A problem and suggestions sought for resolving it
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.
Problems I face as a member of LAM And suggestions to resolve them
In my talks with our jamaat (LAM) opponents on Internet or in person, I realize repeatedly that they believe that our jamaat has the same beliefs as that of Qadiani Jamaat. Here are couples of examples:
“the same is with Mirzaees whose reasoning falls behind the scope of fundamental tenets of Islam. How ridiculously the fanatics of this cult have remarked about non-Mirzaees being Kafirs! ….. If this be so all Muslims who are not Mirzaees should be Kafirs!”
“I may take your point in that Muslims other than Mirzees were declared Kafirs by his [HMGA] son. But what I am trying to say is that this entire lot is ONE and DISTINCT and has to be viewed as a WHOLE.”
And then in their support they bring quotes from Qadiani Jamaat publications authored by their Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad. Such as:
1) “So whatever has been ordained in the Holy Quran about non-belief in a Prophet, the same applies in the case of Mirza Sahib.” (Al-Qaul-al-Fasal, p. 33).
2) “If we don’t believe in him as a Prophet then a dangerous flaw occurs (in iman [faith]) which is enough to render one a ‘kafir’.” (Haqeeqat-un-Nabuwwat, p. 204).
3) “It is obligatory for us not to consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims.” (Anwaar-e-Khilafat, p. 90).
4) “… and one who does not believe in the Promised Messiah, whatever his reasons for this non-belief, he is kafir.” (Zikar-e-Illahi, p. 22).
5) “The third matter to which he (Maulana Muhammad Ali) calls my attention is the issue of ‘kufar and Islam’. He says the path of peace is that we consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims, but I say ‘the path of peace is that we accept the decision of the Holy Quran. The Holy Quran calls the non-believers in a Prophet a kafir, and the same Allah calls Mirza Sahib a Prophet’.” (Haqeeqat-ul-Amar, p. 17).
6) “Is there any such irreligious non-Ahmadi who will marry his daughter to a Christian or a Hindu? You call them kafir but in this matter he is better than you in spite of being a kafir, but you even being Ahmadi marry your daughters to kafirs.” (Maliakatullah, p. 46).
7) “We met a person in Lucknow who is a great scholar. He said ‘many of your adversaries falsely propagate about you that you call us kafir. I cannot believe that a person of your vast capacity would be saying so.’ Sheikh Yaqub Ali was talking to him. I told him, ‘you tell him that we in fact call him a kafir.’ On hearing this he was much astonished.” (Anwar-e-Khilafat, p. 92).
8 ) All such Muslims who have not entered in the Baiat of the Promised Messiah, whether they have not heard the name of the Promised Messiah, are kafir and out of the pail of Islam. That these beliefs have my full concurrence. I readily admit. (Aaina-e-Saddaaqat. p. 35).
His younger brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad, M.A., surpassed him when he wrote:
“Every such person, who believes in Moses but does not believe in Jesus, or believes in Jesus but does not believe in Mohammed, or believes in Mohammed but does not believe in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but a confirmed kafir and out of the pail of Islam.” (Kalamatul-Fasal, p. 110)
My question is, How we can resolve this problem? Perhaps our Qadiani Jamaat friends should think about rejecting these statements, and accept that mistakes were made by authors of these books.
This will help not only LAM members, but will also definitely help Qadiani Jamaat friends immensely. Qadiani Jamaat friends will find this very helpful in their efforts to be recognised as Muslims, which they seek to do by quoting the Holy Quran and Hadith to prove they fulfill criteria to be declared Muslim.
In this regard, I look forward to suggestions from our jamaat and Qadiani jamaat brothers and sisters. Thanks.
From Zahid Aziz:
I hope any comments will be in a positive vein, and this doesn’t become a polemical, point-scoring debate with entrenched positions being repeated.
The Pakistan constitutional amendment of 1974 has actually provided us with a reference point as to the sense in which we consider other Muslims as being Muslims or not. It has simplified the discussion of the issue! The question is: Would we, if we could make the law of the land, declare other Muslims as non-Muslims just as this amendment declares us as non-Muslim?
