Dr. Aamir Liaquat Hussain a famous religious host of a show called Aalim Online which airs frequently on Geo TV has entered some hot waters in the past few days. It is believed that his comments on the show may have incited Muslims to target and kill followers of the Ahmedi sect. Dr. Aamir has been running this show for the past many years and has developed a strong following catapulting him to fame to the extent that many Pakistanis swear by his religious commentary on TV, and remains a highly sought after show specially during the month of Ramadan.
Historically Dr. Aamir Liaquat Hussain has had his taste of controversy which started of from his fake degrees where this blogger had labeled him as Jahil Online back in 2005, he was then associated with MQM for a few years and ultimately had a falling out with the party over a controversial comment he made on TV condemning the British author Salman Rushdie, saying that Salman Rushdie should be killed for blaspheming the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in his book, Satanic Verses, after making this comment Mr. Online refused to retract his statement despite immense pressure from the top London based MQM leadership which ultimately lead to his dismissal and soon he also resigned from his Ministry
Asian Human Rights Watch reports that on 7th September in his program ‘Aalim Online’ the anchor declared the murder of Ahmadi sect members to be necessary (Wajib ul Qatal) according to Islamic teachings, because its followers don’t believe in the last prophet, Mohammad, peace be upon him.
Dr. Amir repeated his instruction several times, urging fundamentalists Muslims to kill without fear. While on air the anchor person also pressured the other two Islamic scholars (from two different sects) on the program to support the statement. This resulted in a unanimous decision among the scholars, on air during a popular television show, to urge lynching with the intent to kill.
This was not a one-off. On September 9, Mr. Hussain answered a query with the comment that blasphemers are liable to be put to death.
According to the information received, at 1:15pm on September 8, 18 hours after the broadcast, six persons entered the Fazle Umer Clinic, a two-story hospital at Mirpurkhas city and two of them went to the second floor and started pressuring 45 year-old Dr. Abdul Manan Siddiqui to come downstairs to attend to a patient in crisis. Dr. Manan left his office and descended into an ambush. He was shot 11 times and died on the spot. His private guard was also shot and is in a serious condition. A woman was also injured by firing. The killers remained at the hospital until the doctor was declared dead, then they walked out of the building’s front entrance. Police registered the killers as unknown.
On September 9, 48 hours after the broadcast, Mr. Yousaf, a 75 year-old rice trader and district chief of the Ahmadi sect was killed on his way to prayer in Nawab Shah, Sindh province. Yousaf was fired on from people on motor bikes, and sustained three bullet wounds. He died on the way to the hospital. The assailants had taken a route past a police station. No one was arrested.
ACTION ALERT
Join the Asian Human Rights Commission in sending a Letter of Appeal to a number of top leaders in Pakistan
Comments
664 responses to “Aalim Online – Inciting murder against Ahmedi’s”
@Christopher,
You asked the question from me and not Bilal Shah. I think you have mistaken me for him. I am also Bilal but not Bilal Shah.
I will respond to your question tomorrow insha Allah (as I am going to bed in a while). Your interpretation of the verse is totally wrong. I will explain the verse in detail tomorrow. Just for the time being, as I told you before:
Sex without marriage is forbidden and this verse is only allowing MARRYING the female prisoners of war PROPERLY and not just having illicit relations with them for the sake of any worldly desires. The words “marriage” are not just added there for convenience, but they are used in the verse itself and they don’t need to be in the brackets. I will explain tomorrow.
The concept of “Muta” (temporary marriage) might be held by the Shiites, but this certainly goes against the teachings of Quran. I will explain why insha Allah tomorrow.
Bilal
Mirza Gulam ahmad qadiyani was a fake prophet who did what his british masters wanted him to do. In his writings he had comitted uncountable blasphanous remarks and thus created pains for the muslims. I think he was the dirtiest creature of all the eras and those who belive him are even more dangerous pests. What Amir Liaqat Hussain said in his program is the real voice of the muslims. I appreciate him.
bilal,
also read the immediately next verse of your book where there is a specific reference of marrying a girl possessed in your right hand; it says:
004.025 If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess….Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable
so if the first verse (which i quoted before) is allowing you to marry a slave girl, why is this specific permission in the very next verse; read in totality…
and in the first verse, reference is not just to “slave” women; it is to a slave woman who is married; so a muslim is not allowed to keep a married except for a married woman who is a slave (prisoner of war)….. do you mean that koran is advising you guys to marry an already married slave woman!!! read with an open mind and try make sense….
guys, i am sure most of you are muslims coz you were born in a muslim home; i wish you had read your religion, maybe you had decided something for yourself then….
1. Main stream Muslim thought is that Isa ascended to heaven. The prophet Muhammad is still the last prophet even if Isa a.s. was raised to heaven by Allah. Read the following:
`Allama Zamakhshri (467 A.H.-538 A.H) writes in his commentary entitled Kashshaaf, “If you ask how Muhammad can be the last of the Prophets when Hadrat `Isa (Jesus Christ) will appear towards the end of the world? I shall reply that the finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH) means that no one will be endowed with prophethood after him. Hadrat ‘Isa is among those upon whom prophethood was endowed before Muhammad(PBUH). Moreover, Hadrat ‘Isa will appear as a follower of Muhammad and he will offer prayers with his face towards the Qiblah of Islam, as a member of the community of the Muslims.” (Vol. 2, p. 215)
Qadianis love to ridicule this idea as the interpretion of the illiterate mullah and make ridiculous accusations like “Jesus is in the clouds” amongst others. You and your cohorts are more than happy to believe that Allah helped Moses defeated the Pharoah and showed him many MIRACULOUS signs. However you love to ridicule main stream muslim belief about the MIRACLES that Allah performed to save Isa a.s because it suits the purpose of the Qadiani Khulfa in proclaiming Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a prophet.
2. Bilal, what do you mean my interpretaion of the verse:
AND WHOSO OBEYS ALLAH AND THIS MESSENGER SHALL BE AMONG THOSE ON WHOM ALLAH HAS BESTOWED HIS BLESSINGS, NAMELY: THE PROPHETS, THE TRUTHFUL, THE MARTYRS AND THE RIGHTEOUS, AND EXCELLENT COMPANIONS ARE THESE. (Al Quran 4:69/70)
Did you translate the above yourself?
No – you got it from the Qadiani website. I likewise have gone and checked the most authentic translations of the Quran by people such as YUSUFALI, PICKTHAL and Shakir and found the following translations:
004.069
YUSUFALI: All who obey Allah and the messenger are in the company of those on whom is the Grace of Allah,- of the prophets (who teach), the sincere (lovers of Truth), the witnesses (who testify), and the Righteous (who do good): Ah! what a beautiful fellowship!
