In the Name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful AHMADIS ARE INDEED MUSLIM From time to time, country to country some individuals from Islam, who called themselves muslim, will make the same and old false allegation, that Ahmadis muslims are not muslim. Most of them don’t know why Ahmadis are declared non muslims. They are only repeating what they have been told or read about. When Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(a.s) declared that he has been appointed the promised Messiah and Mahdi, a storm of bitter and abusive opposition was let loose against him from all directions. He was condemned as an apostate from Islam, who had put himself outside the pale of Islam and all sorts of opprobrious epithets were applied to him. These accusations were made by the same Muslim Divines who, after the publication of the first volume of the Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya declared it to be an outstanding and matchless performance and newspapers, journals acclaimed the publication of great work in laudatory terms. In consequence of the successive parts of Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya, its revered author had become the most renowned and honoured personage in the contemporary world of Islam. Those Muslims divines named him the CHAMPION OF ISLAM. A Question of Principle 1. Is any Assembly in the world, per se, entitled to deprive an individual of the basic right to exercise his free will to attribute himself, to the religion of his choice? Or, 2. Is any Assembly in the world, per se, entitled to decide, by way of interference in the domain of faith and religion, as to what it considers to be the religion of any community, sect or individual? A Basic Human Right and the Constitution The answers to both these questions are in the negative. Regardless of colour, race, and geographical and national divisions, it is an inalienable right of every human being to attribute himself to whichever religion he chooses, and no one in the world, nor any organization or Assembly can deprive him of this basic human right. The U.N. Charter of Rights, in the context of guaranteeing basic human rights, also accepts this right of every human being to attribute himself to the religion of his choice. Human nature and conscience, too, do not empower any Assembly to deprive any individual or sect, of the right to choose to attribute himself to a particular religion; because in that case this right will have to be granted to every Assembly in the world. National Assembly and the Jurisdiction to Decide upon Religious Matters No National Assembly can be considered entitled to deliberate upon such matters for yet another reason: its members, taken individually too, cannot be guaranteed to have the capability to decide upon religious matters. Mp’s from different social background with different agendas, different educational level, some Maulvis/Mullahs, so how can an Assembly composed of such individuals be entitled to sit in judgement over a religious sect and decide as to what is its religion? If the majority of the members of an Assembly are empowered to decide upon the religion of any sect or denomination merely by virtue of the fact that they constitute the majority, then such a view will also be untenable on the basis of reason, and contrary to human nature and religious conscience. In fact democratic principles themselves universally regard such matters to be outside the purview of democratic decision-making. Similarly, the history of religions in the world reveals that never in any era was the majority ever granted the right to decide as to what was the religion of any particular group of people. If such a right were to be conceded for the majority, then one would perforce have to accept (God forbid) the majority viewpoint against all the prophets of God and the respective communities of their followers. It is obvious that this is a tyrannical concept which will instantly be rejected by the followers of any religion in the world. Explicit Injunctions of the Holy Quran and the Holy Prophet (SAW) Under the injunctions of the Holy Quran and the Ahadith no one has the right to coercively rename someone elses religion. As Allah says: There is no compulsion in religion. (2:257) If someone has been coerced into recanting his faith, ... while his heart finds peace in the faith (16:107) then such actions are also contrary to the teaching: There is no compulsion in religion. Forcibly declaring a Muslim to be a non-Muslim or declaring a Hindu to be a Muslim, while the former is a conscientious adherent of Islam and the latter that of Hinduism would be tantamount to disobeying the verse of the Holy Quran: There is no compulsion