Ahmadiyya Muslims' services for Pakistan

What ever did at the behest of Mullahs will prove to be in violation of religious freedom and human ethics as dogmatized in Holy Quran. It is the majority that is condemned in Quran. “And if thou obey most of those on earth, they will lead thee astray from Allah’s way; they follow nothing but mere conjecture, and they do nothing but lie.” “Verily we have brought the truth to you; but most of you have a hatred for truth.” (Quran 6:117 & 43: 78.)

Justice Munir on Punjab disturbance inquiry reports ‘The establishment of Pakistan came as a great disappointment to the Ahrar’. The new Muslim state came to them as a shock, disillusioned them of their ideology and finished them as political party. For some time they found themselves in a state of frustration, completely bewildered as to their future.’ ‘It may indeed be said that the Ahrar took their birth in the hatred of Ahmadis.’ (P-12) Ahmadis are described as traitors who have no loyalty to Pakistan.’ ‘Sir Zafrullah Khan began to be attacked and described as a traitor.’ (P-20)

A book by Prof. K.K Aziz ‘Making of Pakistan’ published by Chatto and Wandus London 1977, he wrote ‘It must be remembered that Iqbal did not argue for a Muslim state, but only for a Muslim block in an Indian federation. More over Bengal and Assam did not enter into his calculation. It is grossly misleading to call him the originator of idea of Pakistan.’ (P-54) ‘Till 1947 Moudoodi did not believe in Pakistan and that the demand for it was Un-Islamic,’ (P-106)

Few know this fact that Mr. M. A. Jinnah had quit the Indian political scene and out of the frustration left Indian politics. He retreated to London (UK) after attending the second Round Table Conference in 1932, where he established his legal practice. It was a great loss to Muslims in India. It provided immense relief to Indian Congress, as their main adversary left the field.

Mr. M. A. Jinnah was persuaded back to India by no other person than Hadhrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, the Head of Ahmadiyya Movement (2nd Caliph). This divine figure surveyed the Indian political horizon and found no honest and outstanding Muslim figure to lead the Muslims of India, the Muslims who lost their empire in India after five centuries of Mughal rule.

It took Mr. Dard three hours face to face talk successfully persuaded Mr. M. A. Jinnah to return to India. Mr. Jinnah was most reluctant, but he eventually changed his mind. The Sunday Times London (April 9, 1933) carried a report of a reception that was held by the Imam of London Mosque, Mr. Dard, where Mr. Jinnah frankly acknowledged the fact that: "The eloquent persuasion of Imam left me no way of escape."

Sardar Shaukat Hayat in his book "The Nation that lost its soul" mentions the following event: "One day, I got a message from Quaid-e-Azam saying "Shaukat, I believe you are going to Batala, which I understand is about five miles from Qadian, please go to Qadian and meet Hadhrat Sahib and request him on my behalf for support for Pakistan's cause. He wrote “At about twelve midnight, I reached Qadian. When I got there his blessings and, Hazrat Sahib had retired. I sent him a message for him from the Quid-i-Azam. He came down immediately and inquired what Quid’s orders were? I conveyed him Quid’s message to pray for and also support Pakistan. He replied please convey to the Quid-i-Azam that we have been praying for his mission from the very beginning. Where the help of his followers is concerned, Ahmadi will stand by a Muslim leaguer.”

An article titled ‘Snake in the Sleeve’ appeared in Urdu daily ‘Islam’ on 5/9/2003  by Muhammad Tahir Abdur Razzaq in which he quoted Ahmadiyya daily Al-Fazl dated 17/5/1947 ‘ United India; If we have agreed the division of India, it was not with pleasure but compulsion. Then we will try some how to get united. Again in the same paper, another man called Tahir Mahmud wrote, ‘In spite of of Qadiyani Jama’at’s opposition, Pakistan came into being.’ The name of the paper is ‘Islam’ and the editor is Mufti. Every word is a concoction. The truth is in Al Fazl after two days. Favoring creation of Pakistan Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmed Said: “It (Pakistan) is rightful claim by Muslims. Even if we were to be hanged for supporting their rightful claim, we will take it to be an honor for us.”(Al Fazl 19/5/1947) on the face of Mullahs in particular repeatedly portray Ahmedis as anti- Pakistani who are trying to undo Pakistan.

