Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Difference between Qadianis and Muslims

I want to tell you briefly how Qadianis differ from other 'Kafirs'. But before Ido so, I shall answer a question which is in the minds of some of the Ummah
THE QUESTION (In 3 Parts):
Firstly: Why is it that an organization called Aalami Majlise Tahaffuze Khatme Nubuwwat has been set up, specifically aiming to pursue Qadianis to whichever part of the world they go and expose them by Allah's help and with the cooperation of Muslim brethren when there are other non- Muslims also in the world, such as Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc?
Secondly: Why is there no such organization against any other 'Kafir' community?
Thirdly: What was the reason for such stalwarts of Islam as Imam-ul'asr Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Sheikh-ul-Islam Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Binnori, Ameer-e- Shariat Ataullah Shah Bukhari, and Hazrate Aqdas Maulana Mufti Mahmood, (Allah's mercy on all of them), attached so much importance to counter the 'Kufr' of Qadianis that it was considered necessary to estab- lish an organization, on an international level,
namely Aalami Majlis-e-Tahaffuz-e-Khatme Nubuwwat?

Before I answer, I sum up the question which in short is: What distinguishes a Qadiani from other Non-Muslims?
First I lay before you an example:
You know that alchol is prohibited in Shari'at. Drinking alchol, manufacturing and selling it are all prohibited, i.e., 'Ha ram.' Similarly, you know that a Pig is filthy and impure. Selling its meat which is called pork and its eating, giving or conveying are absolute prohibitions, i.e., 'Harame Mutlaq.' Everyone is aware of these precepts.

Now imagine a situation: A man sells alchol and calls it alchol. Another man also sells alchol but pastes a label of 'Zam-Zam' on the bottle, i.e., he is selling alchol under the name of 'Zam-Zam'. Both persons are criminals but who is a greater criminal? You know the answer.

Take another example: There is a butcher who is selling pork. He sells it as such. Clearly he says this is pork. Whosoever wants to buy may buy it. Certainly he is a criminal in Shariat for selling pork. Against this is a person who, sells pork but calls it mutton. Now both those persons have committed a crime in Islamic Law; but sky-high is the difference in the nature of the offence between the two. One sells 'Unlawful,' i.e., 'Haram' calling it 'Unlawful,' Haram. The other sells 'Unlawful' Haram, calling it 'Lawful', i.e. 'Halal.' Anybody, unawares, could fall into his trap and eat 'Unlawful-Haram' pork thinking it to be 'Lawful-Halal' mutton. Thus the difference between a butcher selling pork as mutton and a butcher selling pork as pork is precisely the difference between a Qadiani and other Non-Muslim such as Jew, Christian and Hindu, etc. 'Kufr' is 'Kufr' in both cases because it is negation of Islam. But 'Kafirs' of the world do not put label of Islam on their 'Kufr'
and do not propagate their 'Kufr' as Islam. A Qadiani, on the other hand, puts a label of Islam on his 'Kufr' and deceives Muslims by saying this is Islam.

So far I have spoken to you in general terms. I shall explain the theology.
'Kufr' is of several kinds but three are very obvious:
First: The 'Kafir' who is undoubtedly a 'Kafir.
Second: That 'Kafir' who is 'Kafir' from inside but pretends as Muslim from outside.
Third: That 'Kafir',who tries to label his 'Kufr' as Islam

Category No. 1:
Jews, Christians, Hindus, etc., are unmistakenly and undoubtely Kaffirs. The Polytheist (mushrikeen) of pre-Islamic Mecca were openly included in this category. All of them are openly Kaffirs.

Category No. 2:
In the second category are Hypocrites (munafiqueen) who recite the Kalimah with the tongue but hide Kufr in their hearts. In their case Allah, the Exalted, has proclaimed:

When they (hypocrites) come to thee, they say: "We believe": but in fact they enter with a mind against Faith, and they go out with the same but Allah knoweth fully all that they hide. (HQ 5.61)

Hazrat Imam Shafai, (Allah's mercy on him) used to say about Ibrahim bin Ulayya: "I am his opponent, so much so, that I shall oppose him even if he recites the Kalimah Tayyiba"
It means that some persons are so compulsive liars that they lie even in 'Kalimah Tayyiba' because their 'Kalimah' is a show of falsehood.

