Anti-Ahmadiyyah Thread

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Saif ul Haq, I don't think it is wise to have a Red Herring approach.

If you read page 391 of Al Mawrid, on the bottom right hand corner you will see what I was referring to.

In the case of Hadhrat Isa (as) you have to use that exact usage of tawaffa.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Okay, Saif ul Haq, since you are not going to post what Al Mawrid Dictionary has further translated tawaffa as, and are accusing me of "imagining" things. I am going to post the page so that you will not have an excuse that you did not "see" it.

Look at the bottom right hand, the last entry.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Look at the bottom right hand, the last entry.

[Saif ul Haq]

Saif ul Haq, I don't think it is wise to have a Red Herring approach.

If you read page 391 of Al Mawrid, on the bottom right hand corner you will see what I was referring to.

In the case of Hadhrat Isa (as) you have to use that exact usage of tawaffa.

Now read the rest of what I posted

"Mutawaffika" (3:52-55) comes from the word "Tawaffa" which means to die. "Tawaffa" comes from the word "Waffa" and I explained it above

On its own, it means "take" or even say "taking"

In 6:60 it's used in the context of "yatawaffakum" - making someone fall asleep or to sleep. In the same context "yab'athakum" is used as waking up or reviving, or Allah waking us up in the day

You can read 'al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah' by Ibn Kathir volume two

And in the Qur'aan 3:52-55 "mutawaffika" is followed by "wa rafi'uka ilayya" and I quoted ibn Jarir from his tafseer stating "(mutawaffika) here refers to his ascension"

[Saif ul Haq]

Thank you for posting that, now please read my posts

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Now read the rest of what I posted

"Mutawaffika" (3:52-55) comes from the word "Tawaffa" which means to die. "Tawaffa" comes from the word "Waffa" and I explained it above

On its own, it means "take" or even say "taking"

In 6:60 it's used in the context of "yatawaffakum" - making someone fall asleep or to sleep. In the same context "yab'athakum" is used as waking up or reviving, or Allah waking us up in the day

You can read 'al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah' by Ibn Kathir volume two

And in the Qur'aan 3:52-55 "mutawaffika" is followed by "wa rafi'uka ilayya" and I quoted ibn Jarir from his tafseer stating "(mutawaffika) here refers to his ascension"

Where did you get this from? They are both the same.

As for the rest of your post, don't forget the word "sleep" comes side by side.

Which means? If the soul is not returned? The person is dead.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Thank you for posting that, now please read my posts

I always read your posts, always. And answer without deviating the topic. You always ridicule my posts. Please, stick to the subject and no more Red Herring approach.

[Badlun]

I have always claimed and I still stand by it that if anyone wishes to discuss Ahmadiyyat in a civilized manner I am ready.

I have studied it extensively and I am very sure that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is the Messiah and the Mahdi.

If anyone and I mean anyone thinks otherwise, then let that person step up to the plate and discuss it in a manner which everyone can benefit from.

Again, in a civilized manner, using the Quran, ahadith. If we are going to refer to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's work, I want the original Urdu to be used.

I am reading this thread post by post. Till today I believe that Ahmadis are not Muslims because they dont believe in the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad. I ll try to discuss it in a civilized way with the only request that Urdu may not be made compulsory for the discussion as i cant type in Urdu and if Momin finds any problem in the English translation then you can correct it.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I am reading this thread post by post. Till today I believe that Ahmadis are not Muslims because they dont believe in the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad. I ll try to discuss it in a civilized way with the only request that Urdu may not be made compulsory for the discussion as i cant type in Urdu and if Momin finds any problem in the English translation then you can correct it.

Don't worry about Urdu. We will do it in English. Insha Allah. However, when quoting from Urdu references it is always good to at least show their original.

[Badlun]

According to the Quran they are not wrong for saying this.

The reason for this is that they claim that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. In Islam we can't reject any prophet. This is one causes of being declared a kafir, according to Islamic Shariah.