Those who object to being declared non-Muslim under that amendment, and say that they are Muslims because they recite the Kalima, and pray facing the Qibla, etc. must also recognise that others who recite the Kalima, etc. are also Muslims. This does not mean that you are vouching for the correctness of all their religious beliefs, but you are acknowledging that in terms of the application of Islamic law they must be treated in the way that Islam requires Muslims to be treated by one another.
From Usman:
When talking to non-Ahamdis the best approach, in my opinion, is to make a clear distinction between the Rabwah and the Lahore Jammats and after declaring the differance in ideology (this is important as many people think that the issue is succession and the basic idealogy is the same) simply state that niether HMGA, nor the Lahore Jamaat is responsible for any statement by any leader of the Rabwah Jamaat; and thus any objections raised should be based on what HMGA himself or the leaders of the Lahore Jamaat have written.
May I also add that a certain pamphlet being circualated by the Khatm-e-Nubuwwat people declares, on the authority of some fatwa made by numerous “ulemas” and madrassas etc, that any Muslim who considers Ahmadis Muslims or even associates with Ahmadis (socially, economically, work place) is a Kafir and will burn in hell. A bit hard to have a rational discussion with such a bigoted mentality.
From Rashid:
@Usman:
“When talking to non-Ahamdis the best approach, in my opinion, is to make a clear distinction between the Rabwah and the Lahore Jammats and after declaring the differance in ideology (this is important as many people think that the issue is succession and the basic idealogy is the same) simply state that niether HMGA, nor the Lahore Jamaat is responsible for any statement by any leader of the Rabwah Jamaat; and thus any objections raised should be based on what HMGA himself or the leaders of the Lahore Jamaat have written.”
Given the circumstances, what you suggested is the best approach. But it will tremendously help if Qadiani Jamaat friends could openly and unequivocally reject statements quoted in my original post, and accept that their elders made mistakes. This will not only help LAM, but also Qadiani jamaat friends, they will face less resistance from Muslims, and most of all it will help clarify the much distorted image of HMGA.
I am looking forward to some solution from Qadiani Jamaat friends.
From ikram:
Rashid: You are asking a difficult question. It is very difficult to give up the belief that one is raised in and to top it off, being unjustly victimized for one’s faith by the majority. The messenger has to be of the caliber of Muhammad and Mirza Ghulam Ahmed to do that. But keep doing your good effort.
It is this weakness of human psychology that Quran refers to:
5:104. …They say, `Sufficient for us is that (tradition) whereon we have found our forefathers.’ What! (would they follow them blindly) even though their forefathers had no knowledge whatsoever and had no guidance?
43:22. Nay, but they say, “Behold, We found our forefathers agreed on what to believe – and, verily, it is in their footsteps that we find our guidance!”
[The Holy Quran – Allamah Nooruddin]
From Rashid:
I wonder if there is any Hadith that foretold about following attribute of Dajjal?
The Sixth Sense Technology
Pranav Mistry: The thrilling potential of SixthSense technology
http://www.ted.com/talks/pranav_mistry_the_thrilling_potential_of_sixthsense_technology.html
From Omar:
I think the present or a future khalifa of the Qadiani jamaat himself would first have to reject those statements as false before a major shift can take place.
From Usman:
@Rashid. If the Rabwah jamaat reject the statements then they bascialy become one with the Lahore Jammat!
From Rashid:
I came across following YouTube video produced by a Qadiani Jamaat friend. He very logically made the case that reciter of Kalima-Shahada is a Muslim. And in this regard he provided reference from Holy Quran Chapter 4, Verse 94. Translated and commented by Dr. Israr Ahmad, a non-Ahmadi, notable Pakistani scholar of Islam.
I am baffled, why Qadiani Jamaat friends, especially the one who produced this video, do not show it to their Khalifa V Mirza Masroor Ahmad sahib? He or some other Qadiani Jamaat friend should ask Khalifa V to accept the authority of Holy Quran as the final and supreme authority in matters of religion, and acknowledge the mistakes made by their Khalifa II Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad in their writings and reject them. So that their jamaat can take literature of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib to other Muslims.
