Qadiani Tactics Similar to The Dozeners

[Rationalist]

In this debate the Qadiani tries to prove that Prophet Isa (as) has died and will not return. They quote how Umar said the Prophet did not die, and how Abi Bakr then corrected him and quoted this verse of the Quran 'Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, and indeed (many) Messengers have passed away before him. If he dies or is killed, will you then turn back on your heels (as disbelievers)? And he who turns back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah, and Allah will give reward to those who are grateful.' [Al-Qur'an 3:144]"

 Supposedly with this  so called proof, we are automatically supposed to believe that Mirza Ghulaam Ahmad is a subordinate Prophet.
Likewise, the same tactic is used by the 12er Shia. They will discuss Saqifa, and because it occurred and Umar even admitted  that it  was an evil action, we are supposed to automatically believe there are a dozen divinely appointed Imams.

 

Since this debate is in Urdu so I will cover the tactic of the Qadianis have used.

The issue is the Quranic verse does not say that all Messengers have died. It just says Messengers have died. So again how is this proof that Prophet Isa (as) has died?
Anyway, there are Muslim out there that don't believe in the return of Prophet Isa such as the Ibadis, some among the Zaidi and even some Sunni. Nobody believes they are non-Muslim.

Likewise, just because Saqifa occurred and it is evil as Umar describes it, how does that prove that there are 12 Imams in the Ummah who can be the only rulers?

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

It doesn't, and regarding the verse "Muhammad is no more than a Messenger, and indeed (many) Messengers have passed away before him.." there was an exception for Isa (as), and this exception is mentioned in Surat Al-Nisa' Aya (Verse) 157:

"And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain."

And whoever reads this verse and still says that Isa (as) died or was crucified is a Kaffir.

[Rationalist]

Other sects believe he died later, but not at that time.

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

Other sects believe he died later, but not at that time.

Qadianism is not a SECT, it is a RELIGION!

Here is a bit of what Qadianism teaches:

Qadiyanism Teaches:

•   Dishonouring Allah SWT, the Creator!!
Where can the human escape from that being in whose hands is every atom. He says:  I will come secretly like thieves. (Roohani Khazaa'in Page 39, Vol. 20)

•   Claiming Divinity for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad!

I saw in a dream that I am God. I have believed that I am God. (Roohani Khazaa'in Page 564, Vol 5)

•   Teaches that the Door of Prophethood is Open, Even After the Final Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)!

This fact is established like the day that the door of prophet hood is open after prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (Haqeeqatun Nubuwah Page 228)

•   Insulting the greatest of all Prophets, Muhammad (PBUH)

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his Sahabah [Companions] (RAA) used to eat cheese made by the Christians, although it was well known that pig's fat was used in its making. (Al Fadhal, Qadiyaan 22nd Febuary 1924) 

•   Claiming that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is Prophet Muhammad!

..Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful amongst themselves. In this divine revelation, I have been named Muhammad and also Rasool. (Roohani Khazain Page 207, Vol 18)

One who differentiated between me and the Mustapha has neither seen me or recognized me. 
(Roohani Khazain Page 258-259 Vol 16) 

•   That Mirza Ghulam Ahmed is superior to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)!

..Muhammad has descended among us once again and he is more greater in status than
ever before. Whosoever wants to see Muhammad (SAW) should see Ghulam Ahmad in Qadian. (Badr, Qadiyan 25th october 1906)

•   Propagating that Mirza is superior to all the Prophets

And Allah (SWT) is showing so many signs for me that if they were shown in the time of Noah, those people would not have drowned. (Roohani Khazain Page 575 Vol 22) 

Yousef of this UMMAH, i.e this humble one is greater than Israeli Yousef. (Roohani Khazain page 99 Vol 21)

Although many prophets have come into this world, I am no less in knowledge and
recognition of ALLAH than any of them. (Roohani Khazain Page 240 Vol 18)

Leave the mention of Ibne Maryam (Easaa Alaihe sallam); Ghulam Ahmad is better than him. (Roohani Khazain Page 240 Vol 18)

•   Teaches Hatred Towards Hazrat Easaa Alayhis sallam, one of the greatest prophets of ALLAH!
(Jesus) had the habit of uttering obscenities and frequently using foul language. (Roohani Khazain Page 289 Vol 11)

It should be remembered that he (Jesus) also had to some extent the habit of lying. (Roohani Khazain Page 289 Vol 11)

Jesus could not portray himself as a pious man because people know him as a gluttonous alcoholic. (Roohani Khazain Page 296 Vol 10)

[Rationalist]

Qadianism is not a SECT, it is a RELIGION!

I didn't say it is  a Muslim sect. I said other sects ie Some Zaidi, Ibadis, 12er Shia scholars like Shaykh Saduq said Prophet Isa died.

Here is a bit of what Qadianism teaches:

They are non-Muslims. I agree.