in religion. Further support of this viewpoint is provided by the Holy Quran which states: (O ye who believe!) ... say not to anyone who greets you with the greeting of peace (i.e. says Assalamo Alaikum, like other Muslims) that ‘you are not a believer (4:95) It is an explicit injunction of the Holy Prophet (SAW) that if a person affirms the Oneness of Allah, then to accuse such a person of merely verbally affirming it and alleging that he negates it in his heart, would make such an accuser to be guilty of transgression. The following Hadith of the Holy Prophet (SAW) throws ample light on this subject: Hadhrat Usama bin Zaidra relates that the Holy Prophet (SAW) sent us to the oasis of Juhaina tribe. We caught them early in the morning at their water-fountains. An Ansari and I chased one of them and apprehended him. When we overpowered him, he exclaimed: La Ilaha Illallah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah) which caused my Ansari Companion to restrain his hand from him, but I pierced him with a spear and killed him. When we returned to Medina and the Holy Prophet (SAW) came to know of the incident, he asked: O, Usama! Did you kill him in spite of the fact that he had recited La Ilaha Illallah? I replied: O, Prophet of Allah! He was saying (these words) merely to ensure his safety. The Holy Prophet (SAW) kept on repeating his question to a point when I wished I had not become a Muslim before that day. (Another tradition relates) The Holy Prophet (SAW) said, You still killed him, even though he had affirmed La Ilaha Illallah? I clarified, O, Prophet of Allah! He had said that because he was afraid of the weapon. The Holy Prophet (SAW) exclaimed: Why didnt you cut his heart open to make sure if he had said it from the core of his heart? The Prophet of Allah repeated this remark so many times that I wished I had not become a Muslim before that day. [Bukhari, Book of Al Maghaazi, Chapter Baath al-Nabi, Usaamah bin Zaid ilal Harqaat min al-Juhaina, p. 612] Our Spiritual Master, the Seal of Prophets, Hadhrat Muhammad (saw) prophesied: My followers will become divided into 73 sects—all of these will go to Hell, except one. Hadhrat Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, who is regarded as the Mujaddid (The Divinely appointed voice articulate of the century) of the 12th Century Hijra according to the belief of His Royal Highness Shah Faisal, as well as the majority of Muslims residing in Hijaz, quoted the above-noted Hadith and then stated: The issue of seventy-two sects to be Hell-bound, out of a total of seventy-three sects, is a grand issue. He who comprehends it is indeed endowed with true wisdom, and he who acts on it in practice (i.e., actually regards only one sect as bound for Paradise and considers the remaining seventy-two to be Hell-bound) he alone is a Muslim. [Short Biography of the Holy Prophet (SAW), pp. 13-14, by Al-Imam Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhaab, published in Cairo] The well known organ of Jama‘at Islami, Tarjman-ul-Quran, states in its issue of January, 1945: (translated from Urdu) Agreement reached by the majority on anything is not considered in Islam to be a proof of its being the truth; nor does every preponderance of people constitute a true majority. Every multitude of people is not an organised Community (Jama‘at), nor is the adoption of a particular viewpoint by the mullahs of a particular locality to be termed as Consensus.... This interpretation finds support in a Hadith of the Holy Prophet (SAW) related by Hadhrat Abdullah bin Umar as follows: Bani Israel became divided into seventy-two sects and my followers will become divided into seventy-three sects who will all fall into Hell with the exception of one. People asked, Who would these be, O, Prophet of Allah? He replied, Those who will follow my path and the path of my Companions. This group of people will neither be in the majority, nor would it offer its majority status as an argument in favour of its truth. Rather, it will be just one among the seventy-three sects of the Muslims and would consist of non-spectacular and unassuming people in this wide world, as he stated: .... So there is no ray of hope in this Hadith for the Community which declares itself, solely on the basis of its numerical strength, to be the Community under Allahs protection. Because this Hadith explicitly states two characteristic features of the Community: firstly, it will tread on the path of the Holy Prophet (SAW) and his Companions and, secondly, it will be an insignificant minority. [Tarjumaan-ul-Quran, January/February, 1945, pp. 175-176, edited by Sayyed Abul Aala Maudoodi] In diametric opposition to the above noted pronouncement of the Holy Prophet (SAW), the Resolution presented by the religious scholars in the Pakistan national assembly to declare the Ahmadis non muslim seeks to portray seventy-two Muslim sects to be bound for Paradise and points to only one to be Hell-bound. This is clearly contrary to the Hadith of the Holy Prophet (SAW) and amounts to a sacrilege against him. Definition of a Muslim It is a universally agreed upon principle that before determining whether an individual or a group belongs to a particular species, an all-encompassing and exclusive definition of such a species is made, which acts as a touch-stone. As long as such a definition exists, it becomes quite easy to decide whether or not any particular individual or group may be counted as a member of that species. It is worthy to highlight that before the resolution was presented in the National assembly of Pakistan NO unanimously agreeable, all-encompassing and exclusive definition of a Muslim had been formulated which not only had the unanimous support of all contemporary Muslim sects but on which may also exist the consistent unanimity of all Muslims in history. In this context it will be necessary to keep the following observations in view: A. Can any definition of a Muslim be found in the Holy Quran, or by the Holy Prophet (SAW) which definition may have been applied without exception during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (SAW)? If there does exist such a definition then what is it? B. Can it be considered legitimate for anyone to propose any definition, in any era, which is in disregard of such a definition which is found in the Holy Quran, or by the Holy Prophet (SAW), a definition that can be shown to have been applied in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (SAW)? C. Apart from the definition referred to above, if the term Muslim has been defined in various historical periods by different religious scholars or different sects, then what are those definitions? And what would be their religious status in contradistinction to the definition referred to in (A) above? D. During the time of Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddique(ra), when revolt against Islam was on, did he or the Companions of the Holy Prophet (SAW) feel any need to modify the definition which had prevailed during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (SAW)? E. Was there any instance during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (SAW) or during the period of the Rightly Guided Caliphate (Khilafat Raasheda) of declaring anyone to be a non-Muslim despite ones affirmation of the Kalima, La Ilaha Illallah Muhammadur Rasoolullah, and further expressing ones belief in the remaining four Pillars of Islam, i.e., daily prayer (Salaat), Zakat, Fasting, and Pilgrimage to Mecca, any such person was still declared to be non-Muslim? F. If it were to be considered legitimate to declare someone to be outside the pale of Islam, notwithstanding ones belief in the five Pillars of Islam, just because ones interpretation of a few verses of the Holy Quran is unacceptable to some Muslim divines of certain sects; or if one is declared to be outside the pale of Islam for entertaining a belief which runs counter to Islam in the view of certain sects, then such explanations and identification of such beliefs will have to be made so as to incorporate these in the positive definition of a Muslim, i.e., the statement that if any sect believes in the five Pillars of Islam but, additionally, adheres to this set of identified beliefs, then he will be declared to be outside the pale of Islam. G. If the door of negation of faith is opened against Muslim sects, as referred to in (e) above, then rationality and justice would necessitate that all those issues be scrutinized on the basis of which various religious scholars have already declared Muslim sects, other than their own, to be disbelievers (Kaafir), apostates (Murtad), or outside the pale of Islam. Some instances are as follows: i. To believe that the Holy Quran was created (Makhlooq), or not created. (Ghair Makhlooq) [Ashaira, Hanabilah] ii. To believe that the Holy Prophet Muhammad(saw) was not a human being but Light (Noor). [Barelvi]. iii. To believe that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) was not Light (Noor) but a human being. [Ahle Hadith]. iv. To believe that the Holy Prophet (SAW) was Omnipresent, Omniscient and Knower of the Unseen. [Barelvi] v. To believe that it is legitimate to seek help from the saints who are dead, and to hold that several such dead saints possess such powers as to grant the request of someone in need, when one makes such a request to them. [Barelvi] vi. To believe that nothing is trustworthy in the