I am wondering how producer of this video expects Muslims to get convinced if he is not willing to treat Muslims, the way he wants Muslims to treat Qadiani Jamaat friends?
Here is the video:
QADIANIS QADIYANIS AHMADIYYA ARE KAFIR?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itA-E2OHiew
From T. Ijaz:
Many of my non-Muslim friends are Muslims, and many of my Muslim friends are non-Muslim.
From Rashid:
@T. Ijaz:
You lost me…
Please explain your suggestion. Thanks.
From Bashir:
@ ijaz. Is this the new age answer to why the sons of HMGA called muslims kafirs? Its quite intriguing.
HMBMA wrote in AS (1922) that the eskimoes and red indians automatically became KAFIR when the HP arrived. The plight of muslims and all other humans was the same in terms of recognizing HMGA.
enjoy
75/430
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Truth-about-the-Split.pdf
“The denial would be due to causes altogether beyond their control. It is in accordance with the same principle that Muslims have so long with one accord designated as kuffar all those who have not accepted the faith of Islam, without taking into consideration the question whether or not such failure is occasioned by want of adequate information concerning the Holy Prophet (sa). And the doctor is yet to be born who will class in the category of Muslims the Esquimaux of the North Pole, the Red Indians of America, the Hottentots of Africa or the Maoris of Australia, or those millions of Christians, who living in central Europe or in other out of the way places have not yet heard anything regarding the teachings of the Holy Prophet (sa).”
From Rashid:
Dr. Abdus Salam.
Article on Dr. Salam in Dawn newspaper, December 6, 2009.
As much as I appreciate and hold respect for Dr. Salam, I disagree with my Qadiani Jamaat friends who want to give credit of his winning of Nobel Prize to his association with Qadiani Jamaat and Khilafat. Neither I want to give credit of Sir Zafarullah Khan impressive foreign office services, and nor I want to give military tactics of Qadiani jamaat military generals for their services in 1965 war, to their associations with Qadiani Jamaat and Khilafat.
Reasons: Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib did not come to teach Theoretical Physics, Foreign Relations, and Military Warfare. Otherwise, there are many more Jews, Christians, Hindus etc who have distinguished themselves in field of Sciences, Political Science, International Relations and Military Warfare.
Nonetheless here is an article in The Dawn on Dr. Salam, which is worth a read:
Science, poetry and prejudice
By Kunwar Idris
Sunday, 06 Dec, 2009
Abdus Salam’s 15th death anniversary went unnoticed recently. The 25th death anniversary of Waheed Murad that fell on the same day was celebrated with fanfare. They say nations which do not honour their great men cease to produce them.
Pakistan, for sure, has produced no scientist of Salam’s stature nor perhaps an actor of Waheed’s popularity. Whether it is serious research or playful acting, the national scene remains barren.
Forgotten or celebrated, Pakistan’s few great men were born of accident. In the case of Abdus Salam it was not just one but a series of accidents. More strikingly, in converting accidents into opportunities, help to Salam came not from friends but from strangers. Ironically, when the people who should have been helping him created hurdles even that opened the door to new opportunity.
Link to full article.
From Zahid Aziz:
There seem to be some factual errors in this article. I had always remembered that Prof. Salam died in the same month as our Hazrat Ameer Dr Saeed Ahmad Khan, i.e. November 1996. I have looked up the Wikipedia article on Salam and confirmed this. So how could it be the 15th anniversary of his death in 2009?
The article also states:
“He resigned rather than face the charge and went back to teach at Cambridge. Three years later he became the youngest ever professor at London’s Imperial College and fellow of the Royal Society. There he freely debated with atheist Bertrand Russell the existence of God and with Albert Einstein the Islamic view of the unity of forces.”
Salam became professor at Imperial College in 1957. Einstein died in April 1955 and lived in Princeton, USA. So how could Salam debate any issue with Einstein in London in 1957.