What they are saying is this:

If someone willfully rejects Mirza Ghulam Ahmad then he or she is a kafir. However, if someone does not understand and is not convinced then that person is not a kafir. This is exactly the Quranic stance on this matter.

This I was not expecting from Momin. How some one not believing in Mirza Ghulam is kaafir if some ones knows him. He was not a prophet and not believing in some one who was not at all a prophet at least a prophet of Islam does not make some one Kaffir.

How can you prove that mirza Ghulam was a prophet???????

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Let us first establish this: Are Muslims supposed to accept all prophets? The answer is: Yes.

The second question is that if and when Hadhrat Isa (as) comes back will he be a prophet? The answer is: Yes. How do we know? From Sahih Muslim.

If Hadhrat Isa (as) is passed away, then someone else has to be appointed. That person will know that he is the Messiah because it would be revealed upon him. Also, as per Sahih Muslim, he would be a prophet.

Now, the question remains: Is Hadhrat Isa (as) alive or passed away? If he is alive, then Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is wrong. If Hadhrat Isa (as) is passed away, then that gives Mirza Ghulam Ahmad more credibility for he was the first person to claim that Hadhrat Isa (as) is passed away and that Allah has appointed him.

[inqilab]

You cannot use al mawrid to interpret the Quran. Its just stupid. Mawrid was written by a kafir.

You have to use lisan al arabi or similar, written by muslims.

This is why you are not getting anywhere.

It is better to stick with muslims. The Quran itself is used as a reference on arabic. So you cannot use a dictionary to interpret the Quran. Since the Quran arabic is superior and must be used the way Allahs Messenger [s] interpreted.

A hard headed munafiq will not understand that though.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Saif ul Haq referred to Al Mawrid, so I just showed him what he convenient left off.

Do you have a link to Lisanul Arab or any other good dictionaries, since you do not want to follow a kafir's.

Further, the same verse (5:117) will be used by Hadhrat Muhammad (saw) on the Day of Judgment.

[Badlun]

Momin

Take your time and write rebuttal to the following article


Ahmadiyya Awareness Campaign Oct 22nd, 1996 Page 2
In the name of Allah, the One & Only. His Love and Peace be upon Syedna Muhamaad, after Whom there is no Prophet and upon His Family & CompanionsCAN AHMADIS ANSWER ?

by Illias SattarCash Reward Pak. Rs. 10,000,000.00 (approx. US$ 250,000.00)MAIN ARTICLE

When Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, founder of Ahmadiyya Movement claimed to be the Promised Messiah and Mehdi, he was reminded about the return of Hazrat Isa ibne Maryam (Jesus Christ) from Heavens. According to Muslim faith, Hazrat Isa (Jesus) will descend from Heavens in Damascus and alongwith Imam Mahdi will work for the propagation of Islam. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad denied the truthfulness of such Muslim faith.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad rejected the fundamental Muslim doctrine of Second coming of Hazrat Isa ibne Maryam. Rather he said that Hazrat Isa has died his natural death and even located his grave in Khanyar Street, Srinagar, Kashmir. Mirza Sahib wrote a book "Jesus in India" where he gave a detailed account of what had actually happened at the Cross. According to him Jesus was put to the Cross by the Jews on Friday; Jesus fainted and jews thought that He is dead. He was buried but three days later He regained conciousness and came out of the grave. He was 33 years old at that time. He met His disciples and secretly migrated to India. where he died at the age of 120 years. Let us have a look at the following extracts from this book :

