The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Archive for the ‘Ahmadiyya issues’ Category

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

There is too much opposition to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in Pakistan, and because of Pakistanis in other Muslim countries to some extent. This opposition is basically due to political reasons. Starting from Ahraris of Anjuman-e-Ahrar, to Maududis of Jamat-I-Islami, 2nd constitutional amendment to 1973 Pakistani constitution, General Zia’s order XX…
This opposition is so much that even if Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement and Qadiani Jamaat join hands to reverse it, it is impossible. Only Allah can end opposition of HMGA in hearts and minds of Pakistanis and ill-informed Muslims. Allah informed HMGA in revelation:

‘Dunya mein aik nazier aaya, per dunya nay oos ko kabool na kia. Laikan Khuda issay kabool karay gha, aur baray zoorawar humloon say oos ki sachai zahir karay gha’
(A Warner came to the world, but world did not accept him. But Allah will accept him, and with very powerful attacks will manifest his truthfulness).

We witness this everyday in West European and North American countries, where Muslims are forced to adopt ways of HMGA if they want to propagate message of Islam.

In Pakistan occasionally we come across, in electronic and print media, statements where people question 2nd constitutional amendment. This change in attitude is because of global political situation that has forced Muslims to change their attitudes and search for peaceful solutions to religious issues. I’m sure these occasional pleasant draughts in Pakistan are harbingers of winds of change.

Dawn news article:
Secularism vs Islamism
By Iqbal Akhund
Monday, 22 Feb, 2010

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

February 13, 2010 New York Times article:

Wahabbi Fanatics Reported on the Afghan Frontier Today, February 13, …1872

An image is published: A sequel to the “Note of Warning”
At the end, image says: Insisting with dogged pertinacity upon the dogma of the Prophet, that it is sinful to vield obedience to infidels, the Wahabee fanatics made considerable impression even on the most docile of Indian Mohammedans.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib’s belief was in contrast to Wahabbi ideology. He was criticized for his allegiance to British rulers, both in his life and after him, even to this day. History is witness there was no militant revolt after 1857 mutiny/ war of independence, until Pakistan and India got freedom in 1947.

This leaves me with two conclusions.
1- Muslims of British India without acknowledging became followers of appointee of Allah, i.e. Mujaddid of 14th Islamic Century.

2- Unseen Divine forces that accompany the appointees of Allah did not let Muslims take militant approach.

Wahabbi Fanatics Reported on the Afghan Frontier Today, February 13, …1872

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib, Mujaddid of 14th Islamic Century said, (in my words) a time will come when Muslims will be tired of looking at the sky in hope of descent of Isa AS (Jesus).

Dr. Khalid Zaheer, a modern Islamic scholar in Pakistan, is friend of Javed Ahmad Ghamdi sahib. Dr Khalid Zaheer in reply to questions about ‘The Return of Jesus’ has given the same kind of answers that HMGA gave. On his website he answers questions:

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/347

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/348

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/349

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/352

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/353

In reply to questions based on Ahadith on return of Jesus he writes:

Question:
i) All those ahadith were created under the influence of information about Jesus’s return that Christian traditions were mentioning

If a strong Sanad of a Hadis is traced back to the Prophet SAW, it means that the Prophet SAW had indeed uttered those words. The Ahadis I mentioned are classified Sahih, which means that it is a high probablity that the Prophet SAW had said those words and they were not CREATED UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF INFORMATION ABOUT JESUS’S RETURN THAT CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS WERE MENTIONING.

ii) They were referring to the metaphorical return of Jesus: the spirit of Islam would be revived close to the judgment day like Jesus revived the spirit of Torah.

If it was metaphorical, then please explain how metaphorical the following Hadis can get:

Isa ibn Maryam will descend in the east of Damascus at the white minaret, donned in two Saffron coloured garments, his hands on the wings of two angels. If he lowers his head, it will drip and when he raises it, those drops will fall down like shining pearls.
[Jami Tirmidhi Hadith 2247, Classifed as Sahih by Allama Albani]

iii) The mention of the arrival of al-Masihuddajjal by the prophet, alaihissalaam, was mistaken by some narrators to be suggesting the arrival of Jesus himself.

Highly un-probable after the above two replies.

If a Hadis or a Subject is not mentioned in Muwatta of Imam Malik, it does not mean that that Subject does not exist at all, because a lot of jurisprudence is derived from other books. And if Imam Malik did not mention Ahadis related to Jesus’s second-coming in his book, there could have been several other reasons. Probably, the Muslims were so aware of those teachings that he did not consider them necessary. Probably he FORGOT to mention them. Probably, he did not obtain an authentic Sanad of those Ahadis yet.

It is an established truth that Ahadis do claim the second-coming of Jesus. Only the Munkireen-e-Hadis can reject this truth.