I may be wrong but I also think it unlikely that Salam debated the existence of God with Bertrand Russell. The latter’s arguments would be based on philosophy and Salam’s on physics. Each would not be a specialist in the other’s subject, like the other was.
From Usman:
Interesting that the article actually never specifies the reason why Abdus Salam was shunned by the establishment in Pakistan. Also I remember in school a certain Mathematics teacher at times used to pass anti-Ahmadi remarks in the class room. One time he tried to prove that the work for which Abdus Salam (along with others) won the Nobel Prize was nothing extraordinary….which was rather amusing actually; that a high school Mathematics teacher (that too ordinary Maths…for higher Maths such as Calculus etc we had another teacher) would be daring or foolish enough to even say such a thing!
I am almost 100% sure that if one was to scour past archives one could find a statement from a Mullah that the Nobel award to Dr. Abdus Salam was a Zionist conspiracy to humiliate the Muslims.
From Tariq:
For those who can understand Urdu, minutes 23 to 26 are interesting:
An interview with Dr. Mubashar Hasan (ex PPP high ranking member).
Two things of note in my opinion:
1. He says that the 1974 decision had international dimensions (i.e. someone from outside Pakistan influenced it)
2. The Interviewer states (while asking the question about 1974) to the effect that it was the first misstep and that we (as in Pakistan) are suffering the consequences of pandering to the Mullahs.
Tariq
From Rashid:
I wish the Qadiani Jamaat had stayed on the course defined by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib: Intellectual defense and propagation of Islam.
I wish they had not involved themselves into politics with PPP and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in 1970 elections.
Please watch Dr. Mubashir Hussain, founding member of PPP, divulging some details of the PPP-Qadiani nexus, in Dunya TV program, Najam Sethi special December 6, 2009 at 23 minutes.
http://pkpolitics.com/2009/12/06/najam-sethi-special-6-december-2009/
From Tariq:
Another video with two well known Pakistani clerics generally in denial and unable to come out and unequivocally condemn suicide bombing:
pkpolitics.com
What got my attention in the very last two minutes (minute 35) is when Dr. Israr Ahmad said that unfortunately there is a firqa now born in Pakistan (like the Khawarij who were very pious but mistaken) who have started to call those people kafirs who do not follow the Quran. Implying that it is this attitude and these people who are causing havoc justifying it by first calling their victims kafir.
Ironic insn’t it!
From Rashid:
Founder of Pakistan, Quaid-I-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah birthday is approaching, and I am trying to figure out what Sir Zafarullah Khan was thinking when he decided to go to funeral of founder. If he had no plans to offer Namaz-e-Jinazah (funeral prayer for a Muslim) of founder of Pakistan, then why did he go there?
Sir Zafarullah Khan, a very intellectual person and a seasoned expert in law, politics and international relations, knew that no one from Qadiani Jamaat would lead the Namaz-e-Jinazah. And people will take notice of his decision to not offer Namaz-e-Jinazah of any common Muslim, let alone of founder of Pakistan. Lo and behold, he was photographed sitting on ground, when rest of Muslims were offering Namaz-e-Jinazah. This photograph was published in Pakistan Times (English language daily in Pakistan). I’m sure Sir Zafarullah Khan must have known his this kind of attitude will only reinforce Jamat-I-Islami (Pakistani religio-political party) propaganda and his behavior will add to mayhem against Ahmadis.
My late father attended Namaz-e-Jinazah of Maulana Muhamad Ali sahib. My father got place in first row. According to him when he finished his prayer he saw not only non-Ahmadi prominent citizens of Lahore, offering prayer, but also saw non-Muslims i.e. prominent Hindus of society standing in Namaz-e-Jinazah of Maulana Muhamad Ali sahib. I wish Sir Zafarullah Khan could have just quietly stood in a row, if he was determined to not offer prayer of a Muslim who was not member of Qadiani Jamaat, or if he did not want to offer prayer behind Imam who was not from Qadiani Jamaat.