Shariah of Islam except the Holy Quran, and that one is not obligated to follow the precept of the Holy Prophet (SAW) (Sunnah) or his reported Sayings (Ahadith), no matter how strong the basis of those traditions, and despite the consistent and unbroken chain of their narration extending to our time. [Chakraalvi, Pervezi] The list is long and it can be discuss some other time. The foregoing points call for careful consideration because concrete and decisive evidence exists according to which the religious divines and scholars who belong to various sects of Islam have issued religious edicts (fatwa) that those who hold beliefs as noted above are certainly outside the pale of Islam even if they believe in the other essential elements of Islam. The most recent fatwas is from India where Dr Zakir Naik has been declared Kafir by Ahle sunnat fatwa (Watch the link youtube/watch?v=8wfREFRPWcc)! And a person who is less than sure of their disbelief is himself to be clearly regarded as outside the pale of Islam. The only acceptable and practical definition of a Muslim is one which may be definitively predicated upon the Holy Quran, one which is clearly established to have been narrated by the Holy Prophet (SAW) and adherence to which definition is clearly established throughout the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (SAW) and the period of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. Any attempt to define a Muslim which bypasses this paradigm will not be free of pitfalls and lacunae. In particular, all the definitions which were formulated in the era subsequent to the aforementioned period (when the continued fragmentation of Islam eventually resulted in seventy-three sects) deserve to be rejected because these are mutually contradictory and cannot be simultaneously reconciled. Accepting any one such definition of a Muslim is impracticable because such a Muslim will be found to be non-Muslim on the basis of the rest of the definitions. There is no way out of this quagmire. When Mr. Justice Muhammad Munir asked various Muslim divines to define a Muslim, during a 1953 Enquiry, no two divines could unfortunately agree on any single definition. Mr. Justice Muhammad Munir regretfully observed: Keeping in view the several definitions given by ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kaafirs according to the definition of everyone else. The conclusion reached by Mr. Justice Muhammad Munir clearly establishes the fact that up to the time when the Judicial Enquiry Report was being prepared, there had never existed any consensus on the definition of a Muslim which might find corroboration with view held by the earlier saints of Islam. So if a seemingly unanimous definition is now formulated, it cannot be labelled as a definition resulting from the consensus of Muslims and corroborated by the earlier saints of Islam. So it is imperative that we adopt as definition which was formulated by the Khaatamul Anbiyaa’, Hadhrat Muhammad (saw), and which constitutes a glorious charter for any Islamic country. In this context, let us have a look at three Sayings (Ahadith) of the Holy Prophet (SAW): Hadhrat Abu Huraiah relates that the Holy Prophet (SAW) said: “Ask me question”, but (his companions) were diffident to ask. Meanwhile, a man came in and sat in front of the Holy Prophet (SAW) and asked: “What is Islam:?” The Holy Prophet (SAW) replied “Do not associate partners with Allah, offer prayer, pay Zakat and fast in Ramadhan.” The man replied, “You have spoken the truth.” [Muslim, Kitab-ul-Iman] A man from among the people of Najd, with dishevelled hair, came to see the Holy Prophet (SAW). We could hear the hum of his conversation but could not capture what he said until he drew closer and we could hear him asking the Holy Prophet (SAW) about Islam. The Holy Prophet (SAW) replied, Five daily prayers are appointed which span the day and night. At which he enquired, Are there other (prayers) in addition to these (five)? The Holy Prophet (SAW) replied, No, unless of course you wish to offer some more as superrogatory, and further added, You should observe fasting in the month of Ramadhan. At this, he enquired, Is there any other obligatory fasting besides that in Ramadhan? The Holy Prophet (SAW) replied, No, unless you wish to observe it in supererogation. Then the Holy Prophet (SAW) mentioned Zakat to him, at which he asked, Is there anything apart from it? The Holy Prophet (SAW) replied, No, unless you wish to offer more in super-erogation. Then this man got up to leave, saying, By God! I will neither add to these injunctions, nor would I subtract anything from these. The Holy Prophet (SAW) commented, If he proves himself to be true in what he just said, he