[Sheikh]

^ The Ahmadi belief is that Jesus died at a later time. They still affirm that verse that "they killed him not". They merely say that he died at a later time of completely different causes. Although, they do believe he was crucified (just not to the point of death) and I'm not sure how they reconcile that belief with the above mentioned verses.

I do not believe that saying Jesus died at a later time makes someone a kafir. There are other and more valid reasons for their apostasy.

[Sheikh]

Br. Rationalist, I hope you don't mind if I drop in a quote from one of my favorite scholars of Islam?

"Regarding the 'Qadiani Problem'.

(Ok this one will be one of those controversial posts, so I guess let's get ready for the roller-coaster of comments and hate mail below.)

So I grew up in a typical Western-Pakistani environment, and from as far back as I can remember, I recall hearing how 'Qadianis' were behind each and every problem in Pakistan. This 'blame game' was prevalent in every socio-economic class. As a child, I remember hearing my father's otherwise highly educated friends lamenting what the Qadianis had done to their otherwise perfect land. Another time, in Madinah, I had a Pakistani plumber come over to fix something, and he was going on about how Qadianis had ruined the country and done all sorts of evil deeds. In another conversation, I discovered how Qadianis had always intended to bring about the downfall of the Ummah. And it goes on and on, and EVERY Pakistani knows what I'm talking about.

This type of talk is not only ludicrous, it's downright dangerous, as the sectarian violence in Pakistan, and now with the killing of this shopkeeper in Scotland, shows.

We need to be very clear and explicit here. When people go about persecuting and killing Qadianis, it actually becomes difficult for a theologian to speak accurately without riling up the masses on both sides. There ARE limits, theologically, to what a Muslim can believe. If someone carved out a statue of the ancient idol of Ba'al and began offering blood sacrifices to it as he prostrated and worshipped it, we can safely say that this action expels him from the fold of Islam. Similarly, if one chooses to believe that prophetic wahy continues to humans after the death of the Prophet Muhammad (salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam), we mainstream Muslims of the world would consider this to be a theological deviation of such great magnitude that the second kalima is effectively nullified, and hence anyone who believes such would not be considered a member of the religion of Islam.

But that is a separate issue to what should be done with Qadianis. Pakistan is a nation-state, and just as there are Christian Pakistanis and Hindu Pakistanis, there may be other types of Pakistanis who should be allowed to worship according to their beliefs and without any provocation or physical harm inflicted on them. Conspiracy theories are dangerous, and stigmatizing and blaming one group for all of the problems of that nation (or the world!) is asking for trouble and physical violence.

It is so easy to create a scape-goat. Hitler did it to the Jews. Trump and the Far Right are doing it to the Muslims. Why must we Muslims do the same unto others? The problems of Pakistan (and the Ummah) are not all linked to the Qadianis, and to believe this is in fact a part of the problem!

The bottom line, and let me be explicit here: can't we simply verbally state what we believe about Qadianis even as we teach people NOT to treat them any differently than they would people of other faiths?

These countries are not, by any stretch of the imagination, a type of Dar al-Islam.

You, O overzealous Muslim who claims to defend the honor of the Prophet (salla Allahy alayhi wa sallam) are not Abu Bakr al-Siddiq fighting during the Wars of Riddah.

The Qadiani you oppose is not Musaylama al-Kadhdhab in person.

And even in a pure Dar al-Islam, you singlehandedly would NEVER be allowed to take any law you believe in and implement it with your own hands.

So why all of this physical violence and blame-games? I can have an opinion that a group has deviated on some matters of theology (as is my opinion on Shi'ism), or is not within the fold of Islam (as is my opinion of Qadianis who believe Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be a nabi), and STILL not physically harm them or believe in conspiracy theories about them. In fact, if I go to their shops I can actually smile as I engage in pleasantries while shopping and then wish them a good day before I leave. All of this is not relevant to my views that their beliefs might be incorrect, and I leave their ultimate judgment to Allah alone. 
 
There, rant over. Let the games begin... " - Sheikh Dr. Yasir Qadhi (from Facebook post)

[MuslimAnswers]

^

Thread has gone somewhat beyond the original matter, yet it does have a relation with what many zealous Sunnis are saying about Shias as well:

I have heard many a times that the Qadiani is a 'Waajibul Qatl'. I wonder first if this is a proper translation from the original texts, second if it is applicable to those who come after the first wave of the religion, and third what are the conditions for this to be implemented- that is, if the polity does not act for whatever reason, what can the Muslim in the street do. We are not extreme pacifists nor extreme reactionaries; we do not necessarily need to show our Himmah for the religion with outward acts against others (like the Farkhana case in Afghanistan also, as you may all remember)

These, as the quote from Yasir Qadhi showed are not small issues.

[Hadrami]

Thats fair enough, we dont go around killing people who believe Allah has a son when such statement itself is worse than qadiyani belief. Whats puzzling though is why qadiyani is non muslim but shia is muslim? Someone as clever as him surely knows shia beliefs is at least as bad as qadiyani, although I think it is worse.