From Usman:
Ironic yes..I also found it ironic that the Pakistani Interior Minister is calling for a fatwa from the Mullahs against terrorism. When there is no clergy in Islam, what is preventing the Minister from quoting from the Quran himself to condemn terrorist acts. As I said the war on terror will not be won until the Muslims themselves take an ideological stand against the perps in chief. We can recommend HMGA’s English Govt. and Jihad as a starting point to take such a stand.
From Zahid Aziz:
In regard to funeral prayers, a close family friend of ours belonging to the Qadiani Jamaat passed away two days ago. Yesterday I went to his janaza prayers at the Qadiani Jamaat’s old London mosque, masjid fazl. Mirza Masroor Ahmad sahib led the janaza prayers on the patio outside the front of the mosque, and I was in the congregation behind him. This was followed by zuhr and asr prayers inside the mosque, where I prayed in the congregation led by Mirza Masroor Ahmad sahib.
It was not an occasion to demonstrate our religious differences or make some other point, but a sad occasion at which to pray to Allah for a departed friend’s forgiveness.
From Rashid:
It is very unfortunate when we witness Qadiani Jamaat friends not offering prayers of Muslims who do not belong to their Jamaat. They even give precedence to their “faith” over blood relations. In 2006, Abdul Mannan Omar sahib (son of Maulana Nooruddin) passed away. He had more than one funeral prayers. First one was day after he passed away inside a funeral home in Delaware, USA. Many non-Ahmadis and Black American Muslims offered funeral prayers. Even ladies offered prayers. His real niece Ms. Amtul Rashid (wife of MM Ahmad) also came to pay her respects. I am witness; at time of prayer she went to adjacent room and did not offer her uncle funeral prayer.
From Rashid:
Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in his book ‘Truth about the split’ (Aena-e-Sadaqat) page 157 writes:
Quote:
In the year 1912, I went on pilgrimage to Mecca….My maternal grandfather, Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib, also went on pilgrimage the same year. He went to Mecca direct from Qadian. We met at Jaddah, and from there journeyed together to Mecca. On the very first day at Mecca, while we were circumambulating the Kaaba, time came for the evening prayers. I wished to withdraw, but our way was barred and the service had already commenced. Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib told me that Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I ra had ordered that, while at Mecca, we might pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams. Upon this, I joined the service. Later on, when we were still in the precincts of the Kaaba, came the time for the night prayers, and we joined as before. When we returned to our residence, I said turning to Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab, “The prayers we offered were only to comply with the command of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I ra, let us now offer our prayers for the sake of Allah. Such prayers cannot rightly be offered behind non-Ahmadi Imams.” We, then repeated both the services. The next day, I believe, we joined another service behind a non-Ahmadi Imam. But I began to feel that although we subsequently repeated the service, a certain weight was oppressing my mind, and I felt that if I continued like that, I should certainly fall ill.
Unquote.
Here we see Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 giving reasons for his offering of prayers behind a non-Ahmadi Imam, although he did not want to do that. And later repeated his prayers. In other words Khalifa 2 had no intention to pray behind a non-ahmadi Imam and he just pretended to offer his prayers by standing with non-Ahmadi Muslims and performing rituals/ positions of prayers.
I wish Sir Chaudhry Zafaullah Khan had just did that. Actually Namaz-e-Jinazah is much simpler and shorter than a regular prayer. He could have just stood in row and pretended he was offering funeral prayer. I wish he had not sat on the ground when Muslims were offering funeral prayer of the founder of Pakistan.
From Bashir:
Who is MM Ahmad? If any human dies whatever religion they are, as humans we should pray over their body in the most respectable manner.
From Rashid:
@Bashir:
MM Ahmad was former Amir (senior most office holder) of USA branch of Qadiani Jamaat; he was a former bureaucrat in Government of Pakistan. He was son of Mirza Bashir Ahmad (brother of Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2) and son in-law of Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2.