will prosper. [Sahih Bukhari Kitab-ul-Iman Bab Al-Zakaat min al Islam) One who observes the same prayer as we do, faces the same direction (in prayer) as we do, and partakes from the animal slaughtered by us, then such a one is a Muslim concerning whom there is a covenant of Allah and His Messenger; so you must not seek to hoodwink Allah in the matter of this Covenant. [Bukhari,Kitabus-Salat, Baab Fazl Istiqbal il-Qibla] This translation of the Hadith was taken from the booklet authored by Maulana Abul’A‘ala Maudoodi, A Critique of Constitutional Proposals, pp.14-15, (Urdu). Our spiritual master, Hadhrat Muhammad (saw), has done us all a tremendous favour by spelling out this definition in such comprehensive and unambiguous terms, and thereby laying the foundation of the international unification of the Islamic World. It is incumbent upon every Muslim government to accord explicit recognition to this cohesive foundation in its respective Constitution. During the last fourteen centuries, various religious divines have, from time to time, issued various edicts of disbelief on the basis of their self-styled definitions. It created such a horrifying situation that there was not a single century in which these so-called definitions spared the saints, the deeply religious divines, and pious mystics without holding their adherence to Islam as strongly suspect. One cannot present even a single Islamic sect whose ‘disbelief is not fully affirmed by at least a few of the other Islamic sects. The Status of the Edicts of Disbelief A question that naturally arises in this context is: What is the status, or worth, of such edicts of disbelief? Can any religious scholar, in his individual capacity or as a representative of his own sect, be entitled to issue an edict of disbelief against another individual or another sect? How would such edicts impinge on the collective status of the followers of Islam as a whole? Such edicts should be considered as nothing more than strongly held opinions of some religious scholars who regard certain articles of belief to be counter-Islamic to such an extent that, in their view, Allah will consider one who holds such beliefs to be a disbeliever and such a one will not be resurrected among Muslims on the Day of Judgement. In this sense, such edicts constitute no more than warnings in this world. But as far as conducting the day to day affairs of this world is concerned, no individual or denomination can be empowered to expel an individual or a sect from the larger corpus of Islam. It is a matter between a human being and God and it can only be resolved on the Day of Judgement. Since the application of these edicts to govern worldly matters would entail disastrous consequences for the unity of the Muslim ummah, therefore no individual or sect can be declared to be outside the pale of Islam on the strength of an edict issued by the religious scholars of any denomination. The viewpoint that if unanimity among all sects is achieved in regard to the perceived disbelief of any one sect then such a situation can call for the expulsion of this sect from Islam, is erroneous and irrational on the grounds that, in actual practice, every sect in Islam has certain beliefs which in the agreed opinion of a number of other sects makes the holders of such beliefs liable to be considered outside the pale of Islam. Indeed the existing situation underlines the need for a divinely appointed, just, arbiter. If today a consensus of all sects can be forged against the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at on the pretext of certain differences, then in the days ahead, it is quite likely to have the same outcome against the Shia sect on account of some of their exclusive beliefs. And the same can happen against the Ahle Quran sect, otherwise known as Chakrhalvi or Pervezi. An adverse consensus already exists in practice, among the religious scholars of other sects, against certain beliefs held by the Ahle Hadith, the Wahhabi and the Deobandi sects. Therefore consensus or ‘majority opinion, in this context, is an exaggerated notion. If any one particular sect is singled out to be condemned, the rest of the sects would appear to constitute the consensus in opposition to it. Similarly, each and every sect, taken individually, would look like engendering a potential consensus opposed to its own position and such iterations would establish a consensus-led edict of disbelief against each and every sect, taken one at a time. These edicts are predicated more upon appearance than reality. They cannot per se be taken as a ticket to Paradise or a warrant for Hell. As far as the reality of Islam is concerned, let us have a look at the definition of a true Muslim in