Ahmadiyya Muslims: The apostates of Pakistan – by Aaker Patel

by admin

Editor’s note: It’s a shame that two Pakistani newspapers, Express Tribune and The News, refused to publish this excellent article by Aaker Patel on a much ignored topic. (This is notwithstanding some valid concerns about the last paragraph as outlined in the comments section in this post.) Pakistan’s most persecuted community, Ahmadiyya Muslims, face constitutional and legal discrimination, institutional harassment and frequent acts of violence by Pakistan army-supported Jihadi-sectarian organizations. This exposes the shallowness and hypocrisy of Pakistan’s English press which claims to represent liberal and progressive ideology but in practice remains tightly aligned with the interests and policies of Pakistan’s military establishment and its Jihadi-sectarian affiliates. Recently, The Friday Times which claims to be a voice of Pakistan’s liberal elites published at least four article (in one issue) which misrepresented Pakistan’s most target killed faith group, Shia Muslims. At least one article in TFT also misrepresented the suffering of Pakistan’s Ahmadiyya Muslims. This shows that it’s not only right wing extremists but also urban elites (fake liberals) who are contributing to the sufferings of Pakistan’s oppressed and persecuted communities. Here’s a copy of Mr. Patel’s column published in Live Mint.

************

I wrote this piece for the two Pakistani newspapers where I write columns, but they did not publish it. These papers are quite liberal, and their editors open-minded. This is the first time they’ve done this, and I see their point. The subject is difficult.

Members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community praying in Chenab Nagar, Pakistan, in July 2010. Photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images.

Members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community praying in Chenab Nagar, Pakistan, in July 2010. Photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images.

 

It is about a sect of Muslims, originally all Punjabi, who are disliked in India and Pakistan. They are called Ahmadis, from the sect’s founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Or they are called Qadianis, from Mirza Ahmad’s hometown of Qadian in Gurdaspur on the Indian side.

 

Muslims in both India and Pakistan think Qadianis are apostates, betrayers of Islam, what is called murtadd in Arabic. Pakistan’s passport application forms have this declaration that all Muslims must sign: “I consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Quadiani to be an imposter nabi and also consider his followers whether belonging to the Lahori or Quadiani group, to be non-Muslims.”

Why force Muslims to sign this? Actually, the reason for this cruel wording is to ensure that Ahmadis do not sign it. But why? To deny them access to Mecca, where Saudis permit Muslims alone to enter. Pakistan’s four million Ahmadis are denied their religious obligation of Haj through this device. Pakistan’s electorate is separated into Muslim and non-Muslim categories. This means Ahmadis cannot vote in Pakistan, because the state doesn’t recognize them as Muslim and Ahmadis don’t consider themselves non-Muslim. Indian Ahmadis are more fortunate, but not because Indian Muslims are more open-minded.

 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad with his son in a picture before 1900. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad with his son in a picture before 1900. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

 

The Indian Express reported on 25 September that an Ahmadi exhibition of the Quran in 53 languages was not allowed to be held in Delhi. Jama Masjid’s Imam Bukhari was arrested with 55 other Muslims who threatened the exhibition. A dozen or so years ago, Darul Uloom Deoband’s and Nadwa’s clerics issued a joint fatwa prohibiting Indian Muslims from social and commercial interaction with Ahmadis. They were warned specifically against offering a thirsting Ahmadi water. I wrote an editorial against this, immediately getting the proprietor of my newspaper (who was Muslim) into trouble with Urdu newspapers. Pakistan’s The Express Tribunereported on 8 October that 10 students, including seven girls, and a female teacher were expelled from two schools near Faisalabad after the village learnt they were Ahmadis.

 

On 28 May 2010, two Ahmadi mosques were attacked in Lahore and 93 Ahmadis were slaughtered. Reporting the mosque attacks live, Pakistan’s television channels called them “Ahmadi places of worship”. Calling themmasjid or mosque means up to three years in jail (section 298b). Three years in jail for the Ahmadi who refers to his prayer call as an azan.

Why such hatred? Let’s try to understand the Ahmadi faith.

At the age of 40, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (died 1908) said he began receiving visions. In one, he saw himself writing some decrees about the future and placing them for God’s approval. God, who “looked like a judge or a ruler”, flicked the pen first to get the ink flowing, and signed. When Mirza Ahmad woke, his shirt was spattered with red ink. This message from God qualified Ahmad as a prophet. This is unacceptable to Muslims because they insist God will communicate with no human of any faith after Muhammad’s death. That line has permanently gone dead.

Despite his visions, Mirza Ahmad personally did not claim prophethood. He denounced Judaism and Christianity as error, and once also claimed he was an avatar of Vishnu. Muslims believe Jesus did not die on the cross, but ascended to heaven when alive. Mirza Ahmad said Jesus died not on the cross, but in India. Judgement Day would bring not Jesus, as Muslims and Christians believed, but him. Other than his claim of receiving visions, this is the second thing that is seen as problematic.

Mirza Ahmad’s followers are split into two groups.

The points of Islam on which all Ahmadis agree with other Muslims are: Shahada (“there’s no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet”), prayer, fasting, giving alms and Haj. All Ahmadis consider themselves Sunni. Ahmadis don’t believe in taweez (amulets), in jinns, in dargahs and in pirs. In these things, therefore, they appear to resemble conservative Muslims rather than heretics.

On the issue of prophethood, Ahmadis are split. The smaller Lahori group accepts the finality of prophet Muhammad and considers Mirza Ahmed only a renewer.

The main Qadiani allows space for Mirza Ahmad’s “minor” prophecies. On 25 March 1938, Maulana Maudoodi accepted the Lahori Ahmadis as Muslim, but not the Qadianis.

Sir Muhammad Zafarullah Khan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s foreign minister, and Abdus Salam, Pakistan’s Nobel laureate, were both from the Qadiani group. The May 2010 massacres in Lahore were of the Qadiani group.

Under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, in 1974, Pakistan’s national assembly unanimously declared both groups non-Muslims. Under General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, in 1984, laws were passed criminalizing the practise of religion by Ahmadis.

On 21 November 1996, Salam died in Oxford. His body was brought to Pakistan for burial in Rabwah, a city on the river Chenab built by Ahmadis. His tombstone referred to him as “the first Muslim Nobel laureate for his work on physics”. A Pakistani judge ordered the word “Muslim” to be defaced. It now reads “first Nobel laureate”. Even in death, Pakistan will deny the Ahmadi his faith.

Two years later, on 17 November 1998, Pakistan’s Punjab assembly under Shahbaz Sharif voted to rename Rabwah because it is a Quranic name. Rabwah became Nawan Qadian (New Qadian) against the will of its residents. Some Muslims were uneasy at having to say the despised word “Qadian”. On 14 February 1999, it was again renamed. Rabwah is now called Chenab Nagar.

Mirza Ahmad liked British rule because they gave full religious freedom and legal protection to their subjects. Though some of his teachings are contradictory, he seemed on the whole to be moderate in his interpretations and in his outlook.

There is another thing that gets Muslims worked up about Ahmadis. This is Mirza Ahmad’s undoing of jihad.

He told Muslims to give up qital (jihad’s violent aspect) entirely. His followers, he said, “would have nothing to do with war and fighting”.

“Armed jihad ends, and only the jihad to purify your souls remains,” he said. Jihad of the pen in place of jihad of the sword. Both Qadiani and Lahori groups hold this to be true. All Ahmadis reject Al Qaeda without qualification. It is difficult not to be attracted to such Gandhian pacifism.

