Is Buddhism a Failure?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Humans can fail, but a philosophy lives on. 
Actually both during Zia period. There have been several democratic governments since Zia (1988) but none in too hurry to change these laws. There is certainly widespread support for these laws. Pakistani society is heavily radicalised and sees these laws as steps towards an Islamic system. You can argue there are exceptions such as human rights organisations but by and large this is the situation.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
No SAM. All Muslims agree that Ahmadiyyas are not Muslim. Iran also classifies them as Non-Muslims, as do the Saudis and other Arab governments. It's not local to one country.
The Ahmadiyyas' missionary efforts are solely directed against Muslims, this is why the major Islamic organizations (Sunni and Shia) in Pakistan and other countries have petitioned the government to make it illegal for their missionaries to preach to people in their mosques under the guise of preaching Islam.
Furthermore, they are not Muslims as I have illustrated above with my explanation. If you have any qualms with the explanation I have given, then prove through the Quran that they are Muslims.
Considering the lack of freedom of Muslims in the West, Muslims imprisoned for indefinite periods, tortured, and deported to foreign jails. When Ahmadiyyas start facing the same persecution that Muslims do in the West, then you can complain.
Ahmadiyyas should resist trying to infiltrate Muslim organization and deceptively convert people to their religion. Pakistan's laws don't allow even Muslims to enter, propagate material, and secretly convert Christians, why should the exception by made for Ahmadiyyas. Those who want to embrace the Ahmadiyya religion can go visit their mosques and learn for themselves.
Considering 97% of the population of Pakistan is Muslim, 2% being Christians, it is recipe for civil war which the Ahmadiyyas are pushing for. No government which wishes to stay in power would ever accept such laws to allow them to clandestinely propagate their religion in Muslim places of worship.
In 1953 Justice Muhammad Munir and Justice M R Kiyani submitted a report as to the causes of 1953 Anti-Ahamdiyya riots. They interviewed religious scholars of major sects as part of their investigation and the question of 'who is a Muslim' also came about. Following are the observations of the two justices made in their report;
(Page 215, 218)
Under the heading Apostasy, the Report refering to the belief held by the ulama that, in an Islamic state, a Muslim who becomes a kafir is subject to the death penalty. The Report says:
(p. 219)
link: thepersecution.org/dl/report_1953.pdf
Last edited:
As I have shown in the link above, al Azhar does not agree with you.
Also takfir is a serious accusation in Islam and really, I'm surprised you would say that anyone who adds to the Shahada is not a Muslim. Do you also consider the Shia as non-Muslims? The Ismailis, the Aga Khanis, the Wahabis, the Deobandis?
Seems like the Saudis are more progressive than the Pakistanis. They treat the Ahmadiyas as Muslims.
As Testing has said:
Is this your view, DH? There are NO Muslims?
I recall that the Pakistani people elected Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto, both Shias/Kurdish/Iranians, neither of whom IIRC, could be called radicals.
So I think the "radicalisation" is probably politicised. I notice people with little education are easily led.
And yeah, Zia was a scourge on humanity, as well as on the society of Pakistan.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
Wrong SAM, Al Azhar may accept some books written by an Ahmadiyya, but this doesn't qualify as acceptance of them as Muslims. They don't believe in Prophet Muhammad as the final messenger of God. They have to accept the finality of the Prophethood. The Quran declares that Prophet Muhammad is the last Prophet, referring to him as Khatam e Anbiyat (seal of the prophets). By disregarding the Quran, they have made themselves Non-Muslims.
I already answered this question. Don't change the subject.
We are talking of the classification of Ahmadiyya as Muslims, using the word of the Quran to reach this conclusion. The Quran clearly states, "O people! Mohammed has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Messenger of Allah and the last in the line of Prophets. And Allah is aware of everything." (Quran 33:40) If Allah swt has already stated the definition of a Muslim, who are we to alter it. We should stand by the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet. That's the true definition of a Muslim.
The Ahmadiyyas are officially banned from making Hajj. They aren't Muslims. If being 'progressive' means rejecting the Quran, well then feel free to do so. Don't expect the rest of the Muslims to come to your side any time soon.
No, I believe that was posted by someone else. Those aren't my words. If you wish to read my stances, you can go back and read them. My position is quite clear.
Yeah, Z.A. Bhutto (rahmat allah alayh) was a great leader of Pakistan. Only those who don't care about Pakistan would ever mock him. Frankly, this puts their patriotism in question. He did more for Pakistan than anyone before him, with the exception of Quaid e Azam (rahmat allah alayh).