  

Mr. Wali Khan in his book: ‘FACTS ARE FACTS’ wrote: “The government of Pakistan was determined to tamper with historical records and give the public a one-dimensional view.” (Preface) The subject of preparing the map of two dominions was discussed in that book on page 29. It was Chandlery Zafrullah who prepared the map and passed on to Mr. Jinnah. In this regard Lord Linlithgo wrote to the secretary of Sate for India: “Since Zafrullah was a Qadiani, he had to be cautious. The Muslims would become irritated if they found that this scheme was prepared by a Qadiani.” To prove the contrast between Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmed and Maulana Moudoodi in response to his approach, he exposed Maudoodi Sahib in next para. “Moulana Madoodi basically belonged to Deoband School of theology, which was at the time supporting the Indian National Congress. When I conveyed the Quid’s message to him requesting him to pray as well as support Pakistan’s cause. He replied how he could pray for NAPAK Pakistan (Impure Pakistan) till the whole of India had been converted to Islam. Such was the vision of the leader of Jama’t-i-Islami.’

Maudoodi Sahib is the founder of Jama’at Islami, he opposed creation of Pakistan tooth and nail. His book ‘Musalman and Siasi Kashmakash’ was fully devoted to condemn Pakistan coming into being. After partition, this book disappeared from the bookstalls and libraries. The provincial chief of Jama’t Moulana Fateh Mohammad in a press release claimed “It would be uncharitable not to count Maulana Moudoodi among the founders of Pakistan like the Quid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah and Allama Iqbal.” (Dawn 19/3/1973)

On retirement of Zafrullah Khan from the president ship of the international count of Justice, Mr. Bhutto, President of Pakistan said “As a leading member of the political movement, which lead to the achievement of a homeland of the Muslims in the subcontinent and earlier as President of the All-India Muslim league in 1931, you played a very significant role in the creation of Pakistan.” “As foreign Minister of Pakistan for the first seven years after the birth of the country, you helped in establishing Pakistan as a state which commanded respect abroad and whose voice carried a weight in international forums.” (Morning News. 19/3/1973)

“An associate of the Quid-i-Azam and a founding member of the All-India Muslims league, Zafrullah Khan was closely associated with league politics during the critical period prior to independence.” His defence of the Palestinian cause won him ‘The star of Jordan’. “He was similarly honored by Tunisia, Noricco, Algeria, Libya and Syria for his tireless role in championing the cause of the independence of many Muslim countries in Africa and the Middle East.” (Editorial Dawn 3/9/1985)

Mullah’s tributes to Zafrullah in Allah’s name, it is compulsion to show the other side of the coin that will besmear these lines. Otherwise, the filth they spattered would have been avoided here. I quote those hurtful lines from Punjab disturbance 1953 inquiry report page 100, by Justice Munir.  “The students of M.B. High school Wazirabad, carried in procession on a charpoy with a dog tied on it representing Ch. Zafrullah Khan.” “Another procession, which had marched thorough the streets of Kasur on 25th June 1952, after Friday prayers and which was reported by the Additional Superintendent of police, Kasur in his dairy dated 26th July 1952 also came to the notice of the Chief Minister. In that procession Ch. Zafrullah Khan had been grossly abused in slogans such as ‘Zafrullah Knjar’ ‘Zafrullah dog’ and ‘Zafrullah swine’. Did it not occur to any of the Mullahs that the as person “swine” for a human being if ever read any where, it is in tradition (Hadith) only for Mullahs and not for Zafrullah Khan.

It was during the days when Chandlery Zafrullah Khan was championing the cause of independence of many Muslim countries in Africa and Middle East and also struggling in the U.N. on Palestine issue. Mufti of Egypt declared him an infidel. At this, News papers and the heads of Muslim countries reacted against Mufti and declared: “If Zafrullah is an infidel we want such infidels.” Just as Zafurllah Khan’s role as makers of Pakistan had provoked anti Pakistan Mullahs to vilify him, so did his struggle defending Arab cause provoke an Arab Mufti to declare him an infidel. Could it be the perpetration of Anti Muslim clandestine schemers?

Justice Munir Rebuked Mullahs, “But the President of this court who was a member of that commission, considers it his duty to record his gratitude to Chandlery Zafullah Khan for the valiant fight he put up for Gurdaspur” “Vile and unfounded charges have been leveled against the Ahmadis that the District of Gurdaspur was assigned to India by the award of the Boundary Commission because of the attitude adapted by the Ahmadis and the arguments addressed by Chandlery Zafrullah Khan who had been elected by the Quid-e-Azam to present the case of the Muslims before the commission, considers it his duty to record his gratitude to Chandlery Zafrullah Khan for the valiant fight he put up for Gurdaspur. This is apparent from the record of the Boundary Commission which any one who is interested my see. For the selfless service rendered by him to the Muslim Community, it is shameless ingratitude for any one to refer to Chandlery Zafrullah Khan in the manner in which he has referred to by certain parties before the court of Inquiry.” (P-197)