PICKTHAL: Whoso obeyeth Allah and the messenger, they are with those unto whom Allah hath shown favour, of the prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they!
SHAKIR: And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger, these are with those upon whom Allah has bestowed favors from among the prophets and the truthful and the martyrs and the good, and a goodly company are they!
They clearly do not mean what you are trying to imply. Your translation implies that Allah is going to reward the followers of the prophet Muhammad a.s pbuh with prophethood. Evidently the translations I have provided imply nothing of the sort.
Now the reason our translations differ is that the translation you supply incorrectly translate a word to mean “AMONG THOSE”, however the more accepted translation is “with those” or “in the company of those” and this completely changes the meaning of the sentence. Please check the link http://www.omeriqbal.com/a/43 for a more thorough explanation.
Now if you want to argue about the meaning of certain Arabic words then you are far more knowledgeable than I am about Arabic. However my suspicion is that your translation and interpretations are straight from Qadiani sources and knowledge of Arabic is zilch.
So please don’t accuse me of just copying and pasting and repeating the opinion of others. If you didn’t translate the above verse yourself and are unable to defeat my accusation that the verse has been mistranslated by showing me the Arabic definitions of the words using standard dictionaries then you are also guilty of the same.
3. Lastly, we agree on this point.
Ahamdis call non ahamdis non muslims and outside the pale of Islam.
I am sure you know the position of muslims about ahmadis.
The reason I make this point is that you hear many Ahmadis say that they consider Ghair Ahmadis non-muslims within the four walls of Islam. This is not only non-sensical but also diametrically opposed to the claims of Mirza Mahmood Ahmad.
What amazes me is that I am not even well versed in the translations of the Quran, yet even I am able to poke holes in many of their claims using just plain common sense.
It took me less than 5 minutes of googling to prove that Qadianis had purposely mistranslated certain verses in order to put forth their false claims about the finality of prophethood.
Also Bilal,
Do you believe that there a are 200 MILLION ahmadis in the world as claimed by your Khalifa not so long ago.
What do you think of the claims by Mirza Tahir Ahmad when he claimed that there were 80 million convert in one year and in the preceding year there were 40 million converts?
I see in ability to tell the truth seems to run in the family!!
@ Bilal Shah
As a matter of fact I have not put any objection yet on the writings of Mr Mirza. I have just asked few simple questions:
Did Mirza Sb say that when you have sex with your wife or love Allah you cannot differentiate? YES or NO
Did Mirza Sb say that tears jump out of your eyes just like sperm jumps out during ejaculation? YES or NO
Did Mirza Sb say that entering sperms into genitals of a women is matter of great delight and is just like loving Allah? YES or NO
You should agree that Mirza Sb said so because it is clearly written in his books. What have got sufis to do with it. You are welcome to present from punjabi of sufis where they say that when you enter sperms into the genitals of a women and when you say prayer you cannot differentiate. As a matter of fact, if Mirza Sb has said the truth as per your belief it will mean that when Ahmadi get pious and go to their place of worship they cannot differentiate if they go there and say prayer or if they go their with their wives and enter sperms into genitals.
Similarly, when Ahmadis become pious, their tears start jumping out of their eyes as their sperms jump out during ejaculation. What is your personal experience? Have you been able to make your tears jump out a few feet?
These are gems of spiritual wisdom because these are written by Mirza Sb and should be spread all over the world. SEX FOR ALL HATRED FOR NONE.
@newobserver
tell me the book and the volume i will check and let you know. even if mirza sahab was wrong prophet i dont think that he would say that. bcz molvi to sab se pehlay ye baat saamnay laain ge etraaz kernay kay liye. anyway, tell me the book and page number please
@newobserver
well dear. if mirza sahab or anybody else said that. then lets take it this way. look at the level of satisfaction. whey you cry dusing dua after you feel satisfied. its not same but similar to the sex. and according to you mirza sahab said “intercourse with you wife”. he didnt say intercourse with girl friend. you relation with your wife isnt dirty. its “sunnat e nabi (pbuh)” dont get mad but its true. having sex with other than wife is dirty but with you wife….whats wrong and dirty about it? if someone use it to let other know the satisfaction level, its ok.
remember, if sperms are dirtiest thing them all Prophets including Hazrat Muhammad (phuh) were created with this.
@Bilal Shah
Read it out….. kafir qadiyani kah nadir shahkaar
barahin-e-ahmediya vol 5 page number 193-196
http://alislam.org/urdu/rk/rk-21-79.pdf
@Bilal Shah: Muslims never consider ‘Sufis’, that you quoted above, as Prophets. And a vast majority do not even consider them holy figures. So there is no point in equating your ‘prophet’ to these ‘Sufis’.
This is only one of the pearls by Mirza Qadiani that ‘newobserver’ has mentioned here. Please read ANY of his books with an open mind and you will find them filled with contradictions and filty language. If you still insist on calling him your ‘prophet’ based on some obscure logic of Jesus (PBUH) being dead and him being the ‘promised messiah’ which is really not ‘promised’ by the Quran, then may Allah give you guidance and courage to see the light…..
The video clip that you have inserted in this post does not contain anything of the sort which you have written in your post.
Please insert the relevant clip.
@Bilal Shah,
Well you can give your logic of satisfaction in reply for Question 3 and you can proudly inform the world that Ahmadis believe that love of Allah is just like entering sperms into internal genitals of your wife because both give satisfaction. This can be a valid logic and you should proudly present it to the world – it should attract many Ahmadis to indulge into love of Allah.
Please also comment on the first two questions: can pious Ahmadis differentiate when they say prayer or when they have intercourse with their wives because Mirza Sb says “farq nahi kar sakey ga”.
Second question was that when pious Ahmadis cry in love of Allah do their tears jump out of their eyes just like sperms jump out during ejaculation.
I have seen the complete program on the YouTube and there is nothing objectionable in it. You may not agree with wording of the participants of the programme but the statements given by them are endorsed by all school of thoughts in Islam.
anyone for me…. i guess not!
@Haris Zuberi,
1. So you have chosen to give a COMMENTARY of someone in regards to your belief that Jesus (AS) has ascended to heaven bodily and will return to the world again with the same body. According to the commentary you have given me, Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) finality will not be affected by Jesus’ return. The first reason given is that because he was a prophet before Holy Prophet (PBUH) came. Second reason given is that his prophethood will be subordinate (follower) to Holy Prophet’s prophethood, meaning his shariah will be that of Holy Prophet’s. He will offer prayers towards the Qibla of Islam and not Baitul Maqdas as a FOLLOWER of Holy Prophet of Islam.