• "Hence, I shall prove in this book that Jesus (Peace be upon him) did not die on the Cross either did he go up to the Heavens nor it should ever be hoped that he will return to the earth from the Heavens; rather, he died at the age of 120 years in Srinagar in Kashmir, and his grave is in the Khanyar Region of Srinagar." (Maseeh Hindustan Mein, Roohani Khazain vol.15 p. 14)
  "Authentic narrations of Hadith prove that our Holy Prophet (pbuh) said that Maseeh lived upto the age of 120 years. And this is ACCEPTED by ALL THE SECTS of ISLAM that in the person of Jesus two such qualities were combined which were not present in any other Prophet. Firstly, that HE LIVED HIS FULL LIFE i.e. he was alive for 125 years. Secondly, He toured most of the parts of the world . . . . . now it is obvious if he had ascended to Heavens at the age of only 33 years, then the Tradition of 125 years would not have been correct, neither he could have toured at such a young age of 33. These Traditions are not only mentioned in the authentic and ancient books of Hadith, but they are so popular among all the sects of Muslims that none can be imagined more famous." (Maseeh Hindustan Mein {Messiah in India}, Roohani Khazain vol.15 pp. 55-56)

Christian Era (AD) begins with the birth of Hazrat Isa ibne Maryam (Jesus) in 1 AD. Hazrat Isa according to Mirza Sahib died at the age of 120 years, meaning 120 AD. Now let us examine the following extract from "Anjam-e-Atham" written by Mirza Sahib:

• "The Holy Quran clearly says that the Masih was lifted to the heavens after his death. Therefore his descent is symbolic and not real. And in the verse 'Falamma Tawaffeteni' it has been clearly manifested that death of Hazrat Isa (pbuh) has already taken place. Because the meaning of the verse is that the Christians will go astray after the death of Hazrat Isa (pbuh) and not during his lifetime. So if we assume that Hazrat Isa (pbuh) is not yet dead, then we will have to agree that the Christians are not yet digressed, and this is absolutely false. Rather the verse is saying that the Christians remained faithful only until the life-time of Hazrat Isa (pbuh). From this it becomes known that corruption had already begun during the time of Disciples. If the period of the Disciples had been such that the Christians had still been on right path, then in this verse Allah would not have linked it with the life-time of Hazrat Isa(pbuh) only, but would have included the life time of the Disciples as well. Thus at this juncture a very good point of the period of corruption in Christianity is illustrated and
  which is that IN TRUTH, during the time of the Disciples itself, the seeds of SHIRK (associating partner with God) were sown in Christianity.(Anjam-e-Atham, Roohani Khazain vol.11 p.321) THE IMPORTANT POINTS FROM THE ABOVE EXTRACT ARE:

• Mirza Saheb gives prove from Hadith that Hazrat Isa died at the age of 125.
• The Christians were on right path only during the life time of Hazrat Isa.
• He was not made God or son of God during his life time.
• Seeds of SHIRK (Trinity) were sown after the death of Hazrat Isa. Till the life time of Hazrat Isa there is no possibility of such a digression. Mirza Ghulam is quoting the verse "Falamma Tawaffeteni" (5:117) from Quran implying that Allah is guaranteeing protection of such corruption during the life of Hazrat Isa only.
• Since Mirza Sahib has stated in his book "Jesus in India" that Hazrat Isa died in 120 AD, therefore sowing the seeds of Association of Partners with Allah (i.e. Trinity) could not have take place before 120 AD. This means that Hazrat Isa was made God and son of God only after 120 A.D. Before 120 A.D. not even one man can have this faith that Hazrat Isa is God or son of God.
• Thus the year of 120 A.D. became a turning point.

Now let us examine some extracts from Another book of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Chashma-e-Masihi (Roohani Khazain volume 20):

• "All the bad things were introduced in this religion (Christianity) by Paul. Hazrat Isa was such an unselfish person that He did not even want anyone to call him a pious man but Paul made him God."(Chashma-e-Maseehi, Roohani Khazain vol.20 p.375)
  "And in the very first instance, he (Paul) implanted the bad seedling of Trinity in Damascus. And this Pauline Trinity started from Damascus. It is towards this that Hadith Shareef has hinted that the future Maseeh will descend on the eastern side of Damascus." (Chashma-e-Maseehi, Roohani Khazain vol.20 p.377)

In this book, Chasma-e-Masihi, Mirza Sahib has clearly stated that St. Paul was responsible for the doctrine of Holy Trinity and thus turning Hazrat Isa into God. It is a well known fact that St. Paul died in 64 AD or 67 AD. 'The 100' gives the year of his death as 64 AD. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics says:

