Why are Ahmadis considered non-Muslims in Pakistan

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

how does it make hazrat issa (as) the last prophet?

Is it because he will die after muhammad (saw)?

Yes.

I thought the order of prophethood depended on who was given prophethood first. And clearly issa (as) was a prophet before muhammad (saw) so how can issa (as) be the last prophet?

Could you please give me reference to where you got this idea?

[Mujib]

No, they don't consider themselves a separate religion, of course.

Actually, sister, they do.

The question that opened this thread ("Why are Ahmadis considered non-Muslims") has been answered. Now the following question can be asked: Why do Qadianis (Muslim scholars refer to "Ahmadis" as Qadianis) consider Muslims as non-Muslims (kafirs)? The answer: Because Muslims reject Mirza Ghulam's false claims to prophethood.

Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, the eldest son of Mirza Ghulam and the second "caliph" of Qadianism, claims that those who do not accept the claims to prophethood of his father Mirza Ghulam are kafirs. He says this in his book A'ina-e-Sadaqat. The book is available on their website among the books MWMN provided a link to. It is translated as Truth about the Split. He says:

[T]he belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit. (Truth about the Split, 70-71)

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Sangar has made it clear he is not a Qadiani. You went from saying "their beliefs" and "them" to espousing their beliefs as your own. But khayr, country jana, the discussions are not about you or me or another member, so I'm not going to ask you whether or not you are Qadiani. The focus of the discussions is beyond that.

Whether Sangar is an Ahmadi or not is not the issue. He still disagreed with your scholars and stated it as such. He has continuously made fun of sunnipath and Faraz Rabbani. Therefore, why is it that when I said "your scholar" you pounced on me? Be fair dear brother.

Did you know how Hadhrat Hamza (ra) accept Islam? If not, read about it. If so, then that is all I need to say.

No Muslim rejects Qadianism blindly. Claims to Prophethood are not rejected blindly, because every Muslim, man, woman, and child, knows that our Prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace) is the last Prophet. This belief is the very essence of Islam and it is imbedded in the heart and mind of every Muslim. So when anyone or anything contradicts this fundamental truth, they know, without the need to "hear their side" or "read their books," they know to reject it.

A Christian would say:

"No Christian rejects Islam blindly. Claims to the prophethood of Muhammad are not rejected blindly by Christians, because every Christian, man, woman, and child, knows that Jesus is God. This belief is the very essence of Christianity and it is imbedded in the heart and mind of every Christian. So when anyone or anything contradicts this fundamental truth, they know, without the need to "hear their side" or "read their books," they know to reject it."

Do you see your logical fallacy?

I am eargerly awaiting what you will present from their work. I love knowledge and discussions. I would love to learn more. I am very much inclined towards Ahmadiyyat.

Brother, please be honest when you present your stuff. I will trust that you have read the original sources, not someone's assement of his work.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Actually, sister, they do.

The question that opened this thread ("Why are Ahmadis considered non-Muslims") has been answered. Now the following question can be asked: Why do Qadianis (Muslim scholars refer to "Ahmadis" as Qadianis) consider Muslims as non-Muslims (kafirs)? The answer: Because Muslims reject Mirza Ghulam's false claims to prophethood.

Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, the eldest son of Mirza Ghulam and the second "caliph" of Qadianism, claims that those who do not accept the claims to prophethood of his father Mirza Ghulam are kafirs. He says this in his book A'ina-e-Sadaqat. The book is available on their website among the books MWMN provided a link to. It is translated as Truth about the Split. He says:

[T]he belief ey may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit. (Truth about the Split, 70-71)

Dear brother,

did you read the whole book or did you simply find the quote somewhere and posted it conveniently?

[Mujib]

Dear brother,

did you read the whole book or did you simply find the quote somewhere and posted it conveniently?

Dear brother, should I quote the section where he supports this charge of kufr? Or should I quote more charges of kufr against Muslims from the same book?

Again, brothers and sisters, Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad, the eldest son of Mirza Ghulam and the second "caliph" of Qadianism, claims that those who do not accept the claims to prophethood of his father Mirza Ghulam are kafirs. He says this in his book A'ina-e-Sadaqat. The book is available on their website among the books MWMN provided a link to. It is translated as Truth about the Split. He says:

[T]he belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit. (Truth about the Split, 70-71)

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I don't think you read the book my dearest and beloved brother. I just skimmed it quickly.

Theoretically speaking, Mujib wrora, if someone rejects a prophet is he or is he not a kafir?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I don't have a reference as such but its from my own undrestanding.

Do you have a reference for you conclusion that the prophet who dies last is considered the last?

No, my dearest brother, because in my mind there is no concept of a 'last' prophet.

I was simply performing a logical exercise with you. But you seemed to be sure of your answer, that is why I asked you. I really wanted to know if it is an understanding of Islam as per how one determines who is last or who is first. Thank you for clarifying that it was conjecture.