Note by Zahid Aziz: M.M. Ahmad held a high position in the Pakistan civil service in the field of public finance. Later, he was a vice-president of the World Bank. Due to marriages between the (unrelated) families of the early followers of the Promised Messiah, M.M. Ahmad turns out to be a cousin of a cousin of my wife.
From Rashid:
CNN online article mentions Qadiani Jamaat in Indonesia. My question to our Qadiani Jamaat friends: Do you agree, a part of what is happening is result of writings of your elders and their behaviors such as Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2, his brother and prominent members?
“They were running for their safety as they called,” she said. “When I heard, I realized how far it was to the main compound, and I was like, ‘Oh, my God.’ ”
Nurhati and her family are members of a Muslim minority sect called the Ahmadi, who hold annual gatherings in each country where they have a community. It was in July 2005 that the Indonesian gathering came under attack by — Nurhati estimates — 10,000 people throwing stones.
The protesters outnumbered the Ahmadi by 100 to 1.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/12/17/religious.restrictions/index.html
From ikram:
Lord Headley while answering a set of questions posed to him, wrote in “Islam, The Guide to Modern Religious Thought” – Islamic Review, June 1929, pg 201-204, Vol XVII, No. 6, pub. The Mosque, Woking, England:
I am sometimes asked questions about essentials and non-essentials, and not very long ago I received a letter from my friend Mr. Dard [Qadiani missionary Abdul Rahim Dard], the Imam of the Mosque at Southfields, in which he makes inquiries as to my views on certain subjects. He begins by an allusion to my lecture entitled “Is our House in Order?” delivered in London on July 29, 1928 [before British Muslim Society, with Abdullah Yusuf Ali in chair]. He asks me to enlighten him on the following points raised in that lecture, viz.:
(1) …
(2) What do you mean by “schism and those sacerdotal dogmas” from which you want Islam to be purged?
(3) …
As regards No. (2) I refer to the trouble caused by new sects which spring up with quite new ideas about what constitutes a follower of Islam. As an example I point to the Quadianis, followers of that very admirable teacher Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom they hold up with veneration as the “Promised Messiah.” This would not matter so very much, but they become bellicose if other Muslims decline to believe that he was the Messiah. I cannot but look upon these people as hostile to the spread of Islam to the West because their tenets indicate complete severance from the orthodox Muslims who are of the Hanifia persuasion. Lest you should think I am making too much complaint, I may point out that a Quadiani is not allowed to give his daughter to a Muslim who is not a Quadiani. A Quadiani is not allowed to say his prayers in a Mosque if the officiating Imam is not an Ahmadian of the Quadian, and finally a Quadiani may not attend the funeral service of his dearest friend unless that friend is a Quadiani thus carrying the unpleasant curtailments and restrictions even to the grave.
It is also specially laid down that unless a man believes that Mirza Ghulum Ahmad was really the Messiah, that man shall be deprived of the light of Faith, and that it is as bad for him as though he denied his belief in the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself. In other words, he becomes a kafir. I cannot help feeling that this high-handed action on the part of a small sect is to be deprecated as very unwise. People sometimes ask me if the Quadianis are really Muslims, and I invariably reply “Yes, they are undoubtedly Muslims, but I think they have deviated somewhat from the ordinary course.”
The fact of the matter is that every fresh sect weakens the community of interests we like to observe in Islam. When sects spring up on every side, we can no longer hope to show that solidarity which is so essential to convince our opponents. And the worst of it is that certain of these sects are quite uncompromising; they lay down the law, tell us what we ought and what we ought not to do, and expect the whole Muslim world to bow down at the ipse dixit of a small fraction of its members. I have recently had opportunities of finding out how bitterly jealous many of the Muslim sects are of one another and what a general absence of unanimity exists throughout the world of Islam. It is infinitely sad that it should be so, because Westerners, flying to Islam for relief from the fanatical teachings in many branches of Christianity, find themselves confronted by a set of conditions not so very much better than those they are trying to get away from.
So that in answer to Mr. Dard’s second question I have endeavoured to show the danger of schisms and the great disservice done to Islam by sects such as his own.
