TwelverShia.net Forum

Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

muslim720

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2017, 05:06:09 AM »
We, Afghans, have a saying which I cannot help but apply to this topic.  With my apologies in advance to the original poster!  Take dog poop and split it in half.  One half is Qadiani, the other half is Ahmadi.  That is the difference.
"Our coward ran from those in authority" - Iceman (admitting the truth regarding his 12th Imam)

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2017, 05:18:45 AM »
Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti was well known for saying "Love for All, Hatred for None!"


ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2017, 06:09:01 AM »
Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti was well known for saying "Love for All, Hatred for None!"

He also claimed to be the Second Jesus

دم بدم روح القدس اندر معینی می دمد
من نمی دانم مگر عیسیٰ ثانی شدم


http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2014/10/khwaja-moinuddin-hasan-chishti-claims.html

So I find it interesting that when Moinuddin Chishti claims to be the second Jesus he becomes a Saint and his tomb in Ajmer is worshiped as an idol by the so called Muslims. But when Ghulam Ahmad claims the exact same thing he is declared a Dajjal
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2017, 07:31:24 AM »
I did a search through the Christian view, and most of them are in an agreement with Lahori sect that Joseph was already married to Mary. So why would you argue that it happened after? Is this a Qadiani belief?

We are talking about the existence of Joseph Carpenter, nor whether he was married to Mary or even when they became married. Suppose, for the sake of argument, they were married before Jesus was born, that doesn't prove that Joseph was Jesus's father or that Mary wasn't a virgin when Jesus was born. It is possible that marriage doesn't equate consummation of marriage.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2017, 08:48:13 AM »
The violent reaction of the traditionalist Muslim community, under the influence of the Ulema to the Ahmadiyya movement of Ghulam Ahmad should not be understood as purely a reaction to heterodoxy. After all, there  have been many more serious departures from Islamic orthodoxy which threaten the very structure of the Religion as has been practiced by the vast majority of Muslims generation to generation going back to the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions. Recently, I came across certain individuals whose conception of Islam is so radically different than that of the mainstream that there is no option but to say that they are adhering to an altogether different religion. To such an extent that it can be said that the followers of a distinct world religion, Judaism, are closer to the practice and conception of traditional Islam, than some of these modern sects claiming to be "Islamic". Keep in mind that generally speaking the Jews acknowledge the Nubuwwah of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم but say he is the Prophet sent by Allah for everyone except Jews. In fact, the adherents of the radically new approaches to Islam accuse the mainstream, traditionalist community of approaching the Religion under an unmistakably Judaic influence. Hence, consider some of the radical new doctrines that are invading the spiritual marketplace; 1. Salat is not a ritual act of worship but a system of government of justice or government that needs to be established 2. The purely lunar calendar of Islam for calculating the months has no basis in the Quran, which hints at a lunosolar calendar when it says both the sun and moon are for calculating time. 3. The Medinese Verses of the Quran were only meant for the time of the Prophet ﷺ. It is the Meccan verses that constitute the universal message of Islam (this idea was propagated by Mahmud Taha who was executed by the Sudanese government for apostasy in 1985 - nevertheless, his ideas are carried on by the political party he founded) 4. The Quran is an interpolated text (belief of the Akhbari Twelver Shi'a in particular) 5. Deification of Ali b. Abi Talib كرم الله وجهه (belief of Nusairi and Ghulat sects) 6. Sects that believed in Tanasukh (reincarnation) 7. "Muslims" who believe the universe is eternal (the philosophers) 8. Sects which believed that Allah incarnated in a human form 9. Sects which believed that Allah is a flesh and blood body (belief of the Mushabbihah and Mujassima) 10. The Sunnah and Hadith have absolutely no value and are to be rejected wholesale (belief of the Hadith rejecters and so called "Quranists")

All of these and many others which have been described are departures from fundamental and essential Articles of Faith in Islam, beliefs that have come to define Islam. Yet we see that none of these ideas, and those who cling to them even till this day, have faced as great of an aggressive response as that of the Ahmadiyya, officially declared as a non-Muslim minority by way of amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan. Yet in Pakistan or any other Muslim country the Hadith-rejecters, followers of G. A. Pervez, the Ghaali and Nusayri sects (deification of sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib), and any other clearly heretical group (Zanadiqa) have not officially been declared as non-Muslim despite presence of their followers claiming to be Muslim. In Pakistan, there are present the followers of G. A. Pervez, the Zikri sect (who reject practice of Salat), the Aga Khani sect, the Akhbari sect (who believe in tahreef of the Qur'an), yet none of them have officially been declared as non-Muslim.

As for the Ahmadiyya, they are considered non-Muslims due to their alleged rejection of the Finality of Prophethood. Yet upon closer inspection of their actual creed it becomes clear that the Ahmadiyya interpretation of Finality of Prophethood matches precisely with the traditional Sufi conception and even the mainstream Sunni concept of the possibility of the advent of pious men from the Umma who receive inspiration from Allah while upholding the supremacy and limits of the Shari'a, nor questioning the fundamental Articles of Faith, such as Tawhid, Risala, and Akhira.

We come to realise that the motivation for considering the Ahmadiyya as a separate, non-Muslim religion is primarily political and also born out of a sense of rivalry between the mainstream Ulama and their fear of the influence of Muslim individuals claiming to receive divine inspiration, and thus not subject to their influence. It is in fact the latest manifestation of the classic rivalry in the medieval history of Islam between the Ulama and the Sufiya mystics. The latter for the most part did not drift from the