Gen. Zia was a corrupt dictator, he murdered Z.A. Bhutto and took over with US complicity. When he himself became overly religious and anti-US, he was assassinated in a plane crash. They keep who they like, and they get rid of who they wish. Everyone knows a true patriot of a Muslim country will never be pro-US, ever. The US has committed horrible sins in the Muslim world.
Can you show me evidence where al Azhar has rejected the Ahmadiya as Muslims? Because I have never heard of this outside of Pakistan or Pakistanis.
The Saudis most definitely do not discriminate against the Ahmediyas, because I know some who have gone for haj. Maybe not from Pakistan, because Pakistanis classify them as non-Muslims on their passport.
The shahada does not require anyone to believe Mohammed is the last prophet. It would be absurd if that were so, since there is a Muslim belief that Jesus will return. Obviously, his return will be after Mohammed.
The verse says final prophet not final messenger.
[33:7] Recall that we took from the prophets their covenant, including you (O Muhammad), Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary. We took from them a solemn pledge.
[3:81] GOD took a covenant from the prophets, saying, "I will give you the scripture and wisdom. Afterwards, a messenger will come to confirm all existing scriptures. You shall believe in him and support him." He said, "Do you agree with this, and pledge to fulfill this covenant?" They said, "We agree." He said, "You have thus borne witness, and I bear witness along with you."
Anyway, its not anyones job to decide who is Muslim or not. Making Mohammed more important than belief in God is a kind of shirk.
Last edited:
The koran is a book of disception.
DiamondHearts
Registered Senior Member
I have actually not read Muhammad Ali's writings, I can't comment on them. My hypothesis is that Ghulam Ahmad is not mentioned. The acceptance of his writings, however, does not change the stance of Al Azhar, nor the world's Muslims, that the Ahmadiyyas who believe Ghulam Ahmad is a prophet are Non-Muslims. You are free to get in contact with Al Azhar relating to this issue. I am familiar with their line of thought.
Yes, SAM. What you are propagating is denial of the Quran where it is stated quite clearly:
"...This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed my favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your way of life". (Quran 5:3)
The return of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) does not contradict the finality of the Prophet, because he had already brought his message during his prior years on this Earth. He will come as Prophet, but the revelation has already been completed. He will follow the example of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and encourage people to embrace his Sunnah.
"And he (Jesus), shall be a Sign of the Hour"(Quran 43:61)
"That they say (in boast): 'We killed the Messiah Isa, son of Maryam, the Messenger of Allah, but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of Isa was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no certain knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely, they killed him not, but Allah raised him up unto Himself. And Allah is ever All-Powerful, All-Wise. And there is none of the people of the scripture but must believe in him before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection, he (Isa) will be a witness against them." (Quran 4:157-159)
Allah swt completed the religion with the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as stated in the verse above "This day have I perfected your religion ..." (Quran 5:3)
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who, according to the Quran, completed God's favor on humanity with the revelation of the Quran and the establishment of Islam on Earth. He is the seal of the prophets, none shall come after him. If anyone after this claims prophethood, he is a deceiver (dajjal).
"Apostleship and prophethood have ceased. There will be no messenger or prophet after me." [Musnad-Ahmad]
"Anyone who demands proof from him (a claimant to Prophethood after the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.) will become a Kafir (disbeliever), as Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) has emphatically said: 'No Prophet will come after me". (Manaqib Abu Hanifah)
"There will arise thirty impostors in my Ummah (followers) and each one of them will pronounce to the world that he is a prophet, but I am the last in the line of the Prophets of God and no Prophet will come after me". (Abu Dawood).
"My position in relation to the prophets who came before me can be explained by the following example: A man erected a building and adorned this edifice with great beauty, but he left an empty niche in the corner where just one brick was missing. People looked around the building and marveled at its beauty, but wondered why a brick was missing from that niche. I am like unto that one missing brick and I am the last in the line of the Prophets". (Bukhari, Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, Tirmizi, Musnad Abu Dawud).
"Muhammad (s.a.w.w) is "Khatim-un-Nabiyeen" meaning the Last of the Prophets (a.s) and that on Him all sorts of Nubuwwat (Prophethood) came to an end. This is supported by definite arguments and clear injunctions and is one of the fundamental beliefs of Islam. Rejection of this doctrine is an obvious disbelief and an ugly deviation". (Sheikh Mulla Ali Qari)
"The Children of Israel used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Caliphs who will increase in number.”