Under the caption “THE DANGEROUS TREND” there was series of editorials in English daily DAWN early in 1952 by then editor Mr. Altaf Hussain. Unmindful of the warning the nation responded with a stoic attitude and brought about a strategic situation as is prevalent now. Excerpts from fifth edition only will impress the truth: ‘Unless this danger is effectively curbed and the design of the particular type of Ulema is nipped in the bud, they will try to reduce Pakistan to the worst kind of dictatorship. Throughout Muslim history in all times and all climes, the false Ulema have repeatedly tried to do disservices to Islam and slab Muslims in the back. Let it not also be forgotten that some of these Alims attacked the person of Quid-i-Azam himself and tried their best to mislead into believing that he was not a true follower of Islam.’ (DAWN 13/7/52)

The truth behind the political turmoil in Pakistan had been summarized by Justice Javed Iqbal in DAWN dated 14/1/1998: “Politicians failed to implement the concept of humanistic Islam. Anti Ahmadiyya Movement was the first example of sectarianism being used for political purpose.” In defiance to Allah’s commandments, the diabolic spirit let loose by Mullahs is evinced in Justice Munir’s report.

Corrupt, Brutes, Criminals and Terrorists like Diabolists Mullahs are truly insult for Islam and Muhammad (saws). Pakistan has topped in the world in corruption and crime. Collectively they are exemplifying the merits of being followers of Muhammad (saws), adversely to disprove moral and spiritual influence of Islam. On the other hand Ahmedis who bask under spiritual sun shine of Muhammad (saws) are qualified to identify differently.

_____________________________________________________________________________
 Love for all & hatred for none                                                                 With Love to the Muslims of the World

Death for 'Apostates' in Pakistan?

Throughout history, Mullahs had interrupted religion with irrational edicts backed by personal whims to suit to their seasonal expediencies. ‘Death for apostates’ is the law invented by Mullahs to satiate their kind of hearts by cold blooded murder in the name of Islam.

Justice Munir wrote: “Ulema are practically unanimous on the subject of apostasy that is punishable with death.” He named man including Maulana Maudoodi. “The same fate should befall on Deobandis and Wahabis. In the court of inquiry some Maulanas asserted that during first and subsequent Khilafat, that the wast area of Arabia became repeatedly red with blood of apostates.” He remarked: “It stamps Islam as a religion of fanatics.” “With this implication Islam becomes an embodiment of complete intellectual paralysis. In my opinion there is no express text in the Quran for the death penalty for apostasy.”

Maudoodi was the stern proponent for death penalty to apostates. But his own commentary on the subject in his Tafheemul Quran is: “This order is for those Muslims who outwardly keep relation with Muslims and during war practically keep relation with Kafirs and help them in hostilities against Muslims. (Quran: 4:89). Same is the view in some more Urdu commentaries. Refer to Abul Kalam Ahmed, Shah Rafiudin Dehlavi, and also English commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali and Saudi edition where it is clearly stated that it is penalty for spying: Shriat can’ be seasonal.

In early British days there have been conversions of Mullahs and many Muslim personal to Christianity in India. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as) had recorded some names. The same are also available in the Christian history of ‘Religious Conversion Movement in South Asia’ by Geoffrey A Oddie published by Curzon Press Richmond. Some of the names are Moulvi Safdar Ali, Moulvi Mushtaq Ahmed and Moulvi Imamuddin the Khatib of Agra Mosque. One may wonder why there was no reaction from any Islamic groups against those converted to Christianity in those days. Can Shariat be subjected to seasonal expediencies?

As against this reads Mullah’s home made shariat, “Shari’at allows three days’ grace period for an apostate - Murtad) to get back into Islamic fold. If he does not, he is to be awarded capital punishment.” (Gift for Qadianis. Page 127) Why this contradiction? It seems fanatics are brain washed to believe that all opposing groups in ideology are infidels or apostates liable to be killed. Otherwise how are they embarking on mass murders by way of suicide bombing?

Abdullah Bin Abi Sarah who was the scribe of Holy Prophet (PBUH) became an apostate in Medina and joined Meccans. He was not killed after fall of Mecca. If that was the case of an apostate who fell from the spiritual height, how is it advisable to kill any apostate in Pakistan who may by great chance be a brutalized like, dacoit, rapist, murderer and so forth? If he voluntarily quits Islam to sanctity rest of Islam, why chase him to bring him back.