In Lahore 10 years ago to speak at the Kinnaird College for Women, I was rattled by the snarling response from a professor there, a woman who till that moment was quite sophisticated, when someone in our dinner group mentioned Ahmadis. She felt they were rightly being punished for their religion, and this is the view of Pakistanis across class.

I would say some of the responsibility for their persecution lies with Pakistan’s Ahmadi community. They will reject this, and it is a callous thing to say given their state, but it is true. They were enthusiastic supporters of the two-nation theory, and of Pakistan. Sir Zafarullah Khan championed the Islamizing of Pakistan through its infamous Objectives Resolution of 1949. Ahmadis crossed over to do jihad in Kashmir, ignoring Mirza Ahmad’s wisdom. They raised a group of mujahideen there called Furqan Force to cleanse it of Hindu rule.

Such bigotry against other faiths usually invites punishment against your own. For the apostates of Pakistan, it has.

Aakar Patel is a director with Hill Road Media.

Send your feedback to replytoall@livemint.com

26 Comments to “Ahmadiyya Muslims: The apostates of Pakistan – by Aaker Patel”

  1. With utmost respect to the Pakistan blogzine team, as an Ahmadi I am extremely glad that two Pakistani newspaper editors refused Aakar Patel’s mischievious and dishonest article.The last line and last paragraph of the article essentially suggests that Ahmadis deserve the persecution they are suffering because of their own actions.Talk about blaming the victims!
    There is absolutely NO basis whatsoever that Sir Zafrullah Khan “championed the Islamisation of Pakistan”.As a member of the government and in cabinet he supported the Objectives Resolution as he was expected to do.Everyone in the cabinet did the same and to describe that as “championing” the cause of Islamisation of Pakistan is a gross distortion.
    Even worse distortion of the truth is to suggest that the Furqan Force was raised to “cleanse it of Hindu Rule”! Where on earth does Aakar Patel base that accusation on? That is in effect claiming that Ahmadis were supporting the ethnic cleansing of Hindus from Kashmir which is a total lie and again distortion of the truth.

    I wonder how my Shia brothers and sisters would feel if someone had written that Shia have no right to complain about persecution as Jinnah was a Shia and supported the creation of Pakistan and they deserve all that happens to them because they supported the two nation theory!

    The last line of Aakar Patel’s article is simply disgraceful as it blames the victims of persecution and suggests that this a form of Karma that Ahmadis are suffering because of the past.Does he really believe that Lashkar i Jangvi and other extremist groups are persecuting Ahmadis because of our support of the two nation theory or raising of a Furqan Batalion?

    Shame on Aakar Patel!!

  2. @Munir

    Thanks for the feedback.

    I understand and agree with your views that the the last paragraph of Mr. Patel’s otherwise balanced article is not only insensitive but also misrepresenting. Apparently, Mr. Patel does not seem to have a sectarian bias thus it could be his Pakistani or Indian Muslim colleagues (progressive thugs) who might have fed this misrepresentation to him.

    I agree that instead of blaming the victims, the Ahmadiyya Muslims, Pakistan’s most persecuted faith group, need to be supported and the wrongs against them need to be reversed on the constitutional, political and societal levels.

    I don’t know much about the Furqan Battalion thus can’t comment on that part.

    I still think that ET and The News could have edited out the last para and published the article (content editing is a routine thing for them) but they instead chose to wipe out the complete article, I suspect their reasons for not publishing may not necessarily be related to the last para.

  3. @Laibaah

    Forgive me but I think that you may have misjudged this matter.

    The articles central premise is that Ahmadis got what they deserved in terms of persecution.How on earth is that a balanced supposition to be made in an article?His closing paragraphs sum up his views which are quite grotesque.If the same premise had been made about any other persecuted group there would have been collective outrage.As I said before, imagine Shia’s,Christians or any other minority being told that they “invited such punishment”!

    Furthermore,the basis of his accusations are lies and distortions.The closing paragraph contains outright lies and distortion of the truth that negates the entire article.

    Aakar Patel has written a hateful article and in the absence of an apology or explanation from him should be roundly condemned!

  4. @Munir

    An academic question please: I understand and agree with your concerns about the last paragraph. Do you have some other concerns about other sections of the article too?

  5. @ munir @laibaah no one have power to give decision of someones belief ,every one have its own point of view….mr patel’s article is good effort .the newspaper done wrong by nt publishing this article.

  6. @Laibaah

    I think the entire article is a caricature of Ahmadi beliefs and teachings and is seriously misleading.To sum up Ahmadi beliefs so poorly lays them open to further discrimination.But more to the point, the whole article is negated by the last paragraph which after all the central point!

  7. @Munir

    Thanks for this. Let’s try to provide this feedback to Mr. Patel directly via email (or twitter if available).

  8. It is a matter of great sorrow that, mainly through mistaken notions of zeal, the Muslims have during the period of decline earned for themselves an unenviable reputation for intolerance. But that is not the fault of Islam. Islam has from the beginning proclaimed and inculcated the widest tolerance. For instance, so far as freedom of conscience is concerned the Quran says “There shall be no compulsion” of faith.
    Muhammad Zafarullah Khan, Addressing the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, c. 1949
    By these words the Foreign Minister showed his views and his intentions on Objectives Resolution, rest is upon the readers.

  9. An alternative perspective:

    A response to “The Apostates of Pakistan” by Aakar Patel – by Lutf Islam

    Aakar Patel’s recently published article “The apostates of Pakistan” was penned a couple years ago, but did not see the light of day until now. He states the reason for this delay as reluctance of seemingly liberal Pakistani English language papers to publish some material. Reading through the piece, I could easy spot a number of problems that an editor may see with the article. It mentions the persecution of the Ahmadis in Pakistan, it also tries to explain Ahmadiyya beliefs, history and the bigotry of Pakistani society. The editors may have imagined a backlash from many of their conservative readers. An influential section of Pakistani society has always managed to keep this topic out of public eye for decades. But, as an Ahmadi, I would have sent the article back to Mr. Patel with red lines all over the text, for factual inaccuracies, incomplete research and almost slanderous accusations. Let me say that I admire Mr. Patel’s attempt to look into the Ahmadiyya history to give a fresh perspective to his readers. I wish more people could go to the source materials and inform and educate their readers. I also hope that they make a better job of it.Mr. Patel narrates a vision received by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, which is recorded in in his own writings as follows;
    “I presented the document containing divine decrees for attestation and He, Who was manifesting Himself in the form of a Ruler, dipped His pen in red ink and first flicked it in my direction and with the rest of the red ink which remained at the point of the pen He put His signature to the document. Thereupon, the state of vision came to an end and when I opened my eyes to look at the material world around me, I witnessed several red drops falling on my clothes. 2 or 3 of the drops also fell on the cap of one ‘Abdullah of Sanaur (Patiala State) who was at the time sitting close to me. Thus, the red ink which was part of the vision materialized externally and became visible. Many other such manifestations have been witnessed which it would take too long to relate. ”

    According to the Mr. Patel

    “ This message from God qualified Ahmad as a prophet.”

    The claim of Hadhrat Ahmad as being a prophet did not originate from this experience. In fact such spiritual experiences had started in 1870s when he was still an unknown man, immersed in worship and religious studies. He received many revelations confirming his status as a prophet from 1882. But he did not claim to be the “Promised Messiah” until 1891, when he also revealed that Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) had passed away and he was appointed as the Promised Messiah by God. The status of Promised Messiah according to Quran and Hadith is that of a subordinate (Ummati) prophet.

    Continuing in the very next paragraph Mr. Patel contradicts himself by stating “Despite his visions, Mirza Ahmad personally did not claim prophethood.”