————-
Bold Text and [brackets] above are mine – ikram
From Bashir:
It should be noted that in this period of exchange between the AAIIL, the AMI and the rest of the known world(1911–1953), HMBMA never clarified his stance on the issue. At least this is what is suggested by ahmadi literature, not in the same wording though.
The reason I wrote clarify is this: The ahmadis(Q) claim (since 1954) that HMBMA meant something different than the impression that he gave out. In other words they are claiming that HMBMA really meant that muslims were “really actually muslim”, but when he used the word Kafir in regards to them he meant that only in a restricted sense. Later they claimed a level called MOMIN.
Allah has always allowed muslims to marry other muslims. Allah even allowed muslims to marry “muslim slave girls”. See 4:25.
I am totally dumbfounded in terms of the actions of HMBMA. M. ali didnt show me this verse (4:25) when he argued that muslims could marry muslims.
Khalifa Rashidun who was the father-in-law of HMBMA, he had two daughters. The oldest one married HMBMA(1903), the younger one was to be married to a NON AHMADI(1907). The family of khalifa rashidun was pressuring him to marry the younger daughter into his relatives.
In 1907, HMGA approved of this marriage, HMGA advised that the young non-ahmadi man should get a copy of Haqiqatul Wahy, the marriage ceremony was celebrated in qadian in 1909, Noorudin read the nakah ceremony. HMBMA and m. ali were there at the ceremony.
HMBMA did not object in 1909 to this type of behavior. M. ali even commented that, “he did not wave his finger at the time”.
^ all of this was off of memory, the references can be easily found in M. ali’s book, True Facts about the Split [‘Haqiqat-i-Ikhtilaf’].
See —http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mali/truefactssplit/truefactssplit.shtml
I can find the exact references as needed.
1. HMBMA never commented as to why he didnt object to this marriage.
2. HM. ali did not write as to whether this young man was converted to ahmadiyyat or not.
These were my conclusions after reading about this episode in ahmadiyya literature.
From Rashid:
Note by Zahid Aziz: I have today deleted the bulk of the original version of this comment, in view of the fact stated in the next comment by Rashid.
Abdul Rahim Dard.
If my memory is serving me right, and if I am not confusing the name of Qadiani Missionary Abdul Rahim Dard with someone else in Qadiani Jamaat. Here is some interesting information about this gentleman, narrated to me by late Abdul Mannan Omar sahib (son of Hazrat Maulana Noor Ud Din sahib):
[Deleted]
From Rashid:
Former Qadiani Jamaat missionary to Germany Munir Ud Din Ahmad, who after settling in Germany, left the Qadiani Jamaat and did Ph.D. in liberal arts. On our opponents forum, he replied to Malik Mushtaq sahib query:
Dear Mushtaq Malik – You are confusing Maulavi Abdur Rahim Dard with another person. His name was Mahfuz-ul-Haqq (or Abdul Haqq) ‘Ilmi. He was also Editor of the Ahmadiyya Daily “al-Fazl” and for quite some time nobody noticed that he was writing in the fashion of the Baha’i publications. He was relieved of his duty after he confessed openly that he had long ago converted to the Baha’i Faith. Later on he was publishing a magazine for the Baha’i Community from Delhi.
My comment:
Munir Ud Din Ahmad reply has reminded me of the correct name of Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s private secretary who converted to Bahai faith. His name was Mahfuz-ul-Haqq Ilmi.
From Zahid Aziz:
There are some other facts as well about the infiltration of a group of Bahais into the Qadiani Jamaat, their trying to propagate their views in the Jamaat, and their eventual expulsion by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in, I think, the 1930s.
I do not have those facts to hand, due to being away from home.
From Rashid:
Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad held belief, his followers also held this belief and even hold it today, that Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was NOT the last messengers, and messengers of Allah can come after HP Muhammad. Founder of Bahai Faith (Bahaullah) claimed to be the messenger after HP Muhammad. I wonder why QK 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was angry with his followers who were propagating Bahai Faith and converting to Bahaism?