Category No. 3:
The 'Kufr' of the third category exceeds the 'Kufr' of the second category because their offence is that they call their 'Kufr' as Islam. They present pure 'Kufr' in the nomenclature of Islam by twisting the verses of the holy Quran, the sacred 'Ahadith' of the Prophet (SAW), the statements of his Companions and sayings of revered saints in order to prove their 'Kufr' as Islam. Such men are called zindiq (Dualist-infidels) in Shari'at terminology.
To sum up, the three categories are Unbelievers; Kafir); Hypocrites: (Munafiq); and Dualist- lnfidel: (Zindiq).

'Kafir' (Unbeliever) is a person who does not believe in Allah and the Prophet neither outwardly nor inwardly. 'Munafiq' (Hypo crit) is a person who hides 'Kufr' in his heart and his recitation of 'Kalimah' is false. He is a pretender. 'Zindiq' (Dualist-Infidel) is a person who gilt-edges, his 'Kufr' with the gold of Islam and tries to present it as real Islam.

An apostate (Murtad) is a person who abandons Islam. A precept should be understood here which is recorded in the books. All the four schools of 'Fiqah' unanimously agree that in case of an apostate (Murtad), Shari'at allows him three days to enable him to remove his doubts. All possible efforts should be made to clarify his doubts. If he understands and re-enters Islamic fold, well and good; otherwise he shouk~ be got rid off. This precept is known as 'killing of apostate' (Qatl-e-Murtad). None of the Imams differs on this issue. Laws of all civilised countries and governments award death punishment to rebels. As apostate is a rebel of Islam, therefore apostasy (Irtidad) is punishable with death.

Islamic Shari'at offers a concession to its rebels while laws of the world do not do so. They must put their traitors to death even if they beg for mercy after their arrest and award of sentance.
Take the example of a rebel of any modern government. He may repent, beg to be excused or vouch for good behaviour a hundred times, assuring the government that in future he will never resort to revolt; still he will not be heard. The capital sentence will be executed on him. His repentance will be unacceptable. At no cost will he be excused.
But Islamic Shari'at Law gives a concession to its rebel. The Apostate (Murtad) is allowed three days to think over. He is advised to withdraw and renounce his apostatic stance. If he assures for future and is repentant, he is not punished. In spite of this humane concession afforded by Shari'at, Non-Muslims criticise the Islamic punishment. It is a matter of surprise that there are no objections to the hanging of a person when caught in conspiracy, say for toppling the lawful Govern- ments of the American President or the Russian President or the Pakistani President. Conspirators are sentenced to death and no law of any civlised court disagrees with this.
Why do then people disapprove of punishing a person who rebels against Allah's Prophets and say: Do not put him to death! Islam does concede three days' grace to enable the apostate to remove his doubts and come back into the Islamic fold. If he begs for mercy or repents, Shari'at grants him his life back. But if he is adamant and refuses to renounce his apostasy then Allah's sacred soil must be cleaned of his foul existence.

It is so because it takes the form of a carbuncle which stinks. If a malignant growth (Allah forbid) appears on some part of human body, doctors advise its amputation. Who would call this a tyranny over the patient? Rather a favour to him! By this removal the sound parts of the body are saved from septic poisoning, else death would be certain. Therefore it is wise to cut away the diseased part to protect the healthy part.
In the same way apostasy is a carbuncle of Islamic Mill at. The malignant part, i.e., the 'Murtad,' despite preaching does not retrace his steps. Therefore, cancerous malignancy must necessarily be removed otherwise his poison will gradually travel inside the entire physiology of the Islamic Millat. This indeed is the unanimous verdict of the four Imams, and theologians and doctors of Shari'at law. Wisdom and sagacity demands it. The safety of Millat lies in it.

A dualist-infidel is worse than an apostate, because he is bent upon presenting his 'Kufr' as Islam. Imam Shafai and Imam Ahmad, in their well-known sayings, were pleased to ordain that a dualist-infidel (Zindiq) is governed by the same orders as an apostate (Murtad); that is, afford him a chance first, give him time to repent and permit him to return to the Islamic fold. If within three days he does so, leave him unscathed, otherwise it is obligatory to award him capital sentence.