    Hadhrat Ahmad, the Promised Messiah and Mahdi (pbuh) wrote a book to remove any misconceptions about his claim to be an Ummati Prophet called “Aik Ghalti ka Izala“. He writes

    “Wherever I have denied being a Prophet or Messenger, it has only been in the sense that I have not brought an independent law nor am I an independent Prophet. I am a Messenger and Prophet only in the sense that I have received spiritual grace from the Messenger (pbuh) whom I follow, and, having received his name for myself, and through him, I have received knowledge of the unseen from God. But I have not come with a new law. I have never denied being called a Nabi (Prophet) in this sense. Indeed it is in this very sense that God has addressed me as Nabi and Rasul; and it is in this sense that I do not deny being a Nabi or Rasul” (A misconception removed, page 10)

    The above is just one example of how Aakar Patel has not done justice to his article by including opinions which could have benefited from some proper research. He also states that Hadhrat Ahmad (pbuh) denouced Judaism and Christianity as error. Islam considers both Judaism and Christianity as true faiths corrupted by their followers. Hadhrat Ahmad (as) made his claims at the time when Christian missionary effort in India was at its peak. He held debates with prominent Christian missionaries of his time and showed to the world that Islam was a perfect religion. He also challenged various Hindu revivalists of his time as they also attacked Islam.

    But this is only a minor problem with this piece, easily corrected by a letter to editor. My problem lies with what follows in the last part of the article. According to Mr. Patel, Ahmadis should share some blame for being persecuted in Pakistan. He states that Ahmadis supported the two-nation theory and Sir Zafrullah Khan Islamized Pakistan by supporting the Objectives resolution.

    Do Ahmadis do deserve to be punished for their support of Muslim league? There are many so-called revisionist liberals who may think that the creation of Pakistan was an accident brought about by a mixture of British and feudal Muslim interests.

    Please also note here that the most conservative amongst the Muslims supported Indian National Congress. Same Muslim leaders saw opportunity in Pakistan and started agitations against Ahmadis in 1953. Ahmadis supported Pakistan because the ground realities of British India demanded Muslims to defend their rights. Qaid-e-Azam was right, but unfortunately, Pakistan also inherited the Ahrar, the spiritual forefathers of present day militant outfits. To add to our misery, Maulana Maudoodi also chose Pakistan despite his aversion to its very idea before 1947. The purpose of Ahmadiyya Movement has always been to cleanse Islam of the oppressive and suffocating ideology of such Mullahs. This “war” has been waged since the inception of the community and will carry on until the true Islam is made manifest to the world.

    It is obvious that majority of the people who helped create Pakistan including the leadership, were tolerant, democratic and liberal. The very same people accepted Ahmadis in their ranks as their equals and even sought guidance from the Khalifatul Masih on important matters. Kashmir Committee (of 1930s) is one shining example of Ahmadiyya contributions to the Muslim cause in India.

    Objectives resolution has also been blamed for Islamization of Pakistan. I can understand that in some circles it causes concerns because of its religious tone. I disagree with the critics. To me, objectives resolution was a document written by idealists who had high hopes for Pakistan. Their Islam was not the totalitarian oppressive Islam that Ahrar and Maudoodi had unleashed in the streets in 1950s. For an Ahmadi scholar and a secular Jurist of Sir Zafrullah’s calibre, Islam can only “impose” a secular government which affords full freedom to its subjects. Please also note the emphasis of fundamental rights, freedom and democracy in the text of objectives resolution.

    That brings us finally to the matter of “Furqan Force”. A battalion of Ahmadi volunteers which supported the Pakistan Army in 1948 Kashmir conflict. Mr. Patel thinks that this was a religiously motivated move and a betrayal of “Gandhian” non-violence that the Ahmadiyya community followed. First of all, our non-violence is Quranic non-violence. Mr. Gandhi was a respected politician and I admire his achievements and philosophy. But Ahmadi Muslims follow the teachings of Quran, as explained to us by Promised Messiah (pbuh). He also taught us that loyalty to our state is a religious duty. So if Pakistan was at war with India, Pakistani Ahmadis were duty bound to protect their country. Besides, Hindu rule of Kashmir was no Gandhian rule. It was probably the most oppressive and cruel rule in the history of subcontinent.

    I can also clarify here that Jihad as taught by Promised Messiah (pbuh) includes fulfilment of our duties to protect our faith. And loyalty to our homeland is part of our faith.

    Mr. Patel ends his article on a very harsh note. He started the piece with sympathetic statements, included examples of persecutions and his own dismay at the hatred he saw in Pakistan. He then moves to blame the Ahmadis for their own bad karma; for supporting Pakistan movement. Sir Zafrullah, a prominent defender of human rights and freedom of religion on the global stage, becomes the reason for Islamization of the country. And the article then ends with a statement I can only call a fallacy. Aakar Patel writes;

    “Such bigotry against other faiths usually invites punishment against your own”.

    i.e., Ahmadis opposed an oppressive cruel Hindu ruler; they supported equal rights for Indian Muslims etc etc; so they deserved to be punished in their own country for this. What twisted reasoning brought you to this conclusion?

    I would request Mr. Patel to review his whole article, but in particular this last statement. He should go and read about the message of universal brotherhood that the founder of Ahmadiyya Muslim community sent out to the whole subcontinent just days before his death. Ahmadis stand by every word our Mahdi and Messiah (pbuh) has said and this is apparent through our actions. In fact, it is our belief that all major religions are based on truth and we give great respect to their founders like Raam, Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster and Baba Nanak (may peace be upon them all). You will see evidence of this respect throughout Ahmadiyya history.

    To Mr. Patel, I can also suggest humbly that having an influence on your readership is a big responsibility. I am sure he will correct the factual errors he has made. I hope his opinions are also altered after these corrections.

    As an Ahmadi, I believe that the revival of true Islamic ideals has been ongoing for the past century and Indian subcontinent is its epicentre. It is also my belief that Islam as presented by Promised Messiah (pbuh) will be victorious in this struggle.

    http://alufaq.com/response-the-apostates-pakistan-aakar-patel-lutf-islam

    http://www.lutfulislam.co.cc/2012/03/response-to-apostates-of-pakistan-by.html

  10. I’m totally against the Ahmedi persecution and discrimination but at the same time their persistence on being accepted as muslims is ridiculous. The very basis of Islam that prophet Muhammad is the last prophet is rejected by them. Lets say today another sect emerges that says now there is yet another prophet with his own interpretations of Islam and then they insist on being accepted as muslims is as ridiculous as Ahemdis’ insistence. That said, they’re equal citizens of Pakistan. They should be allowed to live in peace and practice their religion as they please. They’re not a sect of Islam, they’ve a prophet of their own.

  11. “I’m totally against the Ahmedi persecution and discrimination but at the same time their persistence on being accepted as muslims is ridiculous. The very basis of Islam that prophet Muhammad is the last prophet is rejected by them. ”

    @Realistic:

    If this is the basis of Islam then how come Deobandi founder, among others, has the same belief and him and his followers are not considered non-Muslims?

  12. “their persistence on being accepted as muslims is ridiculous”

    @Realistic:

    This is called freedom of belief, what is ridiculous about that? Which century or planet have you come from? Read up on Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a starting point.

  13. haha.. @Hasan: I don’t mind your emotional reaction. Who said anything about curbing their “freedom of belief”? They ARE free to believe whatever they please. what I said (and you missed) was that we are also free to believe that anyone who doesn’t believe in the Holy Prophet Muhammad as the last prophet is not a muslim. Ahmedis are free to do as they please, free to live as they choose but “wanting” muslims to accept them as muslims is asking them (muslims) to go against their very basic beliefs (hello freedom of beliefs?). Anyways, not that I expect you to understand a second time.