the words of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at. He says: The accepted meanings of the term Islam is enunciated in this verse of the Holy Quran: Nay whoever submits himself completely to Allah, while he is excellent in conduct shall have his reward with his Lord. No fear shall come upon such, neither shall they grieve. (2:113) viz. a Muslim is one who surrenders his all in the way of Allah the Exalted, i.e., one who fully devotes his being to Allah the Exalted, for the fulfilment of His designs, and to win His pleasure. Then he earnestly takes to the pursuit of righteous deeds purely for the sake of God and practically devotes every ounce of his energy in His way. In short, he must attune himself exclusively to God, doctrinally, as well as practically. Doctrinally, in the sense that he really believes the raison d’etre of his whole being to be cognizance of God, obedience to Him, and attainment of His love, His affection, and His pleasure. Practically in the sense that he must perform, exclusively for the sake of Allah, genuine good deeds which flow from exercising every internal and external faculty and prowess which God has endowed him with. But he must do so with happy eagerness which indicates as if he is witnessing the countenance of the Being he worships, in the mirror of his total obedience.... Now every person of sound mind can understand, in the light of the aforementioned verses of the Holy Quran, that the essence of Islam can take root in someone only when his being, with all its objective and subjective faculties, is fully devoted to God and in His path. And whatever faculties God has endowed him with, in the nature of a trust, he must reciprocate (their full and exclusive use back) to (God Who is) the True Endower. This must be done not just in terms of belief only, but additionally, he must cause the complete picture of his Islam and its complete essence to be reflected in the mirror of his deeds. That is to say, a person who claims to be a Muslim must demonstrate that his hands and feet, heart and mind, reason and perception, his anger and compassion, his forbearance and his knowledge, all his spiritual as well as physical faculties, his sense of self-respect, his wealth, his leisure and enjoyment, and whatever he possesses—objectively or subjectively—from the hair on his head down to his toe-nails, even his motives and concerns in the recesses of his heart, as well as all desires of his self, have become just as totally subservient to God as a persons own limbs are subject to his control. In other words he must demonstrably prove that the purity of his actions has reached a point where whatever he has is no longer his but has come to be devoted to God, and all his limbs and faculties are so completely immersed in the service of God as if they are Gods own instruments. Pondering over these verses also makes it plainly obvious that devoting ones life in the way of God, which is the essence of Islam, can be accomplished in two ways: Firstly, to accept God to be the only one Who is worthy of ones worship, ones sole objective and beloved, and none else should remain associated with Him in His worship, love for Him and fear of, and hope from, Him. And all decorum, commandments, injunctions and penalties which pertain to His glorification, His praise, His worship, as well as matters pertaining to the heavenly decrees, are accepted wholeheartedly. And all such injunctions, penalties, rules and divine decrees must be held in high esteem, in a spirit of complete self-abnegation and humility. Furthermore, all the eternal verities and pure depths of wisdom must be thoroughly explored which are a means to comprehending His limitless powers and a medium for understanding the lofty station of His dominion and kingdom, and which are a potent guide towards the recognition of His favours and His bounties. Secondly, the other way of devoting ones life in the way of Allah is that one must devote ones life in the service of His creatures in sympathy towards them, exploring ways to alleviate their burdens and genuinely redressing their griefs. So that one may undergo hardships in order to provide comfort to others, and accept pain for oneself to ensure pleasure for others. This discourse reveals that the essence of Islam is really magnificent, and no one can genuinely be given this noble title of being a Muslim until he hands over all his being: with all its faculties, desires, and intentions, to God, and unless he withdraws his hands from his egoism with all its antecedents, and takes exclusively to His path. So, therefore, one shall be called a Muslim in the real sense only when his life of careless abandon is transformed by a drastic revolution