• "That he suffered martyrdom at Rome there can be no doubt. . . . the date will lie between
  A.D. 64 and 67, most probably nearer the former than the later limit." (Encyclopedia vol.9 p. 694)

FINAL ARGUMENTS

1. In the book "Jesus in India" Mirza Sahib proved that Hazrat Isa died in 120 AD.
2. In the book "Anjam -e-Atham" , Mirza Sahib has clearly stated that the seeds of Trinity were not sown until 120 A.D.
3. In the book "Anjam -e-Atham" , Mirza Sahib has clearly said that St. Paul made Hazrat Isa God.
4. Paul died in 64 or 65 A.D. where as Hazrat Isa died in 120 A.D. Therefore Paul died at least 55 years before Hazrat Isa.
5. Since Paul must have given the doctrine of Trinity during his life time, this means that Hazrat Isa was made God at least 55 years before His own death. In other words by 65 A.D. Hazrat Isa was made God/Son of God while he died 55 years later in 120 A.D.
6. While he (Jesus) was alive in Kashmir, he was being worshipped as God in Palestine.
7. Thus Mirza Sahib's commentary on Holy Quran's verse 5:117 (Falamma Tawaffetenni) in his book "Anjam-e-Atham" that Christians made Hazrat Isa God after the death of Hazrat Isa in 120 A.D. becomes absolutely wrong.

Is this a small mistake for a man claiming to have been divinely ordained to be a Messiah, a Mahdi and a Prophet? Such grevious error? So obviously and utterly wrong! So conclusively wrong!
If Mirza Sahib were alive and this question had been put to him, could he have said: "I am a human being and I can make mistakes". Mirza Sahib had claimed help of Allah in these arguments. Can Allah be wrong? No! only the claim of Mirza Sahib is wrong. If he can be wrong in one thing, what proof is there that he is not wrong in other things. The idea of this whole exercise of trying to prove that Hazrat Isa (pbuh) is dead was to establish his claim of being the Promised Messiah and Mahdi. His argument is that since Hazrat Isa is dead he will not return, because it is against the principals of Allah. Someone else will take up the role of Hazrat Isa and that someone is Mirza Saheb himself. Above arguments prove conclusively that he (Mirza Ghulam) could not sustain his claim of being Imam Mahdi and the Promised Messiah. Therefore he is not Imam Mahdi and the Promised Messiah. As a corollary he is not a Prophet, because a true Prophet will not make a false claim. Q.E.D.
ANOTHER INTERESTING POINT
It is written by Qadianis in Tafseer of Quran Majeed that Hazrat Isa kept a careful watch over his followers as long as he was alive. Did he really keep a careful watch as long as he was alive specially in Palestine and Rome were Paul made him God and son of God? According to Mirza Sahib, Hazrat Isa at the age of 33 was put on the Cross after which he fled Palestine for good. HE SECRETLY MIGRATED TO INDIA and remained alive for 87 more years and died at the age of 120 in Srinagar, Kashmir. He kept no contact with the people of Palestine for these 87 years. People in Palestine did not know that Hazrat Isa was alive in Kashmir and Hazrat Isa did not know that the people in Palestine had begun to worship him as God and son of God. Therefore in the original land where he was sent as Messenger (Palestine) and where he was made God/son of God, he kept careful watch only till the age of 33 and for the remaining 87 years of his life he kept no watch over them at all. What a glaring mistake!
Remember: All this is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani's assertions and we have only his words for them. WILL THE QADIANIS, HIS Followers, KINDLY CLARIFY THE ABOVE POINTS OR RECTIFY THEIR BELIEF?
May Allah help them to understand what is right and what is wrong and give them the courge to follow the right path. Ameen. All praise to Allah. His Love and Peace be upon His Noble Prophet, Hazrat Muhammad and upon His family and Companions..

http://alhafeez.org/rashid/Reward2.htm

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Dear brother,

would you like me to answer this or would you like me to give you a book that gives a detailed answer?