[Sahih-al-Bukhari; 4.661]
"Every claim to prophethood after him is falsehood and deceit.” (al-Aqidah al-Tahawiyya)
“Allah Most Blessed and Exalted has stated in His book, as has His MessengerSall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam in the traditions via numerous channels of transmission (mutawatir) that there will be no prophet after him, so that whoever claims this rank thereafter is a lying pretender, misled and misleading, even if he should stage miracles and exhibit all kinds of magic, talismans and spells." (Hafiz Ibn Kathir)
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the last of the prophets sent by Allah and the sealer of prophets (Khatme Nabuwwat) for NO more are to come, EVER! The total number of prophets (pbut) that were sent by Allah to mankind is 124,000 and every nation on earth was given guidance through them. In fact, all major religions today on earth can be traced to have these divinely guided teachers as their original propagators of the Truth of Allah. The best of His messengers all came from the same tree i.e. family lineage and many of them are mentioned in the Holy Qur'an which describes who they were and what their mission on earth was. It is important to note that no prophet on earth ever negated or rejected any of the other divinely ordained prophets and thus their message was always the same and one in purpose. Each established the law of the One and Only God and showed the way of life for humans to observe. From the very first creation of mankind, there was always a prophet on earth which was Prophet Adam (pbuh). This guidance from the Merciful Allah to establish His complete laws continued to the last Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who exemplified the letters of the law in his most perfect behavior. He completed and perfected the one and only True religion, Islam. With the revelation of the last Holy Book, the Holy Qur'an, which is the most protected and perfect book of God with us, he established as part of his mission, every conceivable and practical law for mankind to follow in order to attain spiritual perfection. Great prophets such as Nuh (Noah), Ibrahim (Abraham), Ismail (Ishmael), Ishaaq (Isaac), Yaqoob (Jacob), Yusuf (Joseph), Dawood (David), Sulaiman (Solomon), Musa (Moses), Yahya (John), and Isa (Jesus), - (Peace be upon them all) - all came from the one blessed lineage of Prophet Adam (pbuh) and ended with the last Messenger, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
http://www.ezsoftech.com/akram/default1.asp
The Shahadah includes both recognition of Allah swt and the recognition of the final Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Your claim that it qualifies as shirk reveals a deep misunderstanding. We must make our niyyah (intention) in seeking knowledge for truth, regardless of what is acceptable to others. It only matters what Allah swt thinks of us, everything else is secondary.
There are only two main criteria required for being a Muslim:
1. Belief in One God and His sovereignty of all matters (forgiveness, rewarding deeds, judgment, etc.)
2. Belief in the finality of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and belief in him as the servant of God (requiring belief in the Quran which was revealed to him)
The Ahmadiyyat/Mirzaiyat/Qadianis completely fail in these basic criteria. They can never be classified as Muslims, as long as we judge this claim from the Quran, Allah swt's word.
Historical Background
Qadiani/Ahmadiyyas own declaration that other Muslims are Non-Muslims
http://www.irshad.org/info_q/reverts/bamasri.php
So basically you are basing the denial of an entire group of people as Muslims because of what some scholars have said.
Whats the difference between you believing what some scholars say about Mohammed and how the Quran should be interpreted and the Qadianis beliving what some other scholars say about Mohammed and how the Quran should be interpreted? Both of you are choosing some other person to tell you what to believe. The Qadianis call you kafir and you call them kafir. Again, whats the difference between the two?
I would say that anyone who has taken it upon himself to declare if anyone is a Muslim or not has missed the most important basis of Islam. Its about God, not Mohammed. Islam says all the prophets from the beginning of time came with the same message. That everyone is born Muslim. Make no distinction between the prophets, Mohammed is only a messenger, etc. That if anyone is a disbeliever in God you read Qul ya ayyohal kaafiroon and let him go his way. And yet you would deny someone Islam because he has ideas about Mohammed that disagree with yours. Or interprets the Quran differently from you.
I'm not interested in the Qadiani's declarations. Even the Wahabis think they have perfected the religion with Abdul Wahab.
But surely anyone who has read the Quran knows that you are not responsible for anyone elses religion.
Which word in the shahadah tells you of the finality of prophethood?
All your descriptions tell me is that this must be the reason why the Prophet never wanted anyone to write down the Hadiths. When other people's beliefs define religion, its easy enough to stray rather than use your own brain and think. Note that perfecting your religion implies using your eyes, ears and brain as other suras in the Quran have described. There are no suras which say: and let other people tell you who is Muslim.