such that the entity of his ego that incites to evil (nafse-ammaara), along with all the emotions attendant upon it die readily, and after espousing this death, on account of being righteous, purely for the sake of Allah, a new life will kindle within him. It would be such a blessed life which would be shorn of everything except complete obedience to the Creator and selfless sympathy for His creatures. The obedience to God will take the form of ones being ever ready to endure insults and humiliation for the purpose of establishing His Glory and Majesty and His Uniqueness. And ones readiness to court death a thousand times in ones endeavours to ensure eternal life for the attribute of His Oneness. And one hand may gladly sever ones other hand if obedience to Him so dictates. And ones love for the magnificence of His Commandments and ones thirst for seeking His approbation may create such disgust toward sin as if it were a consuming inferno, or a lethal poison, or a devastating thunderbolt from which one must flee with all the powers at ones disposal. In other words, one must abandon all the desires of ones ego in order to obey His Wishes, and endure life-threatening injuries if only to ensure becoming grafted to Him, and sever all bondage of flesh in order to demonstrate ones bond with Him. The Service to Allahs creatures takes the form of providing benefit to all other creatures in their numerous needs through a variety of ways and means in which (Allah) the Eternal Allocator has made various creatures dependent on various others by exercising all faculties of ones being, in all such matters purely for the sake of Allah. One must use ones God-given faculties to help everyone who is in need of help, and must strive to improve not only the needy persons position in the worldly life but also his life in the Hereafter .... So this tremendous obedience to God and practical service which is mingled with affection and love, and filled with sincerity and perfect genuineness, this indeed is what constitutes Islam, and its essence and its crux, which one attains after one attains ‘death over ones egoism, (apprehension of) other creatures, greed and self-will. [Aa’eenah Kamaalaat-e-Islam, Roohaani Khazaa’in vol. 5, pp. 58-62] Truth will always prevail In a Pakistan TV interview the question was asked whether Allama Iqbal was an Ahmadi. Through that interview, Allah The Almighty has compelled mullah Dr Israr Ahmad harsh opponent of Ahmadiyyat, Justice Jawed Iqbal & Professor Mahdi Hassan to admit the great services rendered by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (A.S) for Islam. They had to bear witness of the piousness of the founder of Ahmadiyya movement in Islam and Dr Israr Ahmad had to admit that Allama Iqbal wrote that if you want to see living Islam in this age then go to Qadian. He also admitted that the common mullas have no knowledge about religions or religious books. Watch the link youtube/watch?v=CWAwvmC42rE&NR=1. Can these people decide who is muslim? Another Anti-Ahmadiyya Mullah Ahmad Manzoor Chinioti was also compelled to admit the truth! In one of his speech he had to admit the fact that Non-Ahmadi Muslims are becoming Ahmadi Muslim because they see it as converting from Islam to Better Islam because they see that Ahmadi Muslims recite Kalima, Read Quran, Offer 5 times prayers & do good deeds. In other words ordinary Muslims are converting to Islam Ahmadiyya in tens of thousands because they see Islam Ahmadiyya as far better Islam than the Mullahs brand of Islam. Watch the link youtube/watch?v=vCpzgjwZR4I&feature=related Pious and peaceful attitude of Ahmadi Muslims (at large) is a proof of the Truth of Ahmadiyya beliefs. The Chairman and Leader of the largest Islamic (ulama) Organization in Indonesia bears witness of the Truth of Ahmadiyyat through pure Islamic attitude of Ahmadi Muslims. Ahmadiyya is the most logical & peaceful approach towards religion. Watch the link youtube/watch?v=Jab-H_K00U0&feature=related This article has been written in the hope that after reading it the seekers after truth may decide for themselves, as to how far the decision to declare the Ahmadi to be non-Muslim was based on justice and the teachings of Islam. I conclude with the following statement of the Promise Messiah: ‘... my opponents are fortuitously engaged in self-destruction: I am not the plant which can be uprooted by their hands.... O, God! Do Thou have mercy on this ummah. Amen! [Arbaeen, Roohaani Khazaa’in vol. 17, pp. 471-472] All praise indeed belongs to Allah, Lord of all the worlds. Mohammad Oomaar Bakarkhan A TRUE MUSLIM
Posted on: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 05:56:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015