Response:
If one reads several ahadith in Bukhari, all supported by strong asnad, that those who lower their garments beneath ankles are going to enter the hell shouldn’t one believe it? Why should one then accept the condition that it is going to be a case only if such an act is done out of arrogance? Clearly there were other ahadith explaining the true picture but there were many complete ahadith that made those uncompromising statements without any conditions mentioned. Why should one explain a complete hadith whose message is unequivocal.

If one reads several ahadith with reliable asnad that everyone who recites the kalima shall enter the paradise, why should one not believe in it literally and forget about the fact if it applied to hypocrites or not?

What should one do of a hadith like this one that comes from a reliable source: Ibn Umar, a companion, claimed that the prophet, alaihissalaam, mentioned that if ladies cry over a dead body, the deceased gets punished for it. When Aisha, radhiallahu anha, learnt about it, she responded by saying that he misunderstood it; his statement couldn’t be correct because it went against the Qur’an which tells us that none shall share the burden of the other. And she went on to say that the reality of the incident was that a Jew got killed and his relative ladies were crying; the prophet said that while he was getting punished, these ladies were crying over his death. Ibn Umer, may Allah be pleased with him, got the two statements confused. Do we not learn from this incident that we must always see ahadith in the light of the Qur’an?

And what should one do of the two ahadith mentioning the same incident of the arrival of Jibrail, alaihissalaam, in human form when one of them mentioned that the prophet stated that the fact that nobody knew what was in the wombs of mothers except Allah and the other didn’t? Both ahadith appear in Sahih Muslim. The one by Abu Hurairah states that the prophet, alaihissalaam, made the above claim. The other, by Umer, didn’t mention that claim. Should we accept the unscientific statement in one of them which ran contrary to the Qur’an as well or should we accept the more reasonable one that was reported by Umer, may Allah be pleased with him?

And I can go on and on. The point is that it is a mistake to equate hadith with the prophet’s statement. A hadith is a claim and not a certainty. Certainly, there is no reason to reject hadith with sound asnad unless there are evidences against it that are strong enough to justify it. Ofcourse, one can disagree on whether a reason is good enough to reject a hadith or not.

If we can call the person who rejects a hadith or a group of them because to him those ahadith are against the understanding of the Qur’an a Munkire Hadith, what would we call the person who rejects a clear meaning of the Qur’an because he believes that there are ahadith that were suggesting a meaning different from the Qur’an?

I have not even clearly rejected the ahadith on the return of Jesus. All I am suggesting is that the idea is contrary to the Qur’anic message. I still want to accept the ahadith, that’s why I offered a suggestion that was meant to explain the ahadith without compromising the meanings of the Qur’an. I am sure your criticism against my explanation carries weight. But what else can I do? Should I compromise the message of the Qur’an?

Let us also not be under any mistake about the fact that all ahadith were not known to all Muslims in the first two centuries of the Muslim calendar while Qur’an and sunnah (like Salat, Zakat etc) were; not even to the scholars. That’s why Imam Abu Hanifa (80-150 H) was accused of not knowing many ahadith. Even companions of the prophet didn’t know all of them. In fact one can say with complete authority that there wasn’t a single companion who knew all ahadith. Then there is confusion and about the meanings of some ahadith some of which I have referred to above. How can such a source of knowledge be a part of the original message of Islam which not all Muslims fully knew? Hadith is an explanation of the original message of Islam that we find in the Qur’an and sunnah and as such it cannot go against the clear verdicts of the two sources. There can be no new belief nor an injunction derived from ahadith. However ahadith provide details and explanations of what has already been mentioned in the Qur’an and sunnah or in the human nature.

Let me also clarify that our dispute is not regarding the question as to who loves the prophet, alaihissalaam, more. In fact, a person who loves the prophet can adopt a stance that we should be extra careful in accepting information about the him. The dispute in reality is about the issue as to what measures were adopted by the Almighty to deliver the message of Islam to the mankind. We insirt that God adopted foolproof measures to communicate His message to the mankind in thwe form of Qur’an ands sunnah. Others are insisting that the work done by humans like Bukhari, Muslim was also so significant that it must be accepted by Muslims as a part of the original Islam. We believe that the scholars who compiled ahadith were great; we salute them. But they were humans. What they have gathered is not an undiluted message of Islam. They have attempted to collect information aboiut the explanation fo the original Islam. They have done a great job. However, they were humans and therefore the end result of their efforts were not fault free.

The ahadith on beard you have mentioned are incomplete. There are more facts about the issue than you have mentioned. We need to be first clear about the status of ahadith.

Submitted by Bashir.