    • You are right. As an Ahmadi I will stand for what you wish to believe as long as you do not legislate what you believe or force others do believe as you do. If everyone is allowed to legislate what they believe, pretty soon you will be facing the same situation that we do. We really do not care if you believe that we are not Muslims. You are not that important anyway. Whether someone is a Muslim or a non Muslim is for Allah to decide and not you or Mullahs or any constitution or any state in the World. Imposing the views of a majority through legislation and force shows the emptiness of their beliefs not strength of argument. You also leave out deliberately an important part of basic freedoms and that is to preach what one believes. You are afraid that if you give that right to Ahmadies, your belief will have no legs to stand on. If you are confident about your own beliefs then stand with us to fight everyone who is against the freedom of belief and preaching what they believe. Again read the UDHR to get introduced to human rights. Sir Zafarullah Khan has written a scholarly treatise on how Holy Quran goes beyond the UDHR and it would do you good to read that to get to know real Islam. May Allah show you the way.

  14. If this idea that Ahmadis got what they deserved is true than what about Muslims??
    Muslims or Pakistans are getting what the are deserve for???

  15. By looking at last paragraph of the author, I think he don’t have any practical idea about ahmadis and he did not bother to read the history of Furqan force, Ch Zufrullah and support to pakistan. I feel that he is ingnorant of history and relies on the history which he read from newspapers.

  16. Like I said, harassing and cornering a minority is wrong by all means. And I do agree that it was insecurity on the part of the orthodoxy that compelled them to legislate and “Declare” ahmedis kaafir – a move that was only meant to corner them and a green signal for fanatics to attack them! A truly islamic state should PROTECT its citizens, not outcast them. But, when ahmedis insist on being accepted as muslims with a prophet of their own (to whom this letter had been written http://alhafeez.org/rashid/shahidsatirical.htm must read!) it does seem ridiculous. They can call themselves muslims, sure, but we can’t accept their nabi at all. Again, we can always disagree peacefully but I’m Strongly against the persecution of minorities!

    • Well thanks. No body asks anyone with sanity to accept anything that does not make sense to them and certainly Ahmadis don’t. Their is no compulsion in religion. If you believe that it is ridiculous that Ahmadies believe in Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Peace be upon him and you do so having read literature of all sides including books written by him in which he defends his claim, then it is all between you and your Allah. No one has any right to interfere in that. Disagreeing peacefully is all we ask for and is absolutely humane and Islamic. Force and compulsion are weapons of the weak and not of strong or people who are secure in knowledge. So here I gather that you actually stand with us in defending our rights to believe what we believe and have the right to say what we say and preach it as our truth. You can engage in debates and peacefully argue with decency your reasons as to why is that ridiculous and I can tell you why your view is contrary to common sense. That is what we ask for and that is a minimum for a civilized existence which we claim Islam represents. May Allah open our and your heart to clarity and wisdom. Many thanks again for this decent dialogue.

  17. Thanks for being so reasonable about debating such a sensitive subject. I hope people read this thread and see how people can communicate without attacking each other – a truly islamic approach!

  18. The article has been written by one who has no knowledge about the basic foundation of Islam.
    The faith rests on two fundamentals pillars, i.e. unity of God and Finality of Prophethood.
    Qadianis or Mirzais (Ahmadis as they like to be called) contest the finality of Prophethood. Fortunately majority of Muslims (Sunnis and Shias) do not accept anyone challenging the finality of Prophethood as a fellow Muslim. Be those the followers of Mussailma the Liar, Bahaullah, Mirza Qadiani, Yusuf Kazab or Gohar Shahi. So Qadianis (and Lahori group Mirzai’s) please don’t insist on calling yourself as Muslims if you do not believe in the two fundamentals of Islam. May Allah lead you away from the heresy of the false claimant to prophethood and guide you and your children towards the right path. (A’ameen)

    • in 1962 Dr israr ahmad ka dawa mahdi come

    • in 1962 Dr israr ahmad ka dawa mahdi has come

    • PROPHET JESUS HAS
      DIED: THE HADITH The fact that Jesus (peace be
      upon him) is dead is
      clearly mentioned in the sayings of the Holy
      Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah
      be upon him). These will be outlined below: 1. “If Jesus and Moses had been alive, they would
      have had no choice but to follow me.” (Kathir vol
      II, p 245 and al yawaqit wal Jawahir, part 2, page
      24). 2. “Jesus son of Mary lived for 120 years, and I
      see
      myself as only entering upon the beginning of the sixties.” (Kanz al Ummal, part 6, p.120). 3. In
      Bukhari, it is reported that in the spiritual event
      known as the miraj, the Holy Prophet saw saw
      Hadhrat Yahya as and Hadhrat Jesusas in the
      second heaven. If Hadhrat Yahya as is dead, then
      Hadhrat Jesusas is dead, for the dead do not keep company with the living. 4. In Bukhari, it is
      recorded that after the death of Hadhrat
      Muhammadsaw, some of the companions, among
      them Hadhrat Umar ibn al- Khattabra, doubted he
      was really dead. However, Hadhrat Abu Bakrra,
      ascended to the pulpit in the Mosque and recited the Quranic verse:
      Muhammad is only a Messenger. All Messengers
      before him have passed away. If he dies, or is
      killed, will you then turn upon your heels?
      (3:145) After the short speech and recitation of this
      verse, the companions realized that indeed, the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw had passed away.
      NO ONE OBJECTED THAT HADHRAT JESUS as OR ANY
      OTHER PROPHET HAD NOT DIED. EVERYONE
      ACCEPTED AND CONFIRMED THE DEATH OF ALL
      PREVIOUS PROPHETS. THIS WAS THE FIRST IJMA OR
      CONSENSUS OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY. 5. The family of the Holy Prophet Muhammad saw were
      also agreed on the death of Hadhrat Jesusas. Imam
      Hasanra, recounting the events relating to the
      death of Hadhrat Alira, stated, “he (Ali) died during
      the 27th night of the month of
      Ramadan, the same night that the spirit of Jesus was raised to heaven.” (Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad, vol III
      Page 26). The words of the Holy Prophet saw, his
      family, and his companions all indicate that Hadhrat
      Jesusas passed away like all mortals