Imam Malik, (Allah's blessing on him), goes one step forward to say:
"I will not accept the penitence of a Dualist- Infidel".
By this he means to say that if a person guises his 'Kufr' with Islam and does not repent, when caught in the act, then, (leaving it to Allah whether or not He accepts his penitence), we shall certainly promulgate Allah's Shari'at on him, i.e., shall pronounce capital punishment for him. This is a crime which is similar to adultery in which a person may be penitent (Taaib) for future but his penitence will not save him from death.
Therefore, he will be punished under all circumstances. Similarly, hands are to be amputated for stealing. A thief, on arrest, may offer penitence ('Tauba') but his offence will not go unpunished. It is in this light that Imam Malik says:
"I will not accept the penitence of a Dualist Infidel." Capital punishment will certainly be given to him, although he may be penitent ('Taaib') a hundred times.
Similar sayings are on record from Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Ahmad bin Hambal, (Allah's blessing on them.) In books of 'Fiqah' such as 'Durr-e-Mukhtar' and 'Shami' and some others, it is written that if a Dualist-Infidel offers penitence ('Tauba') of his own free will, his penitence will be accepted without capital penalty, provided no one came to know of his offence. Similarly, he will be excused from punishment if he became penitent of his own free will, on Allah's guidance. Therefore, if a Qadiani renounces his 'Qadianism' on his own and offers penitence ('Tauba') then he will be excused. On the contrary, if he offers penitence ('Tauba') after arrest then there will be no excuse, irrespective of his repentance even a hundred times.

Shari'at enjoins upon us to preach to the apostate. If he as a result of preaching, undertakes penitence ('Tauba'), he will save himself from capital punishment but this does not apply to a dualist-infidel. There is another saying from Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifa, and one from Imam Ahmad, (Allah's blessings on them all), that penitence ('Tauba') of a dualist-infidel is not acceptable because he has committed the crime of
dualist infidelity (Zindaqa), i.e., he applied false coating of Islam over his 'Kufr'
I repeat, he has sold pork as mutton and wine as 'Zam-Zam.' This is a crime which is not excusable and is certainly punishable with capital sentence.

My purpose here is not to tell you why Qadianis are 'Kafirs.' What I do wish to tell you is that in spite of their being diehard 'Kafirs' they present their 'Kufr' with the label of 'Islam'. Take the case of our Kalimah Tayyiba.
They do not believe in our 'Kalimah'. How can they claim to be Muslims? Please understand this clearly that a person who doubts in their being a 'Kafir' is not a Muslim. They pretend to be Muslims and say, "We are Musalman, we are only a sect of Islam called Jamat-e-Ahmadiya'.' But they are liars. They have established their colony near London and have named it "Islamabad" and behave as protagonists of Islam. When they
come across a Muslim they deceive him and tell him "You see, we offer 'Namaz', keep fasts, do this and do that and we consider Hazrat Muhammad (SAW), as 'Khatam un Nabieen', i.e., the last of the Prophets." They play fraud on simple ignorant Muslims and assure them that every person who enters their 'Jamaat' has got to agree to one condition of their Charter of Loyalty which reads as follows:
"I acknowledge Hazrat Muhammad as 'Khatam un Nabieen' with all sincerety of my heart.
By this covenant they deceive poor simple Muslims.

They are so for the simple reason that they pour Islam into their mould of 'Kufr' and label urine as 'Zam-Zam' and dog's carrion as 'Halal'. The whole world knows that Allah's Prophet Mu- hammad (SAW) was the last of the Prophets. This Islamic doctrine of finality of prophet hood is a definite certainty. On the occasion of his farewell Haj, the Prophet declared:
"O peoplel I am the last prophet and you are the last Ummat." Besides, there are more than two hundred 'Ahadith' in which the Prophet (SAW), himself explained about the finality of Prophethood ('Khatm e Nubuwwat'). In different ways and through different expressions he was pleased to say that there will be no prophet after him and that nobody will be given prophethood after him..........(SAW)

It does not mean that any previous prophet is not alive. It simply means that if for the sake of argument all the previous prophets supposedly come in the world in the times of our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and become his servants, even then our Prophet (SW) shall continue to be the last prophet since nobody has been awarded prophethood after him. The list of the blessed prophets in the manifest of the All-Knowing Allah carried his exhalted name in the last. With his arrival, the list of the holy prophets became complete.