First of all, I need a proof from Holy Quran that Jesus (AS) was physically ascended to heaven. If the mainstream Muslims believe so, then they must back their argument from Holy Quran. I am sure you would fail to give me any such verse that justifies this belief of your mainstream friends.
Mr. Zuberi, would you agree with this commentary even if contradicts the Holy Quran? Quran emphatically declares Jesus (AS) to be a prophet for the people of Israel alone “Rasoolan Ila Bani Israel” is the term used in the Holy Quran for Jesus. On the other hand Holy Prophet Muhammad is declared to be “Rahmatullil Alameen” (ie. Mercy for the whole mankind) in the Holy Quran. In simple words, the Shariah of Jesus (AS) was limited to the people of Israel alone, and the Sharia of Holy Prophet is for the whole mankind. So this notion that Jesus will have his scope/status of prophethood changed is totally against the teachings of Holy Quran. You can’t justify this at all. If Jesus hypothetically speaking comes back physically announcing that he is a prophet from the ummah of Holy Prophet, your Mullahs will be the first ones to stop him and showing him the verse that declares him to be a prophet for the people of Israel alone.
Secondly how would you explain this verse:
“And He hath made me (Jesus) blessed WHERESOEVER I be and hath enjoined on me Prayer (Salat) and Charity (Zakat)AS LONG AS I LIVE.” (19:31/32)
If Jesus is alive today too, then according to the above verse of the Holy Quran he is obliged to offer prayers and obliged to pay the Zakat (charity). He must be offering his prayers now, but what will be his Qibla? He must also be paying zakaat, but you would know as well as I do that Zakat is specifically for the poor, so where is his zakaat being spent? No matter how hard you try, this is a verse that stands as a wall against the ones who irrationally associate things to Jesus and indirectly to God Almighty. Your explanation to justify this veres will certainly make things more complex and irrational.
Thirdly, if Jesus comes regardless of the fact that if his prophethood was given to him before Holy Prophet and after him, he still remains the LAST prophet to come on earth. If we as Ahmadi Muslims are non-Muslims because we believe in a subordinate prohpet of Holy Prophet, then the non-Ahmadis become bigger kuffar according to their own fatwah as according to them, Jesus was born before Holy Prophet, and died AFTER Holy Prophet. According to the Mullahs there is a need of Prophet. Their own fatwah gives them no room to hide.
I need answer to this in a rational way please.
2. AND WHOSO OBEYS ALLAH AND THIS MESSENGER SHALL BE AMONG THOSE ON WHOM ALLAH HAS BESTOWED HIS BLESSINGS, NAMELY: THE PROPHETS, THE TRUTHFUL, THE MARTYRS AND THE RIGHTEOUS, AND EXCELLENT COMPANIONS ARE THESE. (Al Quran 4:69/70)
So according to you, our translation of the verse has been proven to be wrong by your googling of only 5 minutes. According to you it is because we have translated the word “Ma’a” in the verse as “among” and not as “with” or “in the company of”. So according to you (or the website you googled) we have wrongly translated this verse.
I have many examples to show our understanding to be true one, but for the time being just take this example from the Holy Quran:
“…WATAWAFFANA MA’AL ABRAAR”
If your translation of Ma’a is taken here then the above verse will mean:
AND CAUSE US TO DIE “WITH” THE RIGHTEOUS (Al Quran, 3:194)
It is like praying to God: O God, please, please, whenever some righteous person is about to die, cause us to somehow stop breathing, put some embolus into our coronary arteries, or do something to somehow cause us to die when some righteous person in our neighborhood is about to die, for we want to “die with the righteous”. I am sure even non-Ahmadi Muslims do not have this in mind when they say this prayer. What good would it do to a person to “die with” a righteous person. Several thieves, murderers, rapists, drug smugglers, “etc., may die synchronously with righteous people, but this does not make them good or do any good to them. The fact is, we pray to God to “MAKE US RIGHTEOUS” on the same pattern as other righteous people before us.
I will now tell you why in the verse under discussion “Ma’a” is translated as “Among” and not “with”.
There are four different spiritual rewards/statuses/offices mentioned in the verse. 1. THE PROPHET 2.THE TRUTHFUL 3.THE MARTYRS 4.RIGHTEOUS
So if your (or the website you quoted) interpretation of the verse is taken, then that would mean that even though the people of the past were rewarded with all these four spiritual gifts from Allah but the reward of the ummah of the Greatest Prophet is only that they will be “in the company” of these people and would not themselves be able to ATTAIN these rewards. They can’t be “prophets” but would only be “in the company” of past prophets, they can’t be even truthful, but will only be “in the company” of the truthful of the past, they can’t even be martyrs, but would only “be in the COMPANY” of the martyrs of the past, they can’t even be righteous, but only be “in the company” of the righteous of the past!!! How well the ummah of Holy Prophet will be “rewarded” according to your and your Mullah’s interpretation. Think about it, you will only find irrationality and insult of Holy Prophet and his ummah in your interpretation/translation.
I need a rational and honest answer to this issue.
3. If Ahmadis consider non-Ahmadis or the rejecters of a true prophet of God as Kuffar, then they do it because they don’t have any other option. Such people are kuffar according to the teachings of Quran. However if the non-Ahmadis declare us non-Muslims then they don’t have any justification. Where is the justification of their claim from the HOLY QURAN? This is my point.
I need answers to all the three above mentioned issues. I hope you will answer them in a righteous and honest way. ie. You will accept your fault wherever you will find it and acknowledge it here. The matter of religion is not a matter which can be taken lightly. We have a very short life here in this world and then we all will be answerable to Allah. So it is better to accept the truth today than to remain arrogant and reject it until the moment of our death comes.
Bilal.
Bilal
Dear Christopher,
As I understand you are a Christian. If yes, you might be interested in finding out what Ahmadis think about Christianity, please visit ahmadibeliefs.com. For your reference I am pasting one of his writings below and I beg your pardon because I am a Muslim and I consider writing such a thing to be extreme blashpemy; however it is written by Mr Mirza who is a prophet of Ahmadis and all Ahmadis believe whatever he said or wrote in his books. So I beg your pardon and I beg forgiveness from Allah while pasting the below statement:
And then he was stuck in the darkness of womb for a period and he was born through the filthy path which is a dirty passage of urine and contaminated himself in all respects. (Braheen Ahmadiyya – Vol 1 – 4 368)
@Christopher,
As promised Christopher, I will now try to explain to you the verse that you have brought that apparently justifies sex with female prisoners of war outside marriage.