Allah warned, “If any one slew a person – unless it be for murder, or for spreading mischief in the land, it would be as if he slew the whole people.”(Quran 5:32). “If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is hell to abide therein (for ever) and the wrath and curse of Allah are upon him. And a dreadful chastisement is prepared for him.” (Quran 4:93) In the face of such admonishment direct from God, how do fundamentalists and perverted Mullahs manage to indoctrinate unwary fanatics to embark on suicide attack missions to be caught as a murderer and be thrown into hell instead of paradise they hoped for? How do the suicide attackers discriminate between the targeted enemy and the innocents in their massive murder spree?

A columnist Iqbal Ahmed wrote: “Pakistan is full of Muslims but there no Islam here. He said, he had seen Islamic values lived and reflected in USA, Canada, Norway and Sweden” (Dawn 20/2/94) So, according to Iqbal Ahmed Pakistan will have to import Muslims from countries of Kafirs authorized by God to slaughter apostates in Pakistan.

In Quran there are reckonable admonitions on the subject repeatedly. “The goal of you all is to Allah. It is he that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute.” (Quran: 5:48) “Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.” (Quran 3:55) How can any one dare defy this warning unless he is convinced that the targeted groups are not believers? No matter how vehement and eloquent the proponents of false doctrines might be, their efforts will prove fruitless and it will be indisputably clear, on the Day of Judgment as to who entertained false notions and who cherished the truth. Who are Mullahs to challenge Allah’s authority in reservation on the matters of faith?

Justice Jawed Iqbal commented, “Politicians failed to implement the concept of humanistic Islam. Anti Ahmediyya movement was the first example of sectarianism being used for political purpose.”(Dawn 14/1/98) They approach financiers to help in the defence of Islam against Qadianis. Justice Munir in his reports on Punjab disturbance 1953, P-12 wrote: ‘It may indeed be said that the Ahrar took their birth in the hatred of Ahmadis’.

The irony of this reality is that in seeking to impose Islamic law and create an Islamic state, Islamists are actually in direct opposition in spirit and letter of the Quran. (Quran 2:256) 

_____________________________________________________________________________

 Love for all & hatred for none                                      With Love to the Muslims of the World

How to save the world from the holocaust as warned in Holy Quran?

Unmindful of glorious tradition set by Muhammad (PBUH) and the limits laid down in Quran, any man made dogma may amount to interpolation of Quranic Laws. Allah disapproves death penalty and the kind of law enacted in Pakistan.

Merits of Section 295(C): A columnist commented in DAWN dated 9/9/01 “In 1986, the criminal law (Amendment act III) was passed by the hand-picked pious members of champion of Islam General Zia ul Haq’s Majlis-e-Shoora headed by Mohammad Khan Junejo and it added section 295(C), a weapon designed to be used for personal vengeance, a weapon with scores can be settled, a weapon even to be employed for personal gain. It reads; whoever by words,, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall be liable to fine.”

Clerics demonize faithful in Mosques: A sub caption in DAWN dated 8/7/02 was “Imam two others held for attacking U.S Muslim.” A man named Faraz Javed an American by birth went to Jaranwala Faisalabad for Juma prayers. He objected to the Pesh Imam’s political speech. At that time the Imam was cursing the Pakistan government and Americans. At this, Faraz reportedly asked the Imam “Instead of blaming America you should better tell us Islamic teachings.” The Pesh Imam did not like it. He asked people sitting in the mosque to kill Faraz. “ He is also an American enemy of the Muslims.” He managed to escape from the mosque. After Juma prayers Imam Hafiz Abdul Latif was present. Some of the attackers were also carrying iron rods, sticks and lethal weapons. Only two days before this incident, there was news from the same place faisalabad, reported in DAWN dated 6/7/02, under a caption “Villager stoned to death on Imam’s call” – ‘A man of Chak Jhumra was stoned to death on Friday by villagers on call of a local Pesh Imam who had issued a decree (Fatwa) against the man accusing him of blasphemy. Maulvi Faqur Muhammad asked the enraged mob to stone him. Zahid shah sustained serious injuries during the stoning and died on the spot.’

A Bishop committed suicide:  One Masih was charged with blasphemy under the section 295(C) on the complaint of Muhammad Akram on 14/10/1996, after 7 hours of alleged utterances which he said against Islam and the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The section Judge Sahiwal had awarded death sentence to the accused on 27/4/1998. Lahore high Court confirmed his death on 24/7/2001. Then news came in DAWN dated 16/8/02 “SC ACQUITS BLASPHEMY ACCUSED”. It was pleaded in Supreme Court that Muhammad Akram wanted to grab the plot of land on which Ayub Masih and his father were resisting. It was brought on the record of the court that soon after the arrest of Ayub Masih, the complainant Muhammad Akram forcibly occupied his house in Chak No-352 falling in the jurisdiction of Arifwala Police Station. During the process Bishop John Joseph of Faisalabad had committed suicide out side the District and Session Judge, Sahiwal, after hearing the judgment earlier.

One may wonder why it not occurred to any of the Muslims involved in the judicial process to refer to Allah’s Law: “When ye hear the message of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, you are not to sit with them unless they turn to different theme.” (Quran 4:140) Why did Muhammad Akram rejoice blasphemous talk for seven long hours in defiance of Allah’s guidance in Quran?

A case of blasphemy at human level is also available in Quran. Allah charge sheeted one hypocrite named Abdullah Bin Ubai for uttering blasphemous words against Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). “If we return to Madina, surely the more honorable will expel there from the manner (Allah forbid Holy Prophet)”. (Quran 63:8) The son of this hypocrite who had accepted Islam sought permission to behead his father. It was not allowed. When Abdullah Bin Ubai died, his funeral was prayed by Muhammad (PBUH) “When 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai died, his son 'Abdullah bin 'Abdullah came to Allah's Apostle and asked him to give him his shirt in order to shroud his father in it. He gave it to him and then 'Abdullah asked the Prophet to offer the funeral prayer for him (his father). Allah's Apostle got up to offer the funeral prayer for him, but Umar got up too and got hold of the garment of Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle Will you offer the funeral prayer for him though your Lord has forbidden you to offer the prayer for him" Allah's Apostle said, "But Allah has given me the choice by saying: '(Whether you) ask forgiveness for them, or do not ask forgiveness for them; even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times..' so I will ask more than seventy times." 'Umar said, "But he ('Abdullah bin 'Ubai) is a hypocrite!" However, Allah's Apostle did offer the funeral prayer for him whereupon Allah revealed: 'And never (O Muhammad) pray for anyone of them that dies, nor stand at his grave.'”

There are so many exponential verses in Holy Quran on the subject of blasphemy. “Mocked were (many) messengers before thee; but their scoffers were hemmed in by the thing they mock.” (Quran 6:10 & 21:41) It implied the logic of turning of table. So the subject of settling the score is beyond human reach. Where there is talk of blasphemy, Quran commands to keep away from them. “When ye hear the message of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, you are not to sit with them unless they turn to a different theme.” (Quran 4:140) Pakistan by inventing blasphemy law against Allah’s will tarnished the name of Islam world over.

Can there be any blasphemy severe than Allah begetting a SON, which Saudi commentators say, lowers Allah to the level of an animal? Allah’s indignation for the inglorious attribute framed at human level should take human race stunned and terrified. Reflect on Allah’s warning: “And they say, ‘The Gracious God has taken unto Himself a son.’ Assuredly, you have done a most monstrous thing! The heavens might well-nigh burst thereat, and the earth cleaves asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces, because they ascribe a son to the Gracious God.” (Quran 19:88-90).

The most monstrous utterance of blasphemy is the belief Allah begetting a son. It is stupendous blasphemy against Allah. In spite of this, when Christians delegate headed by a Bishop came to Madina from Najaf for a debate with Muhammad (PBUH), they were allowed to pray their own blasphemous way in Masjid-t-Nabavi. If this blasphemy did not carry death penalty, where else could it be justified?

The limit is for any one to claim to be God himself. Allah settled the possible argumentation on this blasphemy by asking to leave it to Allah. “If any of them should say, ‘I am a God besides him’ such a one We should reward with hell; thus do We reward those who do wrong.’ (Quran 21:29) Obviously ‘the hell’ can’t be in the jurisdiction of temporal authorities. So it should be concluded that blasphemy law is Mullah’s invention in violation of Allah’s law.

Then what arrangement was there in Allah’s planning to restore His glory and Holiness? The answer known to the Muslim Ummah is, the advent of Jesus whose duty assigned by Allah is to break the cross. It is hypothetically for demolishing the faith based upon crucifixion, physically ascension of Jesus to heaven and the mythical paradox leading to blasphemous Son-ship of Jesus held by Christianity.

According to the traditions the promised Messiah’s mission was the answer for the stupendous blasphemy discussed here. For Muslims, he is the MAHDI &MESSAIH being the same person to mean “The promised Messiah guided by Allah”. In 1889 Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as) declared: “I had a significant revelation stating Jesus, son of Mary had died and in his attributes, as had been promised, I am raised (as Promised Messiah)” (Ruh. Khaz. Vol.3 pg.402) Next year he had the commandment to declare himself the Promised Messiah in the spiritual rank of Prophet (as subordinate to Holy Prophet). If the normal death of Jesus is proved, it would give a clean wash to blasphemous faith of Christendom and save the world from the holocaust as warned in Quran. The religion of British Empire is Christianity, there while being a subject of British India, reliance on Allah’s backing only could have made him so bold to declare it. His thesis MASIH HINDUSTAN MEIN (Jesus lived in India) is a great work. The vehemence of apposition from Christian and Muslim factions is understandable.

The most excruciating part of their campaign for Hazrat Ahmed (as) was the derogatory and slanderous attack on the person of Muhammad (PBUH) and his holy family. Needless to besmear these lines with the defilement they committed in collusion with new converts from Mullahs. However befitting retorts from Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as) will obviate the situation.

“It is shuddering to read so many books with derisive language against our Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). I testify tearfully with painted heart that had our children been slain before our eyes, or mutilated our kith and kin; or we be condemned and killed, and our belongings be confiscated; by God, it would have inflicted as much grief as profanation meted out to our Prophet (PBUH) has done.” (Ruh. Khaz. Vol. 5 pg.52)

It must be remembered that blasphemous profanity never provoked any prophet. The reason may be the personality gap between ordinary men and a prophet in terms of personal and spiritual faculties is like that of a prattling baby and a divine being. When Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, Promised Messiah died, one of the treasures he left was, bags full of vituperating letters. Speaking about his own fortitude to face hurls of abuses, he wrote: “If any one hurls abuse on my face, not single hair of mine will ruffle.” His advice to his followers was to pay back blissful prayers for the abuses they receive. 
_____________________________________________________________________________

 Love for all & hatred for none                                      With Love to the Muslims of the World

Non Ahmadi Muslims really follow Holy Prophet of Islam?

We believe that Jesus was a prophet raised by God only for the Israelites. He gave the glad tidings to his people of a Noble Messenger who will come after him in the name of ‘Ahmad’ for the complete teaching which would stay forever with mankind. All Muslims believe that this prophecy was fulfilled in the person of Muhammad (PBUH), 1500 years ago in Makkah. Holy Quran records the biblical prophecies in the following verse:

 وَإِذۡ قَالَ عِيسَى ٱبۡنُ مَرۡيَمَ يَـٰبَنِىٓ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلَ إِنِّى رَسُولُ ٱللَّهِ إِلَيۡكُم مُّصَدِّقً۬ا لِّمَا بَيۡنَ يَدَىَّ مِنَ ٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةِ وَمُبَشِّرَۢا بِرَسُولٍ۬ يَأۡتِى مِنۢ بَعۡدِى ٱسۡمُهُ ۥۤ أَحۡمَدُ‌ۖ فَلَمَّا جَآءَهُم بِٱلۡبَيِّنَـٰتِ قَالُواْ هَـٰذَا سِحۡرٌ۬ مُّبِينٌ۬ (٦)

“And remember when Jesus, son of Mary, said, ‘O children of Israel, surely I am Allah’s Messenger unto you, fulfilling that which is before me of the Torah, and giving glad tidings of a Messenger who will come after me. His name will be Ahmad.’ And when he came to them with clear proofs, they said, ‘This is clear enchantment.’” (Holy Qur'an, 61:6)

Reflect on the word ‘Ba’adee’ meaning ‘after'. So called non Ahmadi Ulema interpret it as “After the death” of Muhammad (PBUH) while referring the Hadith ‘La-Nabiyya-ba’adee’. So, in the verse quoted above we must take alike meaning of ‘Ba’adee’ to mean ‘after the death of Jesus’. Therefore, according to its real and true meaning the word ‘Ba’adee’ in the verse proves Jesus’ death. Obviously, the belief about Ahmad that he has arrived in the person of Muhammad (PBUH) also proves his death since, ‘Ba’adee’ only to mean ‘after the death of Jesus’. Yet, if Jesus is alive then how could they believe that Ahmad has come? He can’t come until Jesus is alive!!!!

Now contrary to common sense, Non Ahmadi Muslims believe that Jesus Christ is going to come again. In what capacity then they are going to accept the Holy Prophet (PBUH)? It also needs to be considered that the general run of Muslims would find themselves in a situation of denial of Holy Prophet (PBUH) and they would begin to wait for a prophet who would appear in the name of Muhammad-an after the demise of Jesus, since the prophecy of Jesus in Hebrew Bible demands a prophet will come after him in the name of "Muhammad-an”. Hence, Holy Quran rejects the Mullah’s belief about Jesus being alive.

Alas! Khatam-e-Nabuwwat Mullahs motto “NO PROPHETS AFTER MUHMMAD (PBUH)” is only a propaganda for collecting the funds. No doubt! The word “Islam” has become the mean of biggest business and only source of survival for them.They deny the Holy Prophet of Islam by believing in the life of Jesus. Hence, Mullahs interpretation of Islam and Holy Prophet as ‘Khataman Nabiyyeen’ is false. 