A child who is born last in a family is called their youngest off-spring. He is the final child and none is born after him. It does not mean that he is the last to survive among his brothers. Of course, it sometimes happens that he is born last but dies earlier. Then the father says: this child who died was my last one.
In the same way, the last prophet ('Khatam un Nabieen') means no prophet after him; no person shall wear the crown of prophethood or sit on the throne of prophethood after Muhammad (SAW) Those prophets who were sent down earlier are certainly within our Faith but our Prophet (SAW) is the last one. None else will wear the prophetic mantle of honour after him; nor will the Ummat put faith in any such pretender.

Qadianis say that the epithet of 'Khatam un Nabieen' does not mean that our Prophet is the last of the Prophets, and that there shall be no prophet after him.In their opinion it means that our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) will certify future prophets with his seal, i.e., on whomsoever he will stamp, that person shall become a prophet. What a nonsense ! Infourteen hundred years only one person, namely Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian has been stamped as prophet and he too a cock-eyed man! The seal has authenticated a one-eyed 'Dajjal' from Qadian!
I repeat that the term 'Khatam un Nabieen means that our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last prophet. All new entries have been stopped. They have been sealed. No prophet will come after him. It is like an envelope which has been closed by sealing it. 'Khatam' means sealing. Therefore, the term 'Khatam un Nabieen' means that the list of the prophets is completed and the seal has been placed on it. Neither a fresh entry is possible
nor will there be any removal from that list.
But the Qadianis have changed the meaning of 'Khatam un Nabieen' to mean that our Prophet grants certificates of prophethood to persons. In other words, Allah, who was previously sending down prophets, has now transferred this department to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) for stamp- ing people and making them prophets!
This is called infidelity ('Zindaqa'). In this way, they pronounce the name of Islam for meeting their nefarious designs and twist the meaning of verses of the holy Quran to suit their agnostic beliefs. That is why I say they sell pork and dog's carrion as 'Halal' meat and produce liquor under the holy label of 'Zam-Zam.'

By Allah, I would not have cared one bit for them if they had plainly said: "We are not Muslims and Islam is not our religion.

This is also a religion of the world. The Bahais believe in Bahaullah of Iran as their prophet. This group still exists. We call them 'Kafir' and they have also declared that they have nothing to do with Islam. Well, there ends the matter.
But these Qadianis call their 'Kufr' as Islam and in this way deceive Muslims. It is for this reason that they are dualist-infidels (Zindiq) and not simply Non- muslims. Remember! A Muslim can be at peace with a non-Muslim but never with a dualist-infidel ('zindiq') or apostate ('Murtad').

Who has allowed you to:
2) Cancel the Kalimah of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and adopt the Kalimah of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?
3) Call the so-called 'Wahi' of Mirza Ghulan. Ahmad as the basis of salvation in place of the true 'Wahi' of Prophet Muhammad (SAW)?
You impudently declare yourselves Muslims and call us 'Kafirs'. I quote from your Mirza Bashir Ahmad Qadiani's Kalimatul Fasl, p.110:
"Every person who believes in Moosa but does not believe in Isa or believes in Isa and does not believe in Muhammad or believes in Muhammad but does not believe in the promised Masih (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad), (such a person) is not only an Unbeliever ( a Kafir ) but a thorough Unbeliever ("Pakka Kafir') and an outcast from the Islamic fold".