    • Natural Death of Hadhrat JesusAS, Son of Mary NATURAL DEATH OF HADHRAT JESUS AS, SON OF MARY The greatest hurdle for the non-Ahmadi Muslims in accepting Hazrat Mirza Ghulam AhmadAS, the Founder of Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam, as the
      Promised Messiah and Mahdi is their belief
      regarding Hazrat Eisa (peace be on him); that as
      soon as the Jews resolved to lay hold on him, God raised Hazrat EisaAS to Heaven, and in place of him, caught hold of one of his enemies and,
      making him in the same appearance as Hazrat EisaAS, had this enemy of JesusAS put on the Cross instead of JesusAS himself. They further believe that he is still in Heaven since his ascent,
      without undergoing any change, and this very Hazrat EisaAS will descend for the reformation of the Muslims, and to make Islam dominate over all
      other religions. This concept of the non-Ahmadies is entirely
      against the Holy Quran, the Traditions of the Holy
      Prophet (peace and blessings of God be on him)
      and the consensus of the early scholars of Islam,
      as shall be explained in this series. Insha Allah. THE HOLY QURAN In the last section of the Fifth Chapter of the
      Quran, on questioning from God, whether he taught Trinity to his people, Hazrat JesusAS’ denial is mentioned in clear words. It is further
      stated by him that he is not even aware of their
      associating him with God. Then continuing his
      exoneration from the blame, he says: “I said nothing to them except that which Thou
      didst command me– `Worship Allah, my Lord and
      your Lord’ and I was a witness over them as
      long as I remained among them, but since Thou
      didst cause me to die, Thou hast been the
      Watcher over them, and Thou art Witness over all things.” (5:118) The corruption of the Christians has been
      categorically stated in the Holy Quran: “Indeed they are disbelievers who say, `Surely
      Allah is none but the Messiah, son of
      Mary’.” (5:73) “They are surely disbelievers who
      say’, `Allah is the third of three; `there is no God
      but the One God.” (5:74) As God in the name of Hazrat JesusAS declares that Christians became corrupt after the death of Hazrat JesusAS, how can we think that Hazrat JesusAS is not dead but alive in heaven? Imam Bukhari in his book, Sahih Bukhari–the
      most authentic book after the Book of God, has quoted the saying of Hazrat Ibn Abbas ra under the commentary of Verse 5:118: “Qaala Ibno
      Abbasin Mutawaffeeka Mumeetoka”, i.e., Hazrat Ibn Abbasra said, the meaning of Tawafee is death. Imam Bukhari has named a Bab (Chapter)–Babo
      Tawaffiyo Rasool-ullahi Sallallaho Alaihi Wa
      Sallam, in which the Holy Prophet (peace and
      blessings of God be on him) has connoted the meaning of Hazrat Jesus’AS Tawaffee as that of his own Tawaffee. The Holy Prophet SAW said: “On the day of Qiyamat some people of my
      Ummat would be taken towards Hell. Then I shall
      say, `O my Lord! these are my companions’, Then
      it would be said! `thou don’t know what they
      innovated after thee’. Then, I shall say as the
      righteous servant said: `I was a witness over them as long as I remained among them, but
      since Thou didst cause me to die, Thou hast been
      the Watcher over them.'” (Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer,
      Vol. 3, p. 79, Vol. II, p. 159) Again, we also read in the Holy Quran: “O Jesus! indeed I will cause thee to die and exalt
      thee to Myself, and will clear thee of (the charges
      of) those who disbelieve, and will place those
      who follow thee above those who deny thee,
      until the Day of Resurrection.” (3:56) Hadhrat JesusAS was exalted (or raised) to God after his death like all other righteous servants of
      God. The words `exalt thee’ or `raise thee’ come
      after the words `cause to die’. We have no right
      to change the order of the Holy Quran. It is reported that the Holy ProphetSAW was asked, whether he would make the circuit of Safa first
      or that of the Marwa. He replied, Abdao Bima
      Bada-Allaho–I shall start with what Allah has
      started. Hence, we have to keep the order of the
      Quran. The meaning of Tawaffee has already
      been given. Another verse of the Holy Quran runs thus: “And Muhammad is only a Messenger. Verily, (all)
      Messengers have passed away before him. If
      then he die or be slain, will you turn your back
      on your heels?” (3:145) In this verse of the Holy Quran the passing away
      of all the Messengers who came before the Holy ProphetSAW has been pronounced; and the passing away has been adjudged only in two
      ways–either by death or through assassination.
      Had there been any third way of passing away
      (like that of ascending to heaven) it should have
      been mentioned by God. As a matter of fact this
      verse (3:145) has been revealed specifically to declare the death of Hadhrat JesusAS, as the passing away of other Messengers had already
      been mentioned in 5:76 wherein Allah says: “The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a Messenger;
      surely Messengers like unto him had indeed
      passed away before him. And his mother was a
      truthful woman. They both used to eat food.” It is an admitted fact that the ceasing of Mary’s
      eating was due to her death, hence, on the same analogy, the ceasing of Hadhrat Jesus’AS eating too was due to his death, as both have been
      mentioned equally. Regarding the above quoted verse (3:145), it should be noted that when the Holy Prophet SAW died, the companions became stupefied with grief. Hadhrat Umarra, of all persons, was so afflicted by grief that he unsheathed his sword
      and declared that whosoever said the Holy ProphetSAW was dead would lose his head. He began to say that the Holy Prophet SAW had disappeared temporarily from their midst, even as Hadhrat MosesAS had disappeared on a call from God. Hadhrat MosesAS returned to his people after forty days, so would the Holy ProphetSAW. None of the companions dared to resist and deny what he said. Imam Bukhari
      reports: “Abdullah Bin Abbas narrated that Abu Bakr
      came out while Umar was conversing with the
      people. He said to Umar to sit but he refused to
      comply with. So, the people turned towards him
      (Abu Bakr) and left Umar. Then Abu Bakr said:
      Whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammad, let him know that Muhammad is dead, and
      whoever amongst you worshipped Allah, let him
      know that Allah is Living, there is no death for
      Him. Allah has said, `And Muhammad is only a
      Messenger. Verily, all Messengers have passed
      away before him…’ The narrator says, by God, the people did not know that God had sent down
      this verse until Abu Bakr has recited it. So, the
      people in their entirety learnt it from him; then,
      whosoever amongst the people heard it recited
      it. Then Saeed Bin Musayyeb has told me, that
      Umar swearing by God said, did not know of this verse till he heard it from Abu Bakr, and
      consequently his legs could not support him, he
      staggered and fell down in an outburst of
      grief.” (Bukhari Kitabun Nabiyye Ila Kisra Wa
      Qaisara, Musnad Imam Abu Hanifa, p. 188,
      Hamamul Islamiyya, p. 54, Bukhari, Vol. 2, Manaqib Abu Bakr) Now, if the companions present on this occasion thought that Hadhrat JesusAS had been alive in Heaven for 600 years, they would have stood up and pointed out to Hadhrat Abu Bakrra, that it was wrong to say that all the earlier prophets had died. If Hadhrat JesusAS could remain alive, why not the Holy Prophet SAW? All the companions who heard this verse (3:145) and heard Hadhrat Abu Bakrra’s argument based upon the verse, not only remained silent but
      began to rejoice over it and went about the
      town reciting it. This proves beyond doubt that
      the companions agreed with Hadhrat Abu Bakr’sAS interpretation of the verse that all prophets before the Holy ProphetSAW had died. Another verse of the Holy Quran which proves the death of Hadhrat JesusAS is: “We granted not abiding life to any human being
      before thee. If then thou shouldst die, shall they
      have abiding life?” (21:35) God loves the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace
      and blessings of God be on him) more than He
      loves anyone else. He was the purpose for all
      creation as Hadith says: “Had I not created thee I
      would have created neither heaven nor earth.” Hence, if any man deserved to remain alive and ascend to heaven, it was our Holy Prophet SAW. If he has died in the usual way, other prophets
      have died in the same way. We know too well that the deniers of the Holy ProphetSAW challenged him and asked him if he could
      perform the miracle of ascent to Heaven? They
      said: “We will not believe except if you ascend to
      Heaven. And we will not believe in your ascent
      unless you bring to us from Heaven a Book
      which we may then read.” (17:94) In reply to this challenge, God did not empower the Holy ProphetSAW to show the miracle which the Holy Prophet’sSAW deniers asked him to show. Instead, God made the Prophet say: “Holy
      is my Lord! I am not but a man sent as
      Messenger.” (17:94) Knowing this, how can we think the Holy ProphetSAW should rise to Heaven, but die in the normal way and be buried here in this earth, and Hadhrat JesusAS should go to Heaven and remain alive for these two thousand
      years? “And those on whom they call beside Allah create
      not anything, but they are themselves created.
      They are dead, not living; and they know not
      when they will be raised.” (16:21,22) Hadhrat JesusAS is also among those to whom they call beside Allah (5:73), hence, he is dead. THE TRADITIONS 1. The Holy ProphetSAW said: “If Moses and Jesus had been alive, they would
      have had to believe in me and follow
      me.” (Zurqani, Vol. VI, p. 54, Tibrani Kabeer,
      Alyawaqeet Wal Jawahir, Vol. II, p. 23) 2. During his last illness, the Holy ProphetSAW said to his daughter Hadhrat Fatimara: “Once in every year, Gabriel recited the Quran to
      me. This year he recited twice. He also told me
      that every succeeding prophet has lived to half
      the age of his predecessor. He told me that Jesus,
      son of Mary, lived to 120 years. Therefore, I think,
      I may live to about 60 years.” (Mawahib-ud- Duniya by Qastalani, Vol. I, p. 42, Kanzul Ummal
      Vol. 6, p. 160) THE SCHOLARS Imam Malik said Hazrat Jesus had died. (Majma
      Biharul Anwar, Vol. I, p. 286) The opinions of
      Imam Bukhari, Ibn Abbas, and the companions of
      the Holy Prophet have already been indicated.