[4:24/25] And (forbidden) to you are married women, except such as your right hands possess. This has Allah enjoined on you. And allowed to you are those beyond that, that you seek (them) by means of your property, marrying them properly and not committing fornication. And for the benefit you receive from them, give them their dowries, as fixed, and there is no blame on you what you do by mutual agreement after the fixing (of the dowry). Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, Wise.
The expression, “such as your hands possess” has been used in the Quran with regard to those men and women who took part in aggressive wars against Islam and fell prisoners into the hands of Muslims. This verse is specifically talking about such female prisoners of war in particular as you referred to earlier.
Islam doesn’t allow women taken prisoner in ordinary wars to be taken as wives. This exceptional injunction becomes operative only when a hostile nation wages a religious war against Islam with a view to extipating it and compelling Muslims to abandon their religion, at the point of the sword, and treats their prisoners as slaves. The Islamic injuntion was thus only a retaliatory measure and also served the additional very important purpose of PROTECTING THE MORALS OF CAPTIVE WOMEN by marrying them properly who were generally in large numbers and whom war separated from their kith and kin.
It is to be noted that it is not permitted to take into marriage such female relations of a female prisoner of war who is taken into marriage, as conrrespond to the relations of a free woman within the prohibited degree.
You mentioned the advocates of Muta (temporary marriage) from this verse. The Quran and Arabic language both contradict this menifestly unfounded inference. The misunderstanding has been arisen from the failure to understand the difference between the Arabic words “Tamta’a” and “Isstamta’a” and the way they are used in Arabic language. The word “Tamta’a” means temporary benefit. For example if someone wants to say “he benefitted from the woman temporarily”, he would say “Tamta’a Bil Mar’a”. Notice this word “Bil” which is used before the word “Mar’a” to signify temperory benefit FROM the woman.
The word however used in the verse is “Istamta’a” and never in Arabic idiom this word signifies the meaning of temporary benefit in regards to a woman. Whenever the word “Tamta’a” is used in regards to temporary benefit from a woman, it is followed by the term “bil (ba)” put before the word standing for woman as I have mentioned earlier. But in the verse under discussion the expression “Istamta’tum Behi MIN hun” is used where “hun” refers to woman preceded by the preposition “MIN” and not “Bil (ba)”. So this makes it clear that the justification of Muta doesn’t have any grounding at all. If some so called “scholars” have justified it, they have done it because of their failure to understand the usage of the word in Arabic language.
Secondly you said that the term “marriage” is only in brackets and is not present in actual wordings of the verse. That too is a misunderstanding. The verse does contain the word marriage and it doesn’t have to be in brackets. I will tell you why.
The term “Al-Muhsinaat” means women who have protected themselves by entering the fortress of marriage. This word has come from the root “Husn” and the words from the same root has been used twice in the word. Once in the beginning of the verse and secondly in between the verse where word “Muhsineen” (meaning “by marrying them properly”) has been used.
So verse makes it clear that you are allowed to MARRY THEM PROPERLY but NOT AS A MEANS TO COMMIT FORNICATION.
Lastly dowries have been made compulsory in the verse to the one who take such women into marriage. On principle, the dowry must be paid immediately at marriage; but with the wife’s consent the payment can be suitably deferred. The husband can increase the amount of the dowry later, if he so desires; but he can’t decrease it except with the permission of the wife or the Judge (Qadi).
So the verse in no way allows any sex outside marriage in this verse at all. On the contrary it makes it very clearly that any such action will result in fornication.
I am not a Muslim only because I was born in a Muslim family. With the grace of Allah, I have read my religion and done proper research and have come to this only result that it is Islam alone that is the true way. Islam teaches you rationality and it rejects all forms of irrationalities that are now associated with God by the so called religious people from all the religions. Islam is a religion that is accepted by the nature of man.
Bilal
@Bilal
please dont ask such questions from mr.zubairi and newobserver which they cant answerand will never be able to answer.
so your religion allows you to marry a woman prisoner of war EVEN if she was already married to another man! does this make sense? and what if she was already pregnant (for a few days) which went unnoticed!
@Real Observer: Why are all Qadianis hell bent upon shying away from the filthy language used by Mirza Qadiani in all his books? Leave alone the logic for a moment and just focus on the language, he must be a very very sick person to think of and use such language in his books……
newobserver, i am not interested in your shitty accusations and this will not help you to change the focus from your false religion, a total pack of lies; speak to me if you have answers to my question; otherwise keep your mouth shut!
yaar new obserber
what kind of question is this ke “can pious Ahmadis differentiate when they say prayer or when they have intercourse with their wives because Mirza Sb says “farq nahi kar sakey ga”.
ok if you think that ahmadis cant differentiate between sex and namaz then dear i can make you. think whatever you think. comment whatever you comment. you are never gona accept our faith and i would never say that Mirza sahab was wrong. i dont know why are we aguing. religion is everybody’s personal matter. mere gunahon ki saza allah ne mujhe deni hai aap kiyaon pareshan ho rahay ho. yahi time kisi productive kaam main lagao bhaee. main bura hun mera deen bura hai mirza sahab galat hain…khush?
Asalamalaikum, It is always clear to all Muslims that Qadiyanie, Lahories, Ahmedies, are never a part of Islam or Muslims. The fact is that they r always making evil plots to damage the Muslim world. May Almighty ALLAH, keep us safe from their evil minds and their evil deeds…and guide them towards the right path…Ameen
@Mighty Heart
This is not the shy behaviour of ahmadis. its unfortunately a dirt infused in you guys by mullas that you just read the bits of the writings and never bother to read all the articles. Listen, I am a converted ahmadi and was one of the worst opponents of this jamaat in past. with the Grace of Allah, i feel comfort and feel ashemed what i have been thinking about this jamaat in past.
Well its an open challenge to all of you religious scholars and even you can take help of any person in the world. According to your translation of ‘Bal Rafa Ullaho Ilehey’ (Aur hum ne ussey apni taraf utha lia)Jesus is alive. Quran is never going to be changed. I am sure all of us believe this. Well next step is, you believe that jesus will return. The problem arises here that Quran will say according to your translation that Jesus is alive and was raised towards God and you will say that the claimant on the earth is Jesus, what will you follow?? Quran or that person? Please bring me to the right path if you think i am wrong,show me any verse of Holy Quran which says that Jesus will return and it will end all the story.
Dont be hasty, take your time, think and read Holy Quran with translation, take help of any learned person and if you can find one please post it here and if you cant find still pray for yourself and me that May Allah show us the right path(Aameen).