The Qadianis claim that Prophet Muhammad was destined to come down into the world two times, first in Makkah and this prophethood lasted 1300 years, and secondly in Qadian, at the start of fourteenth Hijra in the incarnation of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Therefore in their opinion, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is the reincarnation of Muhammad ur Rasulullah and consequently the Qadianis think of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as Muhammad
ur Rasulullah in their minds when reciting the Kalima-e-Tayyiba. This is veiled Kufr'.
I quote again Mirza Bashir Ahmad Qadiani from his Al Fasl, p.l58:
"The promised Masih (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) iS Muhammad ur Rasulullah himself who was reincarnated in the world for propagation of Islam. erefore, we do not need a new Kalimah. Yes, if somebody else would have reborn instead of Muhammad ur Rasulullah then this need (to have a new Kalimah) would have arisen"
From the above it is evident that for the Qadianis La ilaha ill Allah Muhammad ur Rasulullah' means 'La ilaha ill Allah Mirza Rasulullah' who (Muhammad ur Rasulullah) has been reincarnated in Qadian. (Allah protect us from this sacrilege) The Qadianis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani is Prophet Muhammad incarnate. Mirza Bashir Ahmad Qadiani acknowledges that for the Qadianis Mirza himself is Muhammad
ur Rasulullah and that they recite the Kalimah believing Mirza to be Muhammad ur Rasulullah. Therefore they do not need to construct a new Kalimah. However we say that Mirza was not Muhammad ur Rasulullah incarnate; rather Mirza was Devil incarnate!

The Qadianis fabricated:
1. a different Prophet
2. a different Quran (named "Tazkirah", which has the same status in the eyes of Qadianis
as is accorded to Torah, Zabur, Injeel and Quran by the Muslims).
3. a different Kalimah
4. a different Shari'at
5. a different Ummat
How with all these very basic differences the Qadianis have the cheek to tell the world that they are Muslims and that their religion is Islam! They are Dualist-Infidels indeed. Allah protect us from their calumny and cunning!

I ask Qadianis: You call us 'Kafirs'. Why? What tenets of 'Deen' of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) have we refused to accept? Just because of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's birth all the Muslims of the world have become 'Kafirs'! Before his birth, our 'Deen' was alright as Islam and we were Muslims. After his creation our 'Deen' has become 'Kufr' and we have become 'Kafirs' ! ! Allah protect us from the Qadianis' snare! Can there be any more nonsense to compare with?

He has committed these heinous crimes:
a . Claimed Prophethood
b. Started a new religion
c. Called his followers Muslims
d. Called followers of Muhammad as 'Kafirs'.

Please tell me, if any Jew, Christian, Hindu, Sikh, etc., has ever committed this crime. Therefore I say that the Qadianis are 'Kafirs' of the highest magnitude and of the worst degree ever born.

By Law of Shari'at, they should be awarded capital sentence because they are Dualistinfidels ('Zindiq'), calling Islam 'Kufr' and 'Kufr' Islam. If they are masquerading as Muslims on the face of the globe, it is because they have not been sentenced. Despite this concession, they proclaim that they are being tyrannized in Pakistan. Truly speaking, they are taking undue advantage of our politeness and the Pakistan Government is treating
them most kindly which they do not deserve. The Government has not placed any restriction on the performance of their religious rites. They have been only told to stop calling the religion of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) as 'Kufr' and to stop calling their Qadiani religion as Islam; no more restriction than this.
Otherwise, remember! The Law of Shari'at ordains to award them capital sentence. But the government of Pakistan has given them a ccncession. The Qadianis occupy high posts and offices in Government administration and public services. In spite of these concessions, they appeal to the United Nations and to the Courts of Jews and Christians, clamouring that the Pakistan Go- vernment has snatched their rights. What were their rights which have been snatched? What wrong has been done to them? Only they have been told that Kalimah Tayyiba is the Kalimah of Islam.

a) be permitted to paste bottles of liquor with labels of 'Zam-Zam'?
b) be allowed to sell pig's pork and dog's carrion as 'Halal' meat?
c) be allowed to call our Islam as 'Kufr'?
d) be a]lowed to present the religion of cock- eyed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as Islam?