  19. PROPHET JESUSas HAS DIED: THE QURAN The notion
    that Hadhrat Jesusas floated into the sky towards
    God is an Un-Quranic concept. Before going into
    the specific verses which
    refute this popular belief, it should be noted that
    Heaven is a spiritual state which our souls experience AFTER death. It is not a physical
    location beyond the stratosphere. By climbing
    Mount Everest, we do not come closer to God!
    Humans, according to the Quran, must live and
    die in the physical universe. “And for you there is
    an abode on the earth and a provision for a time, He said, therein shall you
    live and therein shall you die and therefrom shall
    you be brought forth.” ( 7:25-6) “Have we not
    made the earth so as to hold the
    living and the dead?” (77:26-7) On one occasion
    the enemies of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon
    him, challenged him that they will not believe in
    him unless he “ascend up into heaven” and “send
    down to us a Book.” (17:93) The Holy Prophetsaw
    replied: “Holy is my Lord! I am but a mortal sent as
    a messenger.” (17:93) Thus the Prophets, like all humans, lived and died
    on the earth. If Jesus is alive today, he must be
    more than a mortal. IF ANY HUMAN BEING WAS
    ABLE TO GO TO
    HEAVEN WITH HIS PHYSICAL BODY THEN IT WOULD
    HAVE BEEN OUR BELOVED HOLY PROPHET MUHAMMAD saw, THE GREATEST OF ALL PROPHETS.
    But the verses above indicate that since he is but
    a man, it is not possible. “I will cause you to die” An
    important verse is the following: “When Allah said,
    O Jesus, I will cause you to die
    and will raise you to myself, and will clear thee of those who disbelieve, and will place those who
    follow thee above those who disbelieve, until the
    Day of Resurrection, then to Me shall be your
    return and I will judge between you concerning
    that wherein you differ.” (3:56) The verse clearly
    indicates that Hadhrat Jesus as was to die a natural death and then only would
    he be raised to Allah. The verse does not say that
    Hadhrat Jesusas will be raised first then will die. An
    important word used in the Quran is
    mutawaffi, derived from tawaffa. When God is
    the subject and a human is the object, tawaffa means to take away the soul, i.e, death.
    Zamakhshari (467-538 A.H), an Arab linguist of
    great repute says, “Mutawaffika means, I will
    protect you from being killed by the people and
    will grant you full lease of life ordained for you,
    and will cause you to die a natural death not being killed (Kashshaf).” Scholars and
    commentators like Hazrat Ibn Abbas, Imam Malik,
    Imam Bukhari, Imam ibn Hazm, Imam ibn Qayyin,
    Qatadah, Wahhab and others are of the same
    view. Note that the same word Tawaffa, has been
    used in other places in the Quran to indicate death. For
    example, 2:235: “and those of you who die
    (yatawaffou-na) and leave wives behind, these
    wives shall wait concerning themselves for four
    months and ten days.” Another important word is
    rafaa, which means raising, elevating, lifting, exaltation, honor. When
    the rafaa of a man is spoken of as being towards
    Allah, the meaning is invariably spiritual elevation
    and exaltation. For example the Quran says about
    Prophet Enoch: “We exalted him to a lofty station
    (19:58).” A commentary of the Quran by Ibn Khatib (“modern” Egyptian Commentary) summarizes:
    “And those who assert that Jesus is dead, point
    to the word of the exalted God: every soul shall
    taste death, and Jesus, peace be upon him
    belonged to the human species for which death is
    ordained. Some people presume that he is dead, and lies buried in a locality which they
    mention by name, and may be it is India, and God
    – may He be exalted – knows best what He has
    said and done.” The Crucifixion The verse that
    refers to the crucifixion is
    4:158,159: “And for their saying, We did slay the Messiah,
    Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah;
    whereas they slew him not, nor did they bring
    about his death upon the cross, but he was made
    to appear to them like one crucified; and those
    who differ therein are certainly in a state of doubt about it; they have no certain knowledge
    thereof, but pursue only a conjecture; and they
    did not arrive at a certainty concerning it. On the
    contrary, Allah exalted him to himself. And Allah
    is Mighty, Wise.” The argument of the Jews was
    that because Hadhrat Jesusas died on the cross, considered an accursed death according to the law
    of the Torah, Hadhrat Jesusas could not be a true
    prophet. The Quran rejects the slaying of Hadhrat
    Jesusas in any form, including killing by nailing to
    the cross. Nothing in the verse suggests Hadhrat
    Jesusas was NOT nailed to the cross: the verse only denies DEATH by nailing to the cross. The words
    “Shubbi-ha la hum” means “he made it
    or him to be like it or him”, or “dubious.” The
    question arises, who is the person who was
    made to appear “like one crucified.” Clearly it was
    Hadhrat Jesusas whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. The theory invented by some Muslim
    commentators that someone else was made to
    look like Hadhrat Jesusas and was then crucified in
    his place, is simply absurd. The context of the
    verse cannot be twisted to make room for
    someone else. No one else is mentioned. Besides, the belief that God made someone else, an innocent
    person, look like Hadhrat Jesusas, and die in his
    place, makes God look very cruel. As shown here
    in this future article, the belief of a Jesus-look-alike
    dying on the cross instead of Hadhrat Jesusas has
    its origin in Christianity, and came into Islamic belief through conversion of
    Christians to Muslims. So the Quran is clear that
    Hadhrat Jesusas only appeared to be crucified, and
    in fact the Jews
    were in a state of doubt. The last portion quoted
    above refers to rafaa, spiritual exaltation. The plan of the Jews to make
    Hadhrat Jesusas appear accursed by making him
    die the accursed death of crucifixion failed, and on
    the contrary, Hadhrat Jesusas survived the
    crucifixion. In the sight of Allah, Hadhrat Jesusas
    was not accursed. In summary, according to the Quran, humans live
    and die in the physical universe. Prophets are
    human beings. Prophets, like all humans, are
    subject to hunger, pain, death, etc. The Quran is
    clear that Hadhrat Jesusas was a human being like
    the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw. To say that Hadhrat Jesusas is alive today, 2000 years after he
    was born, is to make him more than a human.
    The Laws of God do not change. In fact, the
    Quran makes a general statement: “But you will
    never find any change in the way of Allah, nor
    will you find any alteration in the way of Allah.”