@Ms Sobia
Hadhrat Aqdas Muhammd Mustaffa SAW says ‘Man Kala La Illaha Illa Allaho Fahowa Musliman’ He who recited Kalma-e-Tayebba is Muslim. Whatever you say or Mullahs say or a pious National Assembley of Pakistan says can over write the saying of Hadhrat Aqdas Muhammd Mustaffa SAW.
@Real Observer,
For the sake of discussion let us agree that Jesus could not be lifted to the skies so he is dead. Now if Prophet Muhammad said he will come back, Allah can give him life again – that is no problem for him.
For all the reasons even if you assume that ok a new one will be born who will be Massiah – how will you identify him? You will identify him with the message he presents. Mr Mirza’s message is full of filth.
He says Jesus is not God and has given such a filthy blasphemes statement about him. Do you think a prophet can use such language. When you sit in your homes, do you discuss the path through which you are born? This guy is not capable of being called a descent human and you call him prophet. May Allah guide you and may Allah help you to read all the books of Mirza and bring you back to the pale of Islam.
@Real Observer: Even if we take your logic regarding Jesus being dead about which the Qadianis are too pushy, how can we ignore the filty language and twisted logic used by Mirza Qadiani in all his books, lets take some more examples:
Mirza claiming to be God himself (Naoozobillah): “And I saw in my kashf that I am Allah Himself and I believed with certainty that I was definitely Him.” (Kitab-ul-Bariyyah page 103-105)
His views about “Non-Muslims”: “All Muslims regard my books with reverence and care and benefit from their sublime thoughts except those who are the offspring of prostitutes; God has put a seal upon their hearts and they do not accept me.” (A’ina Kamalat Islam 547-548)
Mirza openly expressing his lust for a woman: “This morning at dawn I saw myself in a house where my wife (Mahmud’s mother) and another woman were sitting in a haveli at 4:30 AM. I filled a white water-skin with water and carried it into the house and poured the water into an earthen vessel. When I had finished, the other woman came over to me suddenly wearing a beautiful red dress. I saw that she was a young woman and was clad in red from top to toe. The cloth was possibly net. I thought to myself that this was the woman for whom I had advertised but she appeared to me to have the features of my wife. She said or perhaps she thought: I have arrived; and I responded with: May Allah cause her to arrive. Then she came into my arms and as soon as she hugged me I woke up. Thank you Allah for all this.” (Tadhkirah 249)
Mirza’s views about Jesus (PBUH): “The family of Jesus was perfectly holy and immaculate. Jesus’ three paternal and maternal grandmothers were fornicators and prostitutes, from whose blood the body of Jesus came into existence. May be it was a condition for divinity. His inclination for prostitutes and interaction with them might also be due to this ancestral relationship.” (Anjam-e-Atham 291)
“Alas! the Christians deceived in many manners but could not invent the fraud of delivering Masih through the mouth so as to save their God from urine and filth.” (Braheen Ahmadiyya – Vol 1 – 4 370)
His view about Hazrat Maryum (PBUH): “Mary’s hanging out with her fiancee Joseph before wedlock is a strong testimony of an Israelite custom. Going out with fiancees among people in some frontier tribes had exceeded the limits to such an extent that sometimes pregnancy comes before wedlock, yet it is not looked down upon and it is generally ignored with a smile.” (Ayyam-al-Sulh 66 [rk300])
His views about those who want to fight against the British: “Some stupid fools ask if it is OK to wage Jihad against this government. So you should remember this question is very foolish as it is religious obligation and duty to thank British Government so how can there be Jihad against it. I say very truly that anyone who thinks bad about the mohsin is a bastard and an adulterer.” (Shahadat-ul-Quran 84 rk 380)
Lets pray Allah gives strength and courage to all to see the light of the day.
@Bilal Shah: Nobody is scoring points here. We are just trying to ascertain the truthfulness of Mirza Qadiani’s claims, which as you know for yourself, is not a trivial matter. Both of our afterlives depend on believing if Mirza was a prophet of God or not. If he was, then all Muslims are doomed, if he was not, then all Qadianis are doomed. So no one can take this matter lightly.
May Allah give all of us the courage and sight to see what’s wrong and what’s right.
@Christopher
It is so encouraging that you are not concerned about Mirza abusing your God in the most filthy manner. However, you are very concerned about the prisoner of war. I salute your religious tolerance.
As you know Mirza also said that mothers of Jesus were fornicators and you must be very tolerant about your religion once again. However, your question is very important about prisoners of war.
Also Mirza said that birth of Jesus is like the birth of insects in monsoon. Again you must be very tolerant but your concern about POW will be still there.
Also Mirza said that Jesus was an eunuch because he had no father so he had no manly ability. But I would salute again in advance because you will not be concerned whatever Mirza said about Jesus and no matter how filthy language did he use. Your main concern will be about POW.
Obviously, all Muslims easily understand it is a mirzai hiding as a Christian; so please don’t waste your time on this guy.
the only thing your forefathers picked up from their british masters was divide and conquer and that i can see is running in the breed…
your attempts to change my focus from your religion will be futile; why should i get into a debate with someone who is a religious discard by muslims when i do not consider islam itself as a religion!!!
talk to me only if you can defend islam, i challenge you; and i know you wont dare….
@Christopher: You are so bloody full of yourself that no intelligent discussion can be had with you. Just look at your earlier postings and you will know what I am talking about:
“i have a lot of beans to spill if it came to that! trust me, i can thoroughly expose the righteousness of your “prophet”…… wanna try that!!!”
“we will come to the history after that and trust me, i think i have read islamic history that most of you here.”
“we will come to history and trust me, you will be short of words at that time”
“all jackasses here, shying away from the shinning daylight”
“we will go and extract the history and i might surprise you with my knowledge of your books including the koran; but first, i need a straight answer to my questions!”
You “so called” civilized people of the West can only teach “backward” civilizations like ours how to become a better suicide bomber, and congratulations, you are succeeding at it.
We can very well defend Islam and consider our faith the most important aspect of our lives. We don’t have an inkling of doubt about it, just like you don’t have any about yours.
@NewObserver,
So according to you the pre-requisite to accepting or rejecting the truth of a claimant of prophethood is by analysing the language he apparently uses in his writings. According to you the Promised Messiah (AS) used ‘abusive’ language (which I completely disagree with as my reading is honest, unbiased and unprejudiced) against his opponents.
You have forgotten that the very same allegations have been put against our Holy Prophet of Islam and the Holy Quran by the enemies of Islam. You must have gone through those allegations I suppose (if you haven’t then I would suggest you google this and you will find plenty of websites that are dedicated for this purpose alone against Islam), but there your logic becomes totally different. There you will show double standards. What is quite obvious though is that you and your Mullahs are following the footsteps of the enemies of Islam. So continue to do that if it gives you satisfaction!!!
Just a few examples from Quran and Hadiths that apparently are “abusive” if seen from your lenses of “understanding”.
[Quran 68:10/11-13/14]
But yield not to the man of oaths, a despicable person,
Defamer, going about with slander,
Hinderer of the good, transgressor, criminal,
Harsh–beside this, ILLIGITIMATE BY BIRTH (Zaneem is the word used here. You would translate such a word as “Son of a bitch” if you are translating something of the same sort in the writings of the Promised Messiah AS)
[Quran 98:6/7] Verily, those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and the idolaters, will be in the Fire of Hell, abiding therein. They are the WORST OF CREATURES (that is to say that they are even worse than the most ‘disgraced’ and ‘filthy’ of creations).
“They are those whom Allah has CURSED and upon whom He brought His wrath and of whom He made APES and SWINE, and who serve the devil” (Quran 5:60/61).
In the Hadith reports of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) relating to the distant future, the “Ulama” (scholars) of the latter days have been condemned in strong terms such as “APES AND SWINE”.
There are many more such examples from Quran and hadith but these few examples should suffice for the time being. To me that is not abusive language, but the purpose of bringing such verses here before you is to show everyone your double standards.
Similarly the other scriptures such as Bible record languages that will be classified as “filthy” if seen from your lenses of understanding. I won’t bring them here for the time being but my point is that, if your criterion of accepting the truth or rejecting is through the language that is spoken against the disbelievers, then you must reject the truth of Quran and hadith before anything else.
For the seekers of truth, the following link should answer these allegations against the Promised Messiah (AS) that he used abusive language:
http://real-islam.org/reply/index.html
Go to the link and read the sublinks provided under the heading ‘Replies to allegations regarding “Use of abusive language”’.
You should have the courage to come and discuss the real issues through the help of Quran. I am sure you wouldn’t dare discussing them here as Quran is not the Book that supports any of your arguments. So keep up your good work and keep getting your ‘GUIDENCE’ from anti-Ahmadiyya websites. This will atleast keep you away from discussing the real issues according to the teachings of Quran.
Bilal
@Haris Zuberi,
I am awaiting your response to my earlier post. I will paste my earlier post here for your convenience in case it has gone unnoticed by you.
1. So you have chosen to give a COMMENTARY of someone in regards to your belief that Jesus (AS) has ascended to heaven bodily and will return to the world again with the same body. According to the commentary you have given me, Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) finality will not be affected by Jesus’ return. The first reason given is that because he was a prophet before Holy Prophet (PBUH) came. Second reason given is that his prophethood will be subordinate (follower) to Holy Prophet’s prophethood, meaning his shariah will be that of Holy Prophet’s. He will offer prayers towards the Qibla of Islam and not Baitul Maqdas as a FOLLOWER of Holy Prophet of Islam.
First of all, I need a proof from Holy Quran that Jesus (AS) was physically ascended to heaven. If the mainstream Muslims believe so, then they must back their argument from Holy Quran. I am sure you would fail to give me any such verse that justifies this belief of your mainstream friends.
Mr. Zuberi, would you agree with this commentary even if contradicts the Holy Quran? Quran emphatically declares Jesus (AS) to be a prophet for the people of Israel alone “Rasoolan Ila Bani Israel” is the term used in the Holy Quran for Jesus. On the other hand Holy Prophet Muhammad is declared to be “Rahmatullil Alameen” (ie. Mercy for the whole mankind) in the Holy Quran. In simple words, the Shariah of Jesus (AS) was limited to the people of Israel alone, and the Sharia of Holy Prophet is for the whole mankind. So this notion that Jesus will have his scope/status of prophethood changed is totally against the teachings of Holy Quran. You can’t justify this at all. If Jesus hypothetically speaking comes back physically announcing that he is a prophet from the ummah of Holy Prophet, your Mullahs will be the first ones to stop him and showing him the verse that declares him to be a prophet for the people of Israel alone.
Secondly how would you explain this verse:
“And He hath made me (Jesus) blessed WHERESOEVER I be and hath enjoined on me Prayer (Salat) and Charity (Zakat)AS LONG AS I LIVE.” (19:31/32)
If Jesus is alive today too, then according to the above verse of the Holy Quran he is obliged to offer prayers and obliged to pay the Zakat (charity). He must be offering his prayers now, but what will be his Qibla? He must also be paying zakaat, but you would know as well as I do that Zakat is specifically for the poor, so where is his zakaat being spent? No matter how hard you try, this is a verse that stands as a wall against the ones who irrationally associate things to Jesus and indirectly to God Almighty. Your explanation to justify this veres will certainly make things more complex and irrational.
Thirdly, if Jesus comes regardless of the fact that if his prophethood was given to him before Holy Prophet and after him, he still remains the LAST prophet to come on earth. If we as Ahmadi Muslims are non-Muslims because we believe in a subordinate prohpet of Holy Prophet, then the non-Ahmadis become bigger kuffar according to their own fatwah as according to them, Jesus was born before Holy Prophet, and died AFTER Holy Prophet. According to the Mullahs there is a need of Prophet. Their own fatwah gives them no room to hide.
I need answer to this in a rational way please.
2. AND WHOSO OBEYS ALLAH AND THIS MESSENGER SHALL BE AMONG THOSE ON WHOM ALLAH HAS BESTOWED HIS BLESSINGS, NAMELY: THE PROPHETS, THE TRUTHFUL, THE MARTYRS AND THE RIGHTEOUS, AND EXCELLENT COMPANIONS ARE THESE. (Al Quran 4:69/70)
So according to you, our translation of the verse has been proven to be wrong by your googling of only 5 minutes. According to you it is because we have translated the word “Ma’a” in the verse as “among” and not as “with” or “in the company of”. So according to you (or the website you googled) we have wrongly translated this verse.
I have many examples to show our understanding to be true one, but for the time being just take this example from the Holy Quran:
“…WATAWAFFANA MA’AL ABRAAR”
If your translation of Ma’a is taken here then the above verse will mean:
AND CAUSE US TO DIE “WITH” THE RIGHTEOUS (Al Quran, 3:194)
It is like praying to God: O God, please, please, whenever some righteous person is about to die, cause us to somehow stop breathing, put some embolus into our coronary arteries, or do something to somehow cause us to die when some righteous person in our neighborhood is about to die, for we want to “die with the righteous”. I am sure even non-Ahmadi Muslims do not have this in mind when they say this prayer. What good would it do to a person to “die with” a righteous person. Several thieves, murderers, rapists, drug smugglers, “etc., may die synchronously with righteous people, but this does not make them good or do any good to them. The fact is, we pray to God to “MAKE US RIGHTEOUS” on the same pattern as other righteous people before us.
I will now tell you why in the verse under discussion “Ma’a” is translated as “Among” and not “with”.
There are four different spiritual rewards/statuses/offices mentioned in the verse. 1. THE PROPHET 2.THE TRUTHFUL 3.THE MARTYRS 4.RIGHTEOUS
So if your (or the website you quoted) interpretation of the verse is taken, then that would mean that even though the people of the past were rewarded with all these four spiritual gifts from Allah but the reward of the ummah of the Greatest Prophet is only that they will be “in the company” of these people and would not themselves be able to ATTAIN these rewards. They can’t be “prophets” but would only be “in the company” of past prophets, they can’t be even truthful, but will only be “in the company” of the truthful of the past, they can’t even be martyrs, but would only “be in the COMPANY” of the martyrs of the past, they can’t even be righteous, but only be “in the company” of the righteous of the past!!! How well the ummah of Holy Prophet will be “rewarded” according to your and your Mullah’s interpretation. Think about it, you will only find irrationality and insult of Holy Prophet and his ummah in your interpretation/translation.
I need a rational and honest answer to this issue.
3. If Ahmadis consider non-Ahmadis or the rejecters of a true prophet of God as Kuffar, then they do it because they don’t have any other option. Such people are kuffar according to the teachings of Quran. However if the non-Ahmadis declare us non-Muslims then they don’t have any justification. Where is the justification of their claim from the HOLY QURAN? This is my point.
I need answers to all the three above mentioned issues. I hope you will answer them in a righteous and honest way. ie. You will accept your fault wherever you will find it and acknowledge it here. The matter of religion is not a matter which can be taken lightly. We have a very short life here in this world and then we all will be answerable to Allah. So it is better to accept the truth today than to remain arrogant and reject it until the moment of our death comes.
Bilal.
@Mighty Heart
You still fail to understand – Christopher is a mirzai who is posing as a Chrisitian. Ignore him – he is a shameless mirzai who in order to divert attention from Mirza is putting allegation on Holy Prophet.
Just like Bilal is shameless who says that Quran calls people son of a bitch. Like Master like followers.
@Christopher,
Quran only gives a permission to the Muslims to marry (properly with all its conditions fulfilled) a female prisoner of war who herself fought against Muslims just because of their faith in an effort to make them abandon their religion at the point of sword. So this Islamic injuntion is only retaliatory measure.
Secondly, the very next verse to the verse under discussion makes it clear that even though it is allowed, one should avoid as far as possible to marry such belligerent disbelieving female prisoners of war. This is to be done only if, on one hand, one is not able to marry a free or a believing bondwoman and, on the other hand, by remaining unmarried, one fears to fall into sin as big as fornication. This is the reason why in the very next verse the emphasis is on marrying believing female bondwoman. Additionally, it is better to marry such female prisoners (who were generally large in numbers) whom war seperated from their kith and kin and give them this protection rather than leaving them alone and put them in any other danger.
Bilal
mighty heart:
as they say, if you cant dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit! you said everything except for answering my questions – why wont you try that. falling short of reasoning and logic, jackasses always revert to extremism; if your religion is so powerfull, you would fight holding your book in hand and not a bomb…. but there is an IF!
newobserver:
i am happy that you did not dare to reply to me; stay away from the discussion, this is way above your mental calibre!
bilal:
1. as far as my knowledge goes, muslims can only marry someone within limited faiths (mainly jews and christians); what if the woman prisoner of war happpens to be a buddist! there is no mention of that in the verse – correct? what would you do in such a case! can you marry or not?
@Christopher,
As I earlier mentioned even though it is allowed, one should avoid marrying such belligerent desbelieving female prisoner of war according to the very next verse. So it is already not encouraged. Now as Quran makes it clear that one shouldn’t marry an idolator (today many of the “People of the Book” will even come in the category of idolators by the way), then one should not marry such idolator as long as she doesn’t accept Islam as truth.
Bilal
@ A MIGHT HEART
MAN! DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT “Both of our afterlives depend on believing if Mirza was a prophet of God or not.”??? ALLAH IS NOT THAT “NARROW MINDED” LIKE US BUDDY.
Firstly, may I point out that my arguments are those of laymen. I have had no formal training in Arabic, and if my translations are wrong or erroneous I would ask readers to give me the benefit of the doubt as they are quite simply what I a have gleaned from reading various Quranic translations and commentaries and are by no means meant to be definitive.
1,Firstly:
“And He hath made me (Jesus) blessed WHERESOEVER I be and hath enjoined on me Prayer (Salat) and Charity (Zakat)AS LONG AS I LIVE.” (19:31/32)
Now if this verse is read in the way that you make out, Jesus was also praying and giving to charity as long he is breathing. i.e from the day that he was born to the day he dies and hence must be doing this in heaven.
However every sane person can be sure that he did not give alms or prayers when he was only a day old. Would you accept this? Would you therefore accept that there are common sense scenarios that this verse does not apply!
In fact a commentary on this verse that I have read is as follows (from Maulana Muhammad Ali):
31a. It is absurd to suppose that prayers and alms were enjoined on Jesus while he
was only a day old and that he really observed these injunctions at that age. In fact,
Jesus’ answer clearly shows that he was addressing his people after he had been entrusted
with the mission of prophethood.
It would be entirely fair and correct to assume, in my opinion, that these are standards that he set himself after he had been entrusted with the mission of prophethood. The question therefore arises how does the mission of prophethood arise in heaven? What is prophethood? Well a simplistic definition of prophethood would be
“The mission of the Messengers and Prophets (peace be upon him) was one. Allah enjoined upon them all for them to teach their followers, the fulfilment of promises, dutifulness to parents, justice between people and truthfulness. Likewise, detestable actions and attributes such as untruthfulness, lecherousness and the eating of people’s wealth unjustly were prohibited.”
Just as common sense dictates, and many commentators have written before, this verse only applies to Isa pbuh after he been entrusted with the mission of prophethood, and obviously not apply whilst in heaven as he is not performing this mission whilst there.
There is no ground for you to argue that Isa has to fulfil these criteria in heaven, and if you did I would argue that you then had to consider that this verse would mean that he had to fulfil these criteria from the very beginning of his life with equal justification.
In short I dispute that this proves that Jesus died. You are misinterpreting this verse in order to fulfil your own desires.
Secondly it is correct to say that initially his mission was only applicable to the Jews, however muslims make the point that he would follow the Shariah of the prophet Muhammad pbuh , as Muhammad pbuh is the last of the prophets the laws that he revealed are perfect. Yes at the time of his revelations he was a prophet only for the Jews. However since then, Muslims believe that Allah has revealed the perfect religion which is Islam and therefore by definition he can say/preach that which is laid out in the Sharia of Islam.
Isa is not a NEW PROPHET and Islam is not being revealed to him as it was to the Prophet Muhammad so I fail to see how preaching Islam will alter the scope of Isa’s mission. The Sharia of Islam was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad and was therefore the scope of the Prophet Muhammad’s prophethood to preach it to the world. So arguing that Isa pbuh can only preach to the Jews and cannot re-affrim the truthfulness of the Prophet Muhammad because his scope somehow disallows it is laughable. I suppose these rules do not extend to heaven otherwise all the prophets before the prophet Muhammad pbuh may have to keep their mouths shut on Islam and the truthfulness of the Prophet Muhammad for fear of preaching outside their “SCOPE”.
2. Ok, we have to put this verse into context. This verse is addressing companions of the Holy Prophet who fled from their homes, and those who were persecuted, and those who fought in his company. Pledging that if they die, it will be with the “MARTYRS AND THE RIGHTEOUS, AND EXCELLENT COMPANIONS” is perfectly valid. The alternative would of course be to die at the hands of the enemy or at least far away from other Muslims which would of course be an unpleasant fate.
Also, 2 verses later in verse 3:196 Allah states:
”Let not control in the land, of
those who disbelieve, deceive thee.”
So clearly the passage is talking about living under the rule of disbelievers, so a request not to die or of course be tortured by them or indeed die far from your fellow Muslims is not at all far fetched.
Substituting “WITH” to “AMONG” doesn’t bode well for argument either. I would argue that in the English language “AND CAUSE US TO DIE “AMONG” THE RIGHTEOUS” does not mean that you necessarily die in a righteous state either. Infact substituting these 2 words has little effect in this CONTEXT.
For example I could say, “I found a man dead AMONG drug dealers and murderers.” This does not mean that he fell into either of these categories. Likewise I could argue that “dying AMONG the righteous” is as futile as “dying WITH the righteous” so to speak.
A translation that uses the term “WITH” and says exactly what you claim is the only sensible version of this verse is as follows:
“Our Lord! Verily, we have heard the call of one (Muhammad SAW) calling to Faith: ‘Believe in your Lord,’ and we have believed. Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and expiate from us our evil deeds, and make us die (in the state of righteousness) along with Al-Abrar (the believers of Islamic Monotheism, the pious and righteous).
Your second point is willful mistranslation.
To say that Muslim will be in the company of or ”WITH” Prophets, the righteous etc does not exclude them from attaining any of these categories. HOWEVER neither does it imply that they will fall into these categories.
If I were to say that “you are in the company of rich”, it does not mean that you are rich and it also does not imply that you are a pauper either.
This verse in my opinion does NOT CONTAIN ANY INFORMATION about the status that Muslims of the Prophet’s ummah will attain and perhaps a more knowledgeable person than I can find that information elsewhere. However many Muslims I think would agree with me that being among the righteous, prophets etc is a reward in itself, obviously Ahmadis don’t much care for this.
The reward for the ummah of muslims is to have lived their lives and to die following the teaching of the greatest of all prophets and following the perfect religion of Allah. It does not besmirch the status of the muslim ummah at all that no prophets shall rise amongst them because the religion has been perfected. People that lived in an earlier era may have belonged to an ummah that had many prophets in it’s ranks, but I fail to see how that besmirches the honor of the prophet Muhammad pbuh or his ummah.
3. Perhaps I was not clear earlier on but I have no issue with you calling me a non muslim. If you believe that new prophets can come and interpret concept of the finality of prophet hood in the way that you do than you have no choice but to utter these words.
I needless to day do not share these beliefs and view them as contemptible, so I likewise hold a similar view of your co religionists.
@Newobserver
Well if you wish me to read all the literature of Mirza Sb, I read all that and all these alegations which have been raised here before becoming an Ahmadi. I can’t understand one thing, all these books had been written when Maulana Sana Ullah Amratsari, Maulana Muhammad Hussain Batawlvi, Maulana Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari and so many like them called Mirza Sb as the greatest server of Islam. I hope they read all these things rather they studied all the books I hope so and suddenly after the claim of Mirza Sb as Imam Mahdi, all these people started finding his writings as full of filthy language. Some times the blame comes as if Ahmadis Nauzbillah use Ahmad in Kalma Tayebba and some times they are blamed of reciting different Namaz.
With your first reference (Kitab-ul-Bariyyah page 103-105), I would request to read all the pages not just last 2 lines of page 103 Especially read the last paragraph of page 105 and carry on reading first paragraph of page 106.
@ Bilal Shah: You said QUOTE MAN! DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT “Both of our afterlives depend on believing if Mirza was a prophet of God or not.”??? ALLAH IS NOT THAT “NARROW MINDED” LIKE US BUDDY. UNQUOTE
My friend that IS the basis of our religion, isn’t it? Accepting or rejecting a prophet sent by God. Isn’t that why Kuffar of Makkah were doomed, as they did not accept Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as the messanger of God? So its not a question of being narrow minded or anything. Of course, Allah can forgive any sin (except Shirk), but shouldn’t we do our best in this world to believe and act the way Allah has asked us, so that we don’t have any regrets in the afterlife?
@ a mighty heart
yaad rahay ke allah ne hazoor (saw) kay zareeye kaee kuffar aur yahoodion ko bhi un ki aik neki kay badlay jannat ki khush khabri di thi.
72 firqon main se aik sahi hai. is ka matlab ye to nahi ke baqi 71 kay mananay walay jahanumi hain.
@everyone
yaaar ye batao ke kia maan baap ka apni aulad per ehsaan hota hai? kia ager aik maan baat aik bachay ko is dunia main laatay hain to ye un ka faraz nahi ke us ki dekh bhaal karain. hamesha se ye suntay aaye hain ke “maa ke ehsaano ka badla nahi chukaya ja sakta”. beshak maa ka ehtiraam sab se zaroori hai lekin bhaee ehsaan kesa….aik husband and wife aik jaan ko is dunia main laatay hain to us maasoom ki perwarish un ka pehla farz hai.
please send your comments without any religous quotations. its just a general question, i want to know people’s view about it bcz it disturbs me a lot. i am also a father and i dont think that by taking care of my kids i am doing any favour to them.
@Christopher,
I am impressed by your mental calibre and your language skills. Muslims are jakcasses in your words, however, Mirza who says grand mothers of Jesus were fornicators is considered a prophet by you. Great.