The pronouncement of just Kalimah Tayyiba from the mouth of these hypocrites (i.e. the Qadianis) is:
1. A disgrace of our Kalimah
2. A disgrace of Allah's Prophet.
3. A disgrace of Deen-e-Islam.
They cannot be allowed to go ahead with this disgrace and deceit. Allah has said about these hypocrites:
"Allah testifies that the hypocrites are liars".
These dualist-infidels ('Zindiq') like an apostate ('Murtad') must be awarded capital sentence. In the following paragraphs I record my reasons

Shari'at allows three days' grace period for an Apostate (Murtad) to get back into the Islamic fold If he does not, he is to be awarded capital punishment.
I present a case for your study. Consider for example some apostates who forsake Islam and who happen to be in so large numbers that, being a sizable group, they appear to be out of control for an Islamic Government to execute them. Let me be more precise. Take the example of an Islamic country where the Muslim population of a town decides to become, let's say, Christians, and having done so, manage somehow to save themselves from the Shari'at punishment. After a passage of time these Christians die their natural death leaving their children as Christians. The precept for them is to force these people back into the Islamic fold, by imprisoning them or by other appropriate means but not by capital punishment. In other words, if the original parent was an apostate, his son will also be an apostate. However, the grandson will not be an apostate; he will be a simple 'Kafir' and shall not be liable to punishment for apostasy.

The breed of Qadianis will never change. They may multiply up to ninety-nine generations, still the hundredth one will continue to be Dualist- infldel and Apostate. The reason is that their crime is a never-ending one. So long as they call their Kufr as Islam their infidel dualism shall see no end. This offence shall be ongoing in their progenecy.
For anybody unaware of the facts, let it be clear to him that every Qadiani, whether he is so by conversion, or by birth, or by heritage, is a dualist- infidel under the Shari'at Law because his crime flows unending throughout his lineage.

Something more I want to tell you for which I shall draw an example which, I am afraid, is crude but it suits here.
A father had ten sons. All his life he treated them as his sons. After his death a fellow gets up to claim that he is the sole legitimate son and the ten are illegitimate. Two questions arise here:
Firstly: Will any sane person accept the claim of this fellow who is born of a non-descript origin and who never laid his claim while the father was alive? Conversely, never did the deceased father say to anybody that he had a son of that description. Can any Court of Justice in the whole world adjudicate in favour of that fellow and declare the ten legitimate sons as illegitimate ? No. Never!

Secondly: Wh,at will be the reaction of the ten legitimate sons against the non-descript who calls them sons of adultery?
Keeping the answers of the two questions in mind, now listen: We belong to the Ummat of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).We fully believe in the Deen which he brought forth. We are his spiritual children. If I say so, it is no idea of mine but it is in the holy Quran which speaks in these terms:
The Prophet is more related to Momins than their self is to them. (Quran: Ahzab 33:6) That is to say, no member of the Ummat of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) has a stronger relation with his self than what Prophet Muhammad (SAW) has with each member of his Ummat.

And the holy Quran further declares:
'And his wives are their mothers' (HQ 33.6). It is therefore evident that all the revered wives of the Holy Prophets (SAW) are our mothers and we call each of them 'Ummul Momineen' (Mother of Muslims); for example, Ummul Momineen Hazrat Aiysha Siddiqa; Ummul Momineen Hazrat Khadijat ul Kubra; Ummul Momineen Hazrat Maimoona; Ummul Momineen Hazrat Umme Salma, and so on (may Allah be pleased
with them). When they arse our mothers, surely Hazrat Muhammad (SAW) is our spiritual father.

But children in a family are seldom identical. Some are more obedient, some are less helpful, some are more virtuous, some are less dutiful, some are more wise and some are less clever, but they are all members of one family despite their differing personality and varying individuality. Still they are known as children of the same parents.
Muslims have ever been the spiritual children of Allah's Prophet Muhammad (SAW) for thirteen centuries, till, at the start of the fourteenth century, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad popped up from Qadian and claimed solely for himself the spiritual sonship of Allah's Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and excluded all others. Mirza did not stop at that, he dubbed the Muslims as "Kafirs." The whole Ummat of Islam has been abused by him as
"illegitimate" keeping legitimacy only for himself. On this basis Mirza Ghulam Ahmad calls all the Muslims as "haramzadey" (bastard). Allah protect us from his slander and abuse. Excuse me for quoting the words of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad but I had to.

by Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi

No comments:

Post a Comment