  20. REFUTATION OF ARGUMENTS GIVEN IN SUPPORT
    OF JESUS’ PHYSICAL ASCENSION TO HEAVEN ARGUMENT: Allah says in the Holy Quran: “…But
    they killed him (Jesus) not, nor crucified him, but
    so it was made to appear to them and those who
    differ therein are full of doubt, with no (certain)
    knowledge but only conjecture to follow, for a
    surely they killed him not; Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power,
    Wise.” (4:158-159) REFUTATION: It is absurd to think that one who is
    neither killed, nor put to death by putting on the
    Cross has necessarily ascended bodily to heaven. Do the Non-Ahmadies believe that Hazrat Musa AS or the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and
    blessings of God be on him) are alive in heaven
    as they were neither killed nor put to death by
    crucifixion? Besides, the Arabic words Maa
    Salabooho do not deny the fact of Hadhrat Jesus’AS being nailed to the Cross but deny his having died on it as is clear from Arabic lexicon.
    They say Salaba Ash-Shaia, i.e., he burned the
    thing. Salabal Izama means, he extracted the
    marrow out of the bones. Salabal Lissa means, he
    crucified the thief, i.e., he put him to death in a
    certain well-known manner (Lane & Aqrab). In crucifixion one was nailed to a framework made
    in the form of a cross and, being kept without
    food and drink, slowly died of pain, hunger,
    fatigue, and exposure. ARGUMENT: The words Wa Laakin Shubbiha
    Lahum in verse 4:158 means that the likeness of Hadhrat JesusAS was cast upon another person– Judas or somebody else who was then crucified in place of Hazrat Jesusas. REFUTATION: The curious part of it is that there is
    not only one story that speaks of the casting of the likeness of Hadhrat JesusAS, there are several stories. But intelligent commentators like Abu
    Hayyaan have discarded all such stories. The
    word Shubbiha means, he was made to appear
    like, or was made to resemble. Now the question
    arises, who is the person who was made to
    appear “like one crucified”. Clearly it was Hadhrat JesusAS whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. Nobody else can be meant here, for there is
    absolutely no reference to any other person in
    the context. The context cannot be twisted as to
    make room for somebody else of whom no
    mention at all is made in the verse. To what then was Hadhrat JesusAS made like? The context provides a clear answer to that question. The
    Jews did not kill him by crucifixion, but he was
    made to appear to them like “one crucified”, and
    thus it was that they wrongly took him for dead. It was thus Hadhrat JesusAS who was made to resemble “one crucified”. This interpretation is
    not only in perfect harmony with the context but
    is also clearly borne out by all relevant facts of
    history. The second meaning of the expression Shubbiha
    Lahum is, that “the matter became confused to
    them.” This interpretation is also clearly borne out
    by history, for, although the Jews asserted that they had put Hadhrat JesusAS to death by suspending him on the Cross, they were not sure
    of it and the circumstances being obscure, the
    matter had certainly become confused to them.
    The fact that the Jews themselves were not sure whether Hadhrat JesusAS had actually died on the Cross is supported by the Bible and by all
    authentic historical facts. ARGUMENT: The words in verse 4:159 Bal
    Rafa’ahollaho Ilaihi –“Nay Allah raised him up
    unto Himself” clearly shows that Allah lifted Hadhrat Jesus’AS body to heaven. REFUTATION: As a matter of fact the referred
    Arabic words simply mean that Allah exalted him (Hadhrat JesusAS) to Himself. Here the exaltation is the exaltation of the soul of which the Jews
    were trying to deprive him by putting to death
    through crucifixion, but Allah frustrated them in
    their evil designs. The detail of their failure is
    given in Part One of this publication. In the Holy Quran, the Traditions of the Holy ProphetSAW, the Commentaries and in the Arabic idioms, whenever the word Rafa’a is used by
    Allah for a human being, it always connotes
    exaltation of ranks and spiritual nearness,
    because no fixed abode can be, or has ever been,
    assigned to God as the Holy Quran declares: “And
    He is Allah, both in the heavens and in the earth.” (6:4) “So withersoever you turn, there will
    be the face of Allah.” (2:116) “And We are nearer
    to him than even his jugular vein.” (50:17) Hence,
    Rafa’a Ilallah does not necessitate one’s physical
    ascension to heaven, rather this Rafa’a–
    exaltation is achieved on this very earth. As a matter of fact that word Rafa’a has never
    been used in the entire Holy Quran nor in the Traditions of the Holy ProphetSAW as a connotation of physical ascension to heaven as is
    clear from the following references: 1. Wa Lau Shi’naa La Rafa’anaaho Bihaa Wa
    Laakinnahoo Akhlada Ilal Ardhi–“And if We had
    pleased, We would have exalted him thereby; but
    he inclined to the earth.” (7:177) Here the
    commentators are unanimous in their
    interpretation of the exaltation of the ranks of the referred person. It is never meant to indicate the
    intention of physically raising up the referred
    person to heaven. 2. Wa Rafa’anaaho Makaanan Aliyyaa–“And We exalted him (Hadhrat IdrisAS) to lofty station.” (19:58) Likewise see: 24:37; 80:14-15;
    56:35; 58:12. 3. Idha Tawaza Al-Abdo Rafa’ahollaho Ilas Samaa Is-
    Saabiati–“When a person shows humility, Allah
    lifts him up to the seventh heaven.” (Kanzul
    Ummaal Vol. 2, page 53) This Hadith clearly
    shows that even if the word Samaa (sky) had
    been used here instead of Allah, the verse could not have meant anything else but spiritual honor
    and exaltation. Will the non-Ahmadies believe
    that every act of humility literally lifts a person up
    to heaven in both body and spirit? Certainly,
    there can be no bigger folly than such an
    inference. Why then draw such inference in the case of JesusAS? Why should he be sent up to heaven alive? Was not this earth sufficient for
    him as the Quran declared: Alam Najalil Arza
    Kifaatan Ahya’an Wa Amwaatan–“Have We not
    made the earth sufficient for the living and the
    dead?” (77:26-27) 4. All the Muslims are aware of the fact that there
    occurs the word Warfa’anee (and exalt me in ranks) in the prayer which the Holy Prophet SAW used to pray between two Sajdas (prostrations).
    (Kitab Ibn Maja) All the Muslims supplicate this
    prayer between two Sajdas in their Salat, but
    does any one ever think that he is supplicating
    for his physical ascension to heaven? Or, is there any doubt regarding the Holy Prophet SAW’s Rafa’a (exaltation of ranks) despite his sojourn on
    this very earth? 5. In the Commentary of the Holy Quran known as
    Tafseer Saafi under the verse Maa Muhammadun
    Illa Rasool Qad Khalat Min Qablihir Rusul (3:145)
    the demise of the Holy Prophet Muhammad
    (peace and blessings of God be on him) has been
    mentioned in he following words: Hatta Idha Da’a Allaho Nabiyyahoo Wa Rafa’a Hoo
    Ilaihi–“Until when Allah called His Prophet and
    exalted him to Himself.” Now here are words Rafa’a Hoo Ilaihi used for the Holy ProphetSAW had never been interpreted as his corporal
    ascension to heaven. Is it not strange and
    outright blasphemy to interpret the word Rafa’a for the Holy ProphetSAW as exaltation of his ranks, and for JesusAS as his physical ascension to heaven? ARGUMENT: Allah says in the Holy Quran: “And
    there is none of the people of the Book must
    believe in him before his death and on the Day of
    Judgement he will be a witness against
    them.” (4:160) As Jews and Christians have not all believed in HadhratJesusAS, therefore, he must be alive with his physical body in heaven, and after
    descending from heaven in the last days he shall
    turn them into believers. REFUTATION: Although the words of verse 4:160 do not show that Hadhrat JesusAS is now sitting in the sky in his physical body, yet the fantastic
    conclusion is drawn. But it is forgotten that if Hadhrat JesusAS be supported to be alive, even then all Jews and Christians cannot believe in Hadhrat JesusAS; because many generations of them are dead. How can they then believe? So it