In the view of Ahmadiyya belief, Jesus had died in India 2000 years ago and ‘beyond any shadow of doubt, Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is Khataman Nabiyyeen, i.e., the Seal of the Prophets. In him the excellences of prophethood have reached their perfection and therefore, the door to receiving prophethood independently is closed since his appointment to this office. Henceforth, every kind of Grace is attainable only through serving him. Prophet shall appear only through allegiance to him, by receiving light from his light and as his shadow and reflection, and not otherwise. Hence, "all prophethood except Muhammadan prophethood has ended. No law-giving prophet shall ever come, and a prophet without law may, but only such as is primarily a follower of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). I am both a follower and a Prophet.’ (Tajalliyate Ilahiyya by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, pp. 24-25)

Let’s leave it to the readers to ponder over that why Non Ahmadiyya Muslims beliefs are in contradiction with the Holy Quran and the Bible? Can Mullahs justify? Are they really not denying Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by believing in ‘Jesus is still alive today’?

Ahmadi Muslims believe: ‘Life of Islam is in the death of Jesus so let him die!’
_________________________________________________________________

 Love for all & hatred for none                                 With Love to the Muslims of the World

Why Muhammad (PBUH) made Imam Mahdi incumbent on Muslims if he was not a Prophet?

In the following verse of Holy Quran, Allah states the fundamental beliefs in which a Muslim must believe:

 ‘It is not righteousness that you turn your faces to the East or the West, but truly righteous is he who believes in Allah and the Last Day and the angels and the Book and the Prophets, and spends his money for love of Him, on the kindred and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and those who ask for charity, and for ransoming the captives; and who observes Prayer and pays the Zakat; and those who fulfil their promise when they have made one, and the patient in poverty and afflictions and the steadfast in time of war; it is these who have proved truthful and it is these who are the God-fearing.’ (Al-Baqarah 2:177)

Out of the six principles quoted above, only ONE refers to man, and that is PROPHETS. So among men, except for the prophets, the Holy Quran does not make it incumbent on us to believe in any man but only the prophets are for us to believe in. Thus, according to Quran we must have to believe in the prophets only among the men, otherwise we will become kafirs.

Similarly, Holy Prophet of Islam declares Imam Madi a part of FAITH, whosoever denies Imam Mahdi, and whoever opposes him would go out of the pale of Islam. According to Holy Prophet, a time will come when Imam Mahdi would appear in the Muslim Ummah. Our beloved master is reported to have said:

"When you see him (Imam Mahdi) then certainly perform bait to him even if you have to crawl over your knees through the mountains of snow because he (Imam Mahdi) will be the Khalifa of God." (Mastadarrak Hakim Kitab al-Fitn Wal Malaham Chapter Khuroojal Mahdi)

"One who dies without accepting the Imam (Appointed by Allah) of the time, his death is a death in disbelief". (Masnad Ahmad ibn Hanble Vol. 4 Page 96)

"One who obeyed Imam Mahdi obeyed me; one who disobeyed him disobeyed me" (Biharul Anwaar Vol. 13 Page 17)

"One who rejected Imam Mahdi he did kufr" (Hajj Al-Kiramah page 351, as well as Lawaih Al-Anwaar Al-Baheema Vol. 2 page 88)

Can Mullahs tell us: Why Muhammad (PBUH) made Imam Mahdi incumbent on us if he is not a Prophet? Can they quote one verse form the Holy Quran where apart from the prophets; we are bound to believe in anybody?

Hence, whoever is appointed by Allah, is a prophet. Not a single man on earth appeared in history who was not a prophet. In fact a single man can not be quoted from the entire history of all the religions where a man can be said to have been appointed directly by Allah, and to believe in him is not imperative. Therefore from among men, except for prophets, we are not bound to believe in anybody.

So, why Mullahs believe that NOT even a subordinate prophet would ever come after Holy Prophet (PBUH)? While they believe that that Imam Mahdi will be appointed by Allah and he will be the Imam for the whole Ummah and for the whole universe. They are most surely contradicting their own claim. The truth is that they believe in a subordinate prophet, the moment they believe in Imam Mahdi.

Now, it’s up to the readers to judge! As far as the beliefs are concerned, any honest and true person will have to agree and admit that the concept of Imam Mahdi is exactly that concept which Ahmadis term as a subordinate prophet. Whether Mullahs call him a subordinate prophet or not, whether they call him man or not, is not important. What is important is definition. If Mullahs call a man a dog, he still remains a man. If someone enjoys the two qualities of Imam Mahdi, he will remain a prophet, whatever you call him. Even if you do not believe in him, he will still remain a prophet.