Qadiyani "only" has 1, while shia has 12. Mathematically, shia is 12x worse than qadiyani

[Sheikh]

^ It is because the lay Shias (non-scholars) believe in the full Kalima. There is no god except Allah, Muhammad is the last messenger of Allah. Some of their scholars and ancient followers may have believed that the Prophetic wahy continued in Fatima and others, but if you ask the lay Shias of today, they do not believe it.

[Abubakar]

And if I may ask,What is the main Qadiani belief that makes them Kuffar ?

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

And if I may ask,What is the main Qadiani belief that makes them Kuffar ?

The belief in the death of Jesus Christ PBUH is one of them, however the main belief is believing that there is a messenger after the final prophet and messenger Muhammad Ibn 'Abdullah may peace and blessings be upon him.

[Sheikh]

And if I may ask,What is the main Qadiani belief that makes them Kuffar ?

Their belief that there is a Prophet after Prophet Mohammed.

They say that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a subordinate Prophet that "augments" the message of Islam, but does not add or take away anything major from it.

I do not like to throw around blanked takfeers so I would not say "inta kafir" to one of them, but I think there might be an ijma on their apostasy. Not sure. They are very friendly people. I knew a few of them a while back.

[Abubakar]

And if I may ask,What is the main Qadiani belief that makes them Kuffar ?

The belief in the death of Jesus Christ PBUH is one of them, however the main belief is believing that there is a messenger after the final prophet and messenger Muhammad Ibn 'Abdullah may peace and blessings be upon him.

But does that nullify the Shahadah ?
Because they believe the  Prophet after Prophet Muhammad (saw) is still to follow the sharia of the Muhammad (saw) [No new sharia] ,Which is almost the same role as the Shia Imams ,So how does this Nullify their Shahada ?

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

But does that nullify the Shahadah ?
Because they believe the  Prophet after Prophet Muhammad (saw) is still to follow the sharia of the Muhammad (saw) [No new sharia] ,Which is almost the same role as the Shia Imams ,So how does this Nullify their Shahada ?

Yes it does. Allah says in the Holy Qur'an in Surat Al-Ma'idah Ayah (Verse) 3:

"This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion."

Allah says that he has perfected for us our religion, so by following the Qur'an and the Sunnah, we will not need anything/anyone else!

[Rationalist]

^ The Ahmadi belief is that Jesus died at a later time. They still affirm that verse that "they killed him not". They merely say that he died at a later time of completely different causes. Although, they do believe he was crucified (just not to the point of death) and I'm not sure how they reconcile that belief with the above mentioned verses.

The definition of crucify includes death. If a person does not die they are not considered as crucified.

cru·ci·fy
ˈkro͞osəˌfī/Submit
verb
1.
put (someone) to death by nailing or binding them to a cross, especially as an ancient punishment.

[Rationalist]

Qadianis have two groups. One is a Lahori one which believes in the finality of Prophethood. They number about 60,000 in population. Many scholars don't call this group as kaffir.  Then there is the majority who don't believe a final Prophet has come yet. This population numbers around 1.5-2 million. So in another words to them another Prophet can still come after Mizra.

Its strange how they use the 72 sect ahadith and they say they are the last one, but even within their own group there was a split.

[Rationalist]

The belief in the death of Jesus Christ PBUH is one of them, however the main belief is believing that there is a messenger after the final prophet and messenger Muhammad Ibn 'Abdullah may peace and blessings be upon him.

So according to you even if a Muslim believes that Prophet Isa (as) has died they are kaffir?

[Rationalist]

Br. Rationalist, I hope you don't mind if I drop in a quote from one of my favorite scholars of Islam?

I agree with the article, but to be honest even the other side spreads the same kind of hatred against other Muslims. For example the 12er Shia love blaming Yassir Habib for quoting references from their own books without taqiyyah. Yet they too present the same message in an implicit matter.
Here is an example from a so called moderate zakir.

Also, Hassnain Rajabali who presents himself as a moderate, but he too under taqiyyah is able to cover up his hatred. In his lecture on Fatima (sa) he accuses the 2nd of attacking her, and says today's terrorist are getting it from the 2nd, and killing Shias only because they love the Ahlul Bayt.

As for Qadinians, they blame everything on the Mullahs. They say the reason the Muslim can't progress is due the Mullahs. Also according to them us not accepting their cult is the reason for terrorism.

[Sheikh]

^ The Ahmadi belief is that Jesus died at a later time. They still affirm that verse that "they killed him not". They merely say that he died at a later time of completely different causes. Although, they do believe he was crucified (just not to the point of death) and I'm not sure how they reconcile that belief with the above mentioned verses.

The definition of crucify includes death. If a person does not die they are not considered as crucified.

cru·ci·fy
ˈkro͞osəˌfī/Submit
verb
1.
put (someone) to death by nailing or binding them to a cross, especially as an ancient punishment.

Ah, so if they believed that Jesus was nailed to the cross but survived (despite appearing to be dead), then they would not be in direct contradiction to the Qur'an on this one specific issue, right?