    is clear that if they have all to believe in Hadhrat JesusAS, it must be supposed that along with him the Jews and Christians are also alive, which is
    obviously absurd. Besides, if the interpretation of
    the Non-Ahmadies is accepted for the sake of
    argument, then it establishes contradictions in the
    Holy Quran as is clear from the following
    references: 1. “Nay, but Allah has sealed them because of their
    disbelief, so they believe no but little.” (4:156) 2. “So, We have caused enmity and hatred among
    them till the Day of Resurrection.” (5:15) 3. “When Allah said, O Jesus, I will cause thee to
    die…and will place those who follow thee above
    those who disbelieve, until the Day of
    Resurrection.” (3:56) These verses clearly show that all Jews shall not believe in Hadhrat JesusAS, hence, the interpretation of the Non-Ahmadies is entirely
    wrong. The correct translation of the verse 4:160
    without twisting words so as to yield far-fetched
    meanings is: “And there is none among the
    People of the Book but will believe in it (the
    crucifixion of Jesus) before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he (Jesus) shall be a witness
    among them.” What the Quranic verse lays down
    is that every Jew and Christian must according to
    their creeds, continue to believe in the death of Hadhrat JesusAS on the Cross. The Jew because he wants to show that according to
    Deuteronomy 21:23 the curse of God fell upon Hadhrat JesusAS, and the Christian because he wants to affirm the doctrine of Atonement as
    mentioned in Galatians 3:13. So both these
    peoples go on sticking to this absurd and unfounded belief (Jesus’AS death on the Cross) in the face of all reason and all established facts of
    history. The attempts to make the words La
    Yominanna Bihee Qabla Mautehee (will believe in
    it before his death) mean “will believe in him
    (Jesus) before his (Jesus) death” is simply
    ridiculous. The context spurns the idea, as does the second reading of the expression, viz.,
    Mautihee (his death) reported by Ubayy in Ibn
    Jareer, Vol. 6, page 13. ARGUMENT: Allah says in the Holy Quran: “And
    behold I did restrain the children of Israel from
    (violence to) thee when thou did show them the
    clear signs.” (5:111) This verse clearly shows that the Jews could not even touch Hadhrat Jesus AS. But if it is accepted that he was hanged on the
    Cross, his hands bled, and he was taken down
    from the Cross after suffering a lot of troubles,
    then this verse proves false. REFUTATION: There is not a single word which
    connotes that Allah restrained the Jews from violence to Hadhrat JesusAS, hence, the Non- Ahmadi translator Allaama Yusuf Ali had no other
    choice but to put the words “violence to” in
    brackets. The verse does not mean that Jesus
    suffered no persecution at the hands of enemies.
    A similar expression has been used with regard
    to the early Muslims in the Quran: Yaa Ayyuhalladheena Aamanudh-Karoo Ni’Amatillahi
    Alaikum Idh Hamma Qaumun An Yabsotoo
    Ilaikum Aidiy-hum Fa Kaffa Aidiyahum Ankum
    (5:12)–“O ye who believe! remember Allah’s
    favor upon you when a people intended to
    stretch out their hands against you, but He withheld their hands from you.” But it is a well-
    known fact that they had to pass through
    grievous trials and tribulations. As a matter of
    fact the reference in the verse (5:111) is to the attempts of the Jews to kill Hadhrat JesusAS on the Cross, from which accursed death God
    delivered him. Similar protection was promised to the Holy ProphetSAW (in 5:68) but that did not mean that his enemies would not be allowed to
    do him any physical harm whatsoever. It only
    means that they would not be permitted to take
    his life so as to render him unfit for his work. ARGUMENT: The Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace
    and blessings of God be him) is reported to have
    said: Kaifa Antum Idha Nazala Feekum Ibno
    Maryama Wa Imaamokum Minkum –“How would
    it be with you when the son of Mary will
    descend among you and you will have a leader raised from among you.” (Bukhari, Kitabul-
    Anbiya, Chapter Nazul Isa bin Maryam) The word Nazul, it is argued, signifies that Hadhrat JesusAS must come down physically from the high
    heavens, hence, he is physically alive in heaven. Besides, the Holy ProphetSAW said that the son of Mary will come, so it must be Hadhrat Jesus AS himself who should come personally. REFUTATION: In the first place, there is no word
    Minas-Samaa from heaven, mentioned in the
    Tradition. No doubt there are two points which
    need explanation: One Nazool and the other Ibn
    Maryam. It should be remembered that the word
    Nazala may mean “he descended” but it cannot by any stretch of meaning, signify “he descended
    physically from the heavens”. There is not the
    slightest justification for this. The same word is used about the coming of the Holy ProphetSAW. Says the Holy Quran: Qad Anzalallaho Ilaikum Dhikran Rasoolan Yatloo
    Alaikum Aayaatillahi–“Allah has indeed sent
    down to you a Reminder, a Messenger, who
    recites unto you the clear signs of
    Allah.” (65:11-12) But No one can say that the Holy ProphetSAW came down from the heavens physically. Then God says: Wa Anzalnal Hadeeda–“And We
    sent down iron” (57:26), and we know that it is
    not thrown down from the heavens. Likewise
    the word Nazool has been mentioned about
    cattle in 39:7; about raiment in 7:27. Even this
    word had been used for each and every thing in 15:22 where Allah says: Wa In Min Shai-in Illaa
    Indinna Khazaainohoo Wa Maa Nonazzilohoo Illaa
    Biqadarin Ma’aloom–“And there is not a thing but
    with Us are the treasures thereof and We send it
    not down except in known measure.” Hence, it
    appears that all things in nature descend from God–are gifted by God–and yet they do not drop
    from Heaven. Their creation takes place in and on
    and through this very earth. Therefore, the word
    Nazool (descend), when used for the coming of
    the Messiah, can have no other meaning. It can
    only point to the importance, the blessedness and the spiritual significance of the Promised Messiah.
    It is not in the least intended to suggest that he
    would physically drop from Heaven to earth. IBN MARYAM–Son of Mary: As the promised Imam was to be the Messiah, therefore, the Holy ProphetSAW called him the son of Mary. The name of one is generally given
    to another when there is striking resemblance
    between the two. Abu Sufyan, after meeting
    Heraclius, said to his companions: Laqad Amara
    Amrubno Abee Kabshata Innahoo Yakhaafohoo
    Maliko Banee Asfara–“Of a certainty, the son of Abee Kabshah has succeeded, because even the
    king of Bani Asfar fears him”. (Bukhari) Everyone knows that the Holy Prophet SAW was not the son of Abi Kabshah, but Abu Sufyan calls him as
    such because he believed in the Unity of God like
    the son of Abi Kabshah. Metaphors abound in all languages. Is it not a fact
    that a person who excels in the virtue of charity,
    is metaphorically called Hatam of Tai? If the name
    Ibn Maryam is the name of a known individual, is
    not Hatam the name of a known individual? If by
    giving this name to another person, nobody is misled into thinking that this person is the
    original Hatam, need anybody think that when
    the Promised One is named Isa Ibn Maryam or JesusAS, son of Mary, it must mean the self-same Hadhrat JesusAS, son of Mary, who appeared almost 2000 years ago? Hence, when it is narrated in the Traditions that
    Jesus son of Mary will come, it should not be
    taken literally but rather to be understood in the
    metaphorical sense as has been interpreted by a
    scholar of great repute and regenerator of his
    century, Mohyuddin Ibn Arabi, when he says: “His descent in latter ages will be with a different
    body.” (Tafsir Araisul Bayan, Vol. I, P. 262) So the
    inference of Non-Ahmadies from the above
    quoted tradition of Bukhari to prove the physical
    life of Jesus in heaven is altogether repugnant to
    the teachings of the Quran, the common metaphors, and to the high spiritual status of the
    Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be him)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: