Are Qadianis Justified in Defense of Their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad?
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.
Recently an 18 year old girl was raped by 3 perpetrators in mausoleum of founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in Karachi. The court refused to entertain DNA evidence which reportedly proved the guilt of accused, because the victim could not produce the 4 adult male witnesses who saw the “act all the way through”. Weeks later Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) decreed that DNA evidence in absence of 4 righteous men as witnesses to rape is not sufficient for conviction under Islamic Law. (Please remember CII comprises of same kind of people who decreed that Kalima-Shahada reciters i.e. Qadianis are Kafir (non-Muslim)). I AM SURE EVERY QADIANI WILL DISAGREE WITH COURT DECISION AND CII DECREE, I.E., DEMAND OF 4 WITNESSES FROM A YOUNG GIRL WHO IS VICTIM OF RAPE.
In a recent TV interview Khalifa of Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan Mr. Munwar Hassan made the same point that if a female victim of rape cannot produce 4 adult righteous men as her witness who saw her being raped all the way through, then she should remain quite. (Please remember Munawar Hassan is same kind of person who consider Kalima-Shahada reciters i.e. Qadianis as Kafir). I AM SURE EVERY QADIANI WILL DISAGREE WITH JAMAAT-E-ISLAMI KHALIFA MUNWAR HASSAN.
Link to Khalifa Muwar Hassan Interview on youtube:
‘A woman should not report Rape if she has not 4 witness – Munawar Hassan’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nQTTDCromw
Qadiani History is FULL OF TESTIMONIES THAT QADIANI KHALIFA 2 MIRZA MAHMUD AHMAD, in his life time, WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE BY HIS MINOR BIOLOGICAL DAUGHTERS, SONS, NIECES, DAUGHTER AND SONS OF HIS FOLLOWERS, WIVES OF HIS FOLLOWERS, ITALIAN EXOTIC DANCER. Qadianis do NOT deny those accusations but they say, “accusations hold no value as victims could NOT produce 4 adult righteous male witnesses who have seen the entire act including the “thread going through eye of a needle””.
To the die-hard Qadiani defendants of QK 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, I would ask them to read an article published in Pakistan's oldest English daily Dawn Online issue June 5, 2013: ‘A License to Rape’ by Murtaza Haider. Qadianis should pay special attention to following:
QUOTE:
In a well-researched paper published in 1997, Professor Asifa Quraishi explains that the rape laws in Pakistan are anything but Islamic. Drawing exclusively from Islamic sources and Quranic injunctions, Professor Quraishi makes the following points. First, the Quranic injunctions are restricted to zina (consensual sexual act by adults outside of marriage). There is no mention of rape in Quran. Secondly the intent of the Quranic injunctions was to prevent lewd behavior in public and to limit instances of false accusations. The requirement to produce four witnesses who had explicitly witnessed the sexual act is possible only if the act is being committed in public and in nude. This suggests that “unlawful sexual intercourse will be prosecuted by the state only when it is publically indecent.”
The noble Quran forbade Zina (fornication) in Surat Al-'Isrā' (17:32) and prescribed the punishment in Surat An-Nūr (24:2). The noble Quran then reads:
Those who defame chaste women and do not bring four witnesses (shuhada) should be punished with eighty lashes, and their testimony should not be accepted afterwards, for they are profligates. (24:4)
The Quranic speech is clear and without confusion. The requirement to produce four witnesses, and not just male witnesses, is required by the Quran to prevent false accusations of fornication against women.
END QUOTE.
I am sure conscientious Qadianis will NOT like to stand in ranks with CII and Khalifa Munawar Hussain and will reconsider justification of their defense of their QK2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad.
Link to article in Dawn online (I highly recommend this article, especially to Qadianis):
http://beta.dawn.com/news/1016271/a-license-to-rape/?commentPage=1&storyPage=1
From Zahid Aziz:
It is reported in a hadith in Abu Dawud (and I think the same occurs in Sahih Tirmidhi as well) that a woman was raped on her way to Fajr prayers. She openly told people, including a group of Sahaba. They went after the rapist and brought back a man. She identified him to them as the rapist, and they took him to the Holy Prophet for punishment. He was about to pronounce sentence when another man stood up and confessed to the rape. The Holy Prophet let the woman go, saying "Allah has forgiven you", i.e., for the wrong identification. The innocent accused was also let go, and the real culprit punished.
How very far this case is from these mullahs advising women not to report rape if they can't provide four eye witnesses, and the requirement for four eye witnesses in mullah-inspired law!
If four, independent, uninvolved men witnessed a rape, and testified to seeing it, one would have to ask them what were they doing watching it? Couldn't they step in and stop the rapist? Or were they taking notes so that they could give accurate testimony in court!
From ikram:
What Mr. Munawar Hassan and allegedly Qadianis could not discern is the difference between a consensual extra-marital event and a forced rape. In the former, both parties are complicit and criminal, whereas in the latter one party is the perpetrator and criminal while other a victim.
To prove a criminal allegation for a consenual activity, Quran sets a high evidential bar of 4 witnesses (v. 4:15) i.e. innocent until proven guilty.
Whereas, for a victim of a crime, circumstantial evidence is enough to take up the case, which is quite aptly pointed out by Maulana Muhammad Ali:
"…Cases may be decided on circumstantial evidence as well, which is sometimes stronger than the evidence of witnesses. The Holy Quran itself speaks of Joseph’s innocence being established on circumstantial evidence (12:26, 27).” – [Explanatory note of Maulana Muhammad Ali in his English translation of the Holy Qur’ân.]
From Rashid Jahangiri:
Will Qadianis declare Provincial Assembly of Sindh (Pakistan) decision Un-Islamic?
According to Dawn Online edition June 11, 2013:
“KARACHI: The Sindh Assembly has unanimously passed a resolution which calls for making DNA tests mandatory in rape cases. The resolution was tabled by PPP MPA Sharmila Farooqi. As per the resolution, DNA tests should be mandatory in all rape cases, the costs of which should be supported by the Sindh government.”
Now question is will Qadianis declare Provincial Assembly of Sindh (Pakistan) decision Un-Islamic because it has made law that Rape Victim does NOT have to produce 4 witnesses who saw her being raped???
If Qadianis answer is in negative i.e. they agree with Sindh assembly decision, then does it mean Qadianis will STOP justifying that accusers of rape by their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad were required to produce 4 witnesses???
Link to Dawn online news:
Rape cases: Sindh Assembly calls for mandatory DNA tests
http://beta.dawn.com/news/1017553/rape-cases-sindh-assembly-calls-for-mandatory-dna-tests
From Zahid Aziz:
As the news item in Dawn says, this resolution is in response to the statement of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII): "The CII had recommended that DNA should not be included as a primary evidence with regard to rape cases."
What is the opinion of the CII about other modern forms of evidence. For example CCTV cameras are everywhere now days and record crimes in deserted streets late at night.The recording shows exactly what the camera saw, whereas verbal human evidence given by an eye-witness from memory cannot reproduce the scene which the witness saw (hence the need for more than one eye witness). So the camera is not only an eye witness but it also has perfect recall, and what it saw can be further magnified and analysed!
From Rashid Jahangiri:
Imagine difficulties faced by rape victim and her family of Shaikh Abdur Rehman Misri sahib in Qadian in 1937.
On May 28, 2013 US famous national TV PBS aired a Frontline program on a 13 year old girl a rape victim in Sindh province. Program showed the ordeal of girl, her family and murder of her brother by the accused, all in search of justice for her.
Rewind the situation 80 years back to Qadian. At that time Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was at the height of his power, who commanded the unquestionable loyalty of his Qadiani followers. In spite of that there were some among his followers who accused him of sexual misbehaviour. Those adults who accused QK2 on behalf of minor victims were physically attacked and one prominent person, Fakhar ud Din Multani, died as result of injuries he suffered. One such case went to highest court of the Punjab province, Lahore High Court. Originally this case involved minor daughter and son of Shaikh Abdur Rehman Misri sahib as victims.
As PBS documentary shows It is very difficult to provide forensic evidence of rape crime scene in 21st in Pakistan; imagine how difficult it must be over 80 years ago in a small village in India. This is the reason victims’ families publically asked QK2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to hold a public inquiry, by appointing inquiry commission members, who could take public testimonies from the victims and the accused i.e. QK2 by taking oath on Holy Quran and inviting Allah SWT punishment for the liar. It is historical fact that QK2 never formed an investigation inquiry commission that would have given him a chance to exonerate himself if he knew that repeated accusations by different people at different times were unfounded. So it is ridiculous when Qadianis say rape victims should have produced 4 witnesses.
Frontline program: Outlawed in Pakistan. PBS: May 28, 2013
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/outlawed-in-pakistan/
From Omar Ahmad:
In Islam, the rape victim is punished as a result of being present where men are present. If this is a crime then many of the women companions would not have been able to go out without Mahrams. As this permitted in Islam this is defunct and dysfunctional as the rape victim has but not recourse but to go to the authorities for justice.
If there is a crime it is punishable in Islam. The question is what is the punishment? In Islam in the Prophet's time a crime was punished if it was proven without doubt that it was committed by the person involved. The punishment is meted out as soon as the crime is proven without doubt.
As in the case of the victim in the Hadith noted above the crime was to be punished on her testimony which was false. She was forgiven as she was the victim and may have been frightened at that time. Since her testimony was false it is better to have four witnesses but that is not always the case. As her testimony did prove fruitful she was allowed respite, however her crime would not be forgiven in a court of law in this world. As her perpetrator confessed he was given a punishment that is the law in Islam for a rapist.
If there is any doubt in the matter, the punishment is eighty stripes as it cannot be proven in court that he was the rapist as he did not confess to the crime, though circumstantial evidence can prove that he was with the woman and the crime is that of indecent conduct.
If there is a mode of verifying that a sexual intercourse has taken place then it is proven beyond doubt that fornication or adultery has taken place. If the woman pleads guilty to the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse then the punishment would be a hundred stripes for her and her associate. If she states she was raped then her testimony is considered correct is she produces four witnesses.
If the man involved in the sexual intercourse denies involvement then he is relented to as indicated in Dr Munawar's testimony. If he confesses, he is guilty of misconduct and is punished with death. If he is guilty then he will be afforded a chance to repent before the punishment is meted out.
In case of adultery the law is more severe as the person involved in the crime is committing a crime against a family involved so his punishment is death as well based on several Hadith of Prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him. As the Quran does supersede the Hadith it is controversial whether this crime should be punished with death in this day and age when sexual promiscuity is rampant.
Is it a crime if a woman involved in an adulterous relationship is guilty of sleeping with a man? In Islam the punishment meted out is the same for a man involved involved in such a relationship or a woman. The punishment is the same but it is generally required that a woman confesses to the crime while a man is punished regardless if his guilt is established by the circumstances of the case.
As this my opinion I am open to any comments or questions.
From Omar Ahmad:
This my comment on my facebook page. It is regarding our savior Hazrat Mirza sahib and their savior Dr Salam. It is followed by comments on Pakistan's savior Dr. Qadeer. If you wish you may check my facebook page verify its contents.
Omar
Talha UmerAlislamOrg
wh0 is real her0……..?? must tell me nd all the w0rld
Unlike · · Share · 5 hours ago ·
You and 3 others like this.
View 5 more comments
Omar Ahmad I agree with you with regret that the real hero is our savior Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib who asked Mr Salam to persevere with a peace accord with Pakistan until they relinquish him to the grave he wishes for himself. In Islam there are many warriors, he was one of them. As Dr. Salam published his treatise in the West we relinquished a war on him in the east. Since he obeyed Allah's request in all matters except the prophethood of a man other than our Prophet Mohammad SAW, he should be placed with Allah until the matter is decided in the court of man if he is a Muslim like you and me who believe in Khatum an Nabi of our Prophet Mohammad SAW. If a person denies the finality of our Prophet Mohammad SAW, he commits an unbelief in Him and His Prophet which is a sin that places him in the court of our Creator until his sin is reckoned with since this is His dominion whether to forgive or punish. If he is forgiven his place is in Heaven with us. If he is not, he will labor his disbelief until he is forgiven as Muslims are forgiven their unbelief if they understand their fault. This is my opinion as I am a Muslim with insight in this matter. Omar
44 minutes ago via mobile · Like
Omar Ahmad The other personage is ghaddar for our nation since he sold its secrets for the sake of his wealth to occur. As there is a law in Pakistan to respect individuals with intellect we should forsake his case for posterity to decide since his service to his nation were immense as well. Omar
40 minutes ago via mobile · Like
Omar Ahmad While Mr Qadeer was a ghaddar he was forgiven by the President of our time who we respect in certain ways since he did not insist on his death for an act of treason as is customary in our law. As he was prophet in his own right he made a law for himself which was to criticize a group of people who do not know better regarding the personage of our Christ. The person who came to reform the Muslim world is none other than the Christ of our time.
A man is called a prophet if he make a law for himself other than that established by Allah and his Prophet Mohammad SAW. If you call a man like our savior Hazrat Mirza Sahib a ghaddar you will be called a ghaddar as well as you disobey your Prophet Mohammad SAW, who gave him respect by teaching him Islamic edicts to guide men like you to Islam. If you are respectable to him you will also have respect. If disobey your Prophet Mohammad SAW, then you will lose him and be reduced to the multitude who die in ignorance. If you do not respect him as you do now then your fate will be decided like Dr Salam in the court of Allah as you called our savior an infidel who our Prophet respects. Omar
14 minutes ago via mobile · Like