Its a pity really, to support religious ostracism of people because they believe differently. Let them call themselves Muslim or non-Muslim. Whether they are right or wrong, its not upto any person to decide.
Whats the difference between you believing what some scholars say about Mohammed and how the Quran should be interpreted and the Qadianis beliving what some other scholars say about Mohammed and how the Quran should be interpreted? Both of you are choosing some other person to tell you what to believe. The Qadianis call you kafir and you call them kafir. Again, whats the difference between the two?
I would say that anyone who has taken it upon himself to declare if anyone is a Muslim or not has missed the most important basis of Islam. Its about God, not Mohammed. Islam says all the prophets from the beginning of time came with the same message. That everyone is born Muslim. Make no distinction between the prophets, Mohammed is only a messenger, etc. That if anyone is a disbeliever in God you read Qul ya ayyohal kaafiroon and let him go his way. And yet you would deny someone Islam because he has ideas about Mohammed that disagree with yours. Or interprets the Quran differently from you.
I'm not interested in the Qadiani's declarations. Even the Wahabis think they have perfected the religion with Abdul Wahab.
But surely anyone who has read the Quran knows that you are not responsible for anyone elses religion.
Which word in the shahadah tells you of the finality of prophethood?
All your descriptions tell me is that this must be the reason why the Prophet never wanted anyone to write down the Hadiths. When other people's beliefs define religion, its easy enough to stray rather than use your own brain and think. Note that perfecting your religion implies using your eyes, ears and brain as other suras in the Quran have described. There are no suras which say: and let other people tell you who is Muslim.
Its a pity really, to support religious ostracism of people because they believe differently. Let them call themselves Muslim or non-Muslim. Whether they are right or wrong, its not upto any person to decide.
Last edited:
JustLovely
Registered Member
DiamondHearts,
You'd rather worship a BOOK than Allah.
Reminds me of how doomed Mosques are copied from Christian churches or how Muslims where Christian burkas. People like to dance around golden claves or gilded books with words written in pretty gold.
Mohammad was not the last prophet DiamondHearts that's just silly. What? Are Aztec supposed to learn an archaic ancient form of Arabic that no one now can read nor fully understand? What about the Japanese? The Maori? They are all supposed to give up their culture and become ancient Arabs?
For someone who in one thread talks about the rights of culture how quick you are to turn around and act like a cultural bigpot. No one in the world was going to ever receive a prophet from Allah.
Not only silly, it's culturally bigoted.
The Arabs got a rather simple message to get them on the road. DiamondHearts, there have been THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of prophets to MANY MANY different people with LOTS of LEVELS of appreciation of Allah. Of course Indians having the oldest of the worlds cultures we have a DEEPER message.
Your like a caveman who Allah gave paper to and now you try to condemn Indians for using a computer or the phone.
I'm done wasting my time with your. I can see you are a hateful small minded people with no real desire to understand Allah and its no use talking to you when I can spend me time with people who are closer to Allah and want to know the truth.
Oh and just for your information, this weekend we had a meeting where 3 Shia and 7 Sunni kafir came to know the Messiah and are now Muslim - through the forgiveness of Mohammad they have returned the whence they came,, children once again.
You'd rather worship a BOOK than Allah.
Reminds me of how doomed Mosques are copied from Christian churches or how Muslims where Christian burkas. People like to dance around golden claves or gilded books with words written in pretty gold.
Mohammad was not the last prophet DiamondHearts that's just silly. What? Are Aztec supposed to learn an archaic ancient form of Arabic that no one now can read nor fully understand?
What about the Japanese? The Maori? They are all supposed to give up their culture and become ancient Arabs?For someone who in one thread talks about the rights of culture how quick you are to turn around and act like a cultural bigpot. No one in the world was going to ever receive a prophet from Allah.
Not only silly, it's culturally bigoted.
The Arabs got a rather simple message to get them on the road. DiamondHearts, there have been THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of prophets to MANY MANY different people with LOTS of LEVELS of appreciation of Allah. Of course Indians having the oldest of the worlds cultures we have a DEEPER message.
Your like a caveman who Allah gave paper to and now you try to condemn Indians for using a computer or the phone.
I'm done wasting my time with your. I can see you are a hateful small minded people with no real desire to understand Allah and its no use talking to you when I can spend me time with people who are closer to Allah and want to know the truth.
Oh and just for your information, this weekend we had a meeting where 3 Shia and 7 Sunni kafir came to know the Messiah and are now Muslim - through the forgiveness of Mohammad they have returned the whence they came,, children once again.