[Feroza_Banu]

I don't think you read the book my dearest and beloved brother. I just skimmed it quickly.

Theoretically speaking, Mujib wrora, if someone rejects a prophet is he or is he not a kafir?

u gotta be kidding me.

can u stop asking questions over and over again? he provided a quote from the book and u didn't give any reason behind the quote being false... all u do is keep asking him whether he has read the whole book or not. what part of the book r u referring to that he has to read? can u post something that negates what he posted.

u remind me of hamwatan of another forum.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear sister what are you referring to. When have I continuously asked him questions? Are you saying that we can't ask questions?

The question I asked is a fundamental belief in Islam.

I am referring to this, dear sister:

Look what it says (on the pages Mujib wrora noted):

Alleged Innovations

These changes, according to Maulawi Muhammad Ali, relate to three matters; (1) that I propagated the belief that Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was actually a Nabi; (2) the belief that he was 'the Ahmad' spoken of in the prophecy of Jesusas referred to in the Holy Quran in Al-Saff 61:7; and (3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiahas.

These are referred to as "alleged changes."

Look what it says on pdf paging system 73-75 of the same book Mujib wrora gave the link to.

"As for the question of Kufr (unbelief) of non-Ahmadi Muslims, my belief is that Kufr really arises from a denial of God. Hence, whenever there comes any revelation from God of such a nature that its acceptance is obligatory on every man, a rejection of the same leads to Kufr. Belief in such a revelation, however, presupposes belief in the bearer of the revelation. Hence it follows that a belief in the bearer of such revelation is a necessary part of one’s faith. The man who rejects a Prophet thus necessarily becomes a kafir, not because he denies the truth of any particular Prophet X or Y, but such denial will necessarily lead him to reject a revelation of God. To me, the Kufr which arises from the denial of any Nabi has its basis in this principle and not in any personal quality of the Nabi. And inasmuch as the revelation of which the acceptance is obligatory on mankind comes only through Prophets, it is the rejection of such recipients of Divine revelation, and not of others that leads to unbelief. Now, as we hold that the revelation which came to the Promised Messiahas are such that their acceptance is obligatory on mankind in general, to us, the man who rejects the Promised Messiahas is a kafir agreeably to the teachings of the Holy Quran, although he may well be a believer in all the other truths of religion because the presence even of one of the necessary conditions of Kufr is sufficient to make a man kafir. I may however add that in my opinion Kufr arises from a denial of one or more of the fundamental articles of religion, not because such a denial makes a man the object of unending punishment, but because the denial makes him guilty of rebellion against God and leads to the extinction of his spiritual life. Now, as Islam bases its judgments upon what is patent and not upon what is possible, it cannot but class as kafir such as fail to accept any of the Prophets, even though such failure may be due to their want of information concerning him. In the latter case, they will not, of course, be the objects of Divine punishment. 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 Prophetsa. 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 Prophetsa."

Please read the whole quote. He is representing what we Muslims believe as per the Holy Quran. So, therefore, Ahmadiyyat is not a new religion. They are following the Quranic commandments.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

That is why I asked Mujib wrora:

Theoretically speaking, Mujib wrora, if someone rejects a prophet is he or is he not a kafir?

We in Islam believe that if someone rejects a prophet, any prophet, he or she will be a kafir in the eyes of Allah.

So, here, it is that Islam has established who is and who is not a kafir.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Further look to what Mujib posted and what is really the quote on those pages:

This is what Mujib posted:

[T]he belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit. (Truth about the Split, 70-71)

This is the real quote:

These changes, according to Maulawi Muhammad Ali, relate to three matters; (1) that I propagated the belief that Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was actually a Nabi; (2) the belief that he was 'the Ahmad' spoken of in the prophecy of Jesusas referred to in the Holy Quran in Al-Saff 61:7; and (3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are kuffar and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiahas.

He left out, or, where he got it from left out the initial part. That these are allegations. The quote I provided shows what Ahmadis really believe. That is why I aske Mujib wrora the question I did.

[Feroza_Banu]

^great thank you for further clarification of how u call me sister and kafir in the same line...

tomatoe tomaaaatoo... its the same thing... ahmadi calls our disbelief in mirza's prophethood as kufr... simple as that. don't get technical.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

What are you saying sister? When did I call you a kafir?

[Mujib]

^great thank you for further clarification of how u call me sister and kafir in the same line...

tomatoe tomaaaatoo... its the same thing... ahmadi calls our disbelief in mirza's prophethood as kufr... simple as that.

Yes. Notice, sister, that the long passage MWMN quoted doesn't say anything different from what I quoted. It only attempts to justify the charge of kufr.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

But brother, be honest, how does this make them a new religion? This was the crux of your argument. That is why I posed you the question. In Islam we believe that someone who rejects a prophet is a kafir. Don't tell me that this is not a believe of ours.