An excerpt from Todd Lawson’s book, “The Crucifiction and the Koran” (pg. 44&45)

Thousands of exegetical traditions are ascribed to him by both Sunni and Shi”i authors. The Tanwir al-miqbas is a short tafsir ascribed to Ibn Abbas, and like works attributed to other early figures in Islamic history, carries many questions of authenticity. Indeed, the current debate on whether or not it is accurate to speak of tafsir as an early activity casts a certain amount of perplexity over any discussion of the subject. For several reasons, the traditions associated with Ibn Abbas are generally thought to be untrustworthy, at least as far as the ascription is concerned. As observed by Smith:
One issue that must be dealt with by anyone undertaking a specific study of this question is why so little of the material concerning specific passages of the Qur’an attributed to this man by later writers of tafsir is not to be found, or is found in different form, in his own (i.e. the work at hand) tafisr…one hopes that in the near future we may be able to discuss these questions armed with fewer opinions and more facts. (Smith, pg. 42)

Fortunately, one fact that has recently come to light: The Tanwir al miqbas is an abridgment by Al-Dinawari (d. 308/920) of perhaps a Muhammad al Kalbi (d. 146/763) tafsir. (See Andrew Rippin, “The Exegetical works ascribed to Ibn Abbas…………”)

Hence it is with a certain amount of abdication that the following discussion is related to Ibn Abbas: rather we should associate it with al-Kalbi, who, nevertheless cited much on the authority of Ibn Abbas. (As is evidenced in the work at hand, Abu Tahir Muhammad ibn Yacub al Firuzabadi, tanwir al miqbas min tafsir ibn abbas, 2nd edition)

About five years ago when I was collecting material about the Hajj of Lord Headley in 1923, in the company of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, I obtained some British government documents from the National Archives of the UK. Visit this link at the Woking Muslim Mission website to read them.

On the way to the Hajj they passed through Egypt. One document, marked “Secret”, is the political intelligence assessment of their visit. See under heading “6. Secret note from High Commission in Egypt”. And what was the intelligence assessment? It was that Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din:

“is a particularly active Islamic propagandist”.

Then, under “7. Report from Lord Allenby to Lord Curzon”, there is the report sent by the British ambassador in Egypt, the famous general Lord Allenby, to the British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon (earlier viceroy of India). In it, Allenby writes:

“Lord Headley showed himself as an ardent Moslem and the speeches which he made revealed great devotion to the Mohammedan faith and attracted considerable attention.”

So that’s what British intelligence concluded about them!

Submitted by Ikram.

“Perhaps the only thing worse than being an Ahmedi in modern-day Islamic Pakistan is to be a bakra, particularly the black variety. If a report emanating from Islamabad is to be believed, they are having the devil’s own luck – no not the Ahmedis; their goose is as good as cooked – but the four-legged black goats.…” (read full article)

The opening sentence of the article above caught my eye. This one sentence speaks of many things in Pakistani society. Firstly, the author seems to reflect the collective guilt of the society towards Ahmedis and is using humor, which is a mature psychological defense mechanism to reduce his anxiety. Secondly he is using sublimation, which is another mature defense mechanism by writing a satire to undo the remorse underlying the injustices meted out to the Ahmedis. Thirdly, his article brings outs the paradoxes of a Muslim society, where reason and human conscious clashes with dogmas and bias, which is a source of anxiety for the masses.

I understand the well-intended satire of the author above, but I have to take a pause and recognize the fact that such kind of moral and intellectual degeneration that author is pointing out is a natural outcome of mullah infestation of a society, where Islamic ideology has taken a turn for the worst, almost to a level of idolatry.

For some societies the rot starts at the top and they blame the bottom, whereas in others it’s vice versa. In the land of the pure the candle is melting away to extinction by burning from both ends on the axis of morality, economics, intellect and sociology.

Submitted by Rashid

HMGA has been accused as agent of British rulers of India. His father has been accused of helping British rulers during the 1857 riots [known as the Indian Mutiny or War of Independence].

Pakistan’s private TV channel Dunya, program Hasb-e-Haal hosted by Aftab Iqbal is comedy-cum-educational program. In its show on January 22, 2010 the host has tried to teach his viewers truth about 1857 riots. According to him huge number of Muslims sided with British rulers and many prominent Muslims openly supported them. In this regard according to him ‘Mohammedan Association of Bengal’ was first Muslim organization that openly supported British. They were first to give Fatwa that it is Kufr to fight against the British rulers, and obedience and subservience to them is permitted in Islam. He also named Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, poet Mirza Asad Ullah Khan Ghalib and other prominent Muslim poets in India, among supporters of British rulers.

Please watch from 14mins onwards

Submitted by Rashid.

Today Muslim opponents of HMGA, especially those living in Europe and North America, find it difficult to oppose HMGA and his claims of Mujaddid (of 14th Islamic century) as presented by LAM, supported by Hadith of Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS, and endorsed by other Mujaddids of preceding Islamic centuries. These opponents instead of accepting their misunderstanding about HMGA, outrightly reject ALL Hadith of Holy Prophet Muhammd SAWS and Mujaddids that preceded HMGA. I’m sure these opponents of HMGA would not be rejecting Hadiths and previous Mujaddids, if they were not opposing HMGA. It is also interesting that these Muslim opponents are not living in Muslim countries, especially in Pakistan, as their kind of attitude towards Hadith of HP Muhammad SAWS and Mujaddids of previous Islamic centuries would land them in trouble slammed with a certification of Kafir (non-Muslim).

Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi sahib, answering to opponents of HMGA, who in their maneuver to get out of iron grip of Ahmadiyyat (as presented by LAM), reject ALL Hadiths of HP Muhammad SAWS, by declaring them as fabricated. In LAM monthly Urdu magazine ‘Ruh-Islam’ November 1954 issue, page 11, he writes [paraphrased by me]:

Those who reject Hadiths will have to reject all the Holy Scriptures, in defiance of Holy Quran injunctions. By doing this they are rejecting similar teachings in Holy Scriptures of other religions that are repeated in Holy Quran and Hadith. He gives examples. One such example: Procedure of Wudu (ablution) described in Holy Quran is exactly the same that is given in Zend Avesta. Similarly, concept of prayer, fasting, heaven, hell, hur, justice etc are given in other religions holy scriptures.

It is interesting to see objections answered by LAM elders, who had personally met HMGA, are the same that today’s opponents ask us to answer.

Link to Ruh-Islam, November 1954 issue

Submitted by Usman.

An editorial today in the Daily Times of Pakistan has lashed out against the state, police, a mian stream political party and the “Khatm-e-Nubuwwat” movement for aiding and abetting the murderers of an Ahmadi (Rabwah Jammat)
near Lahore.

The link points to a page with 2 editorials. The Ahmadi one is the second editorial to get to which you will need to scroll down the page.

It is quoted below:

The recent incident of murder of an Ahmadi leader in Ferozewala, a city of Sheikhupura district situated near Lahore, is a sad reflection of how society chooses to treat a section of the minorities, variously known as Mirzais or Qadianis in Pakistan. What is more disconcerting though, is the apathy — rather collusion — of the state, which not only allows such incidents to take place under its very nose, it tends to protect the perpetrators. According to a series of reports published in this paper, Professor Mohammad Yousaf, leader of the Ahmadi community in Ferozewala, had sought police protection against sectarian zealots in his locality who had been threatening him. Allegedly, in response to this, two unidentified assailants shot him dead while he was at his general store. It was with some effort the family managed to lodge the FIR against the two murderers and four abettors known to the victim, who live in the same area. Instead of arresting the accused and investigating further, it is reported that the police let the four abettors go when they visited the police station with PML-N’s member of the Punjab Assembly Pir Ashraf Rasool. Meanwhile, both the police and the nominees in the FIR have been pressurising the family to withdraw the murder case. Alarmingly, even after the ghastly retribution visited upon Mohammad Yousaf, Khatam-e-Nabuwat Youth Wing’s signboard on the main roundabout of the town, which urges believers to kill and maim Islam’s enemies and to socially boycott Ahmadis, has not been removed.

While we are witnessing the gruesome consequences of promoting extremist Islam in the form of suicide attacks, this incident shows another dimension of the free rein given to hate-mongering mullahs. Most often the paranoia and hatred against Ahmadis inspired by self-styled Islamic leaders has taken a murderous turn. Not long ago, a TV presenter incited the wholesale murder of Ahmadis by declaring it an obligation for Muslims, as a result of which two targeted killings took place in Sindh. This continues unabated because of the failure of the concerned authorities to take action against the culprits. Apparently, it is due to a deep bias that runs through the entire system. There is a visible nexus of protection as demonstrated in this case. Whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim, the state is responsible to protect all citizens of Pakistan against oppression. It is these kinds of cases that really require judicial activism, as the legislature and executive have both been found siding with the perpetrators rather than the victims.

Submitted by Rashid.

A Youtube clip of a Qadiani Jamaat speaker talks about Hazrat Maulana Noor Ud Din’s (RTA) trust in Allah SWT. In reply to someone who asked about welfare of his children after his demise. Hazrat Maulana Noor Ud Din placed this into the hands of Allah SWT.

Yet we see how inhumanly children of Hazrat Maulana Noor Ud Din were treated, and ex-communicated, by Qadiani Jamaat on orders of their Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. In his only interview, almost 50 years after his forced expulsion from Rabwah, (marhoom) Abdul Mannan Omar sahib (son of Maulana Noor Ud Din sahib) asked: How come, in 50 years, Qadiani Khalifas has not come up with single proof to support their accusations that I conspired to grab Khilafat seat?

Listen at 0:40 seconds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26xuOUOwa84&feature=related