Yet again, sincerely ask yourself: WHAT IS THE TRUE INTREPRETATION OF ‘Khatam-un-Nabeen’? If Muhammad (PBUH) is last Prophet, then why to believe in Imam Mahdi? 

_________________________________________________________________
 Love for all & hatred for none                                 With Love to the Muslims of the World

Exposing lies of Mullahs: Did Hazrat Mirza Ghulam (as) claim of being Pregnant?

It is a pity, the MULLAHS of our time do not ponder over the words of the Holy Quran. They have forbidden themselves to go deep into its meaning. Little wonder, they miss the beauty and the significance which lies underneath the surface of the Holy Text. But if Mullahs had read the writings of the early doctors of Islam, (writings based on the Holy Quran and on the lives and experiences of early prophets), they would have found the truth. They are blind and deaf. How on earth would they be willing to accept any ounce of logic, especially in terms of religion? Why should such spiritual birth be impossible or difficult in the case of the Promised Messiah, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as)?

Not doubt! Mullahs are blaspheming Allah by raising this objection that He had sex with Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as). This stupid objection is not only an attack on Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as) but also on Holy Quran. They are also abusing Hazart Maryam that she had sex with Allah and that's how Jesus was born. This is the reflection of their mindset and the base of their allegation on Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as). It seems as they are living in the valley of SEX and there is nothing positive in their minds!

In response to the shameful question that comes in Mullah’s dirty minds every time, first they should prove us that Allah had SEX with Hazrat Maryam? (Naozbillah) This is what it is in their minds which they are hiding. Such allegations can not be raised until the relationship between Allah and Hazrat Maryam can not be proved in the first place by them.

God has identified particularly two women as the symbol of true believers in Holy Quran. Maryam (Mary) and Assiya (Pharao's wife), God also declares that if a person reaches a certain point in purity and devotion then they can be comparable to these two pious women. That is why Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmed (as) has called himself Mary in this respect that he was the man of God who reached the maximum point of dedication and was now equal to the purity of Mary. The name Maryam has been used to describe a spiritual condition by the Holy Quran, it states:

"And Allah sets forth for those who believe the example of the wife of Pharaoh when she said, `My Lord! Build for me a house with Thee in the Garden and deliver me from Pharaoh and his work and deliver me from the wrong-doing people." "And the example of Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity; so We breathed into her of Our Spirit and she fulfilled in her person the Words of her Lord and His Books, for she was one of the obedients." (Quran 66: 11-12)

In this passage believers are likened to the wife of the Egyptian Pharaoh who persecuted Moses. She sought her end in Heaven, in the nearness of God, and she asked for release from the Pharaoh and his machinations and from partnership in his cruel deeds. Believers are also likened to Mary, the daughter of Imran. She guarded her chastity and she received the revelation of God and affirmed the truth of God's teaching and His Books. She proved to be one of the most loyal servants of God. Here, believers are described as of two types: the type which is like the wife of Pharaoh, and the type which is like Mary. It is obvious that at least one type of believers is Mary-like. 

If, therefore, the Promised One is called, son of Mary, it might mean that this Promised One will have his origin in a Mary-like condition, and that growing out of this, will attain to a Jesus-like condition. It might mean that the earlier life of the Promised One will be holy and spotless even as Mary was holy and spotless, his later life being akin to that of Jesus. Jesus received sustenance and support from the Holy Spirit, so will the Promised One. Jesus devoted his life to the service of truth and goodness, so will the Promised One.

And, if Mullahs have problems understanding this ideology of being Maryam then they might consider them to be equal to pharaoh’s wife or and then bear the consequences afterwards if they want to call themselves MOMIN. They have no choice but to be Pharaoh’s wife and they must think how Pharaoh will treat them.  Yet, if they want to be saved from Pharaoh, then entirely deny being MOMIN in the first place!

After denying the above options, the only option would be to be identified with either of the only other two categories of human beings known to the Holy Quran and be named after either of them. The Holy Quran states:

'God sets forth for an example to the unbelievers the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut: They were [respectively] under two of our righteous Servants, but they were false to their [husbands], and they profited nothing before God on their account but were told: Enter ye the Fire along with [others] that enter.' (Quran 66: 1o)

Once again, one leaves the choice to the Mullahs to decide which of the four categories of human beings known to the Quran they would prefer to be identified with and named after. If they considers being named after any four of these women as a ridiculous idea, then they would be suggesting that they are not a human being at all since the Holy Quran does not know of a fifth category of the human species. In that event, may one enquire of Mullahs as to what are they? Are they Monkeys and Swine if not human being?

________________________________________________________________
 Love for all & hatred for none.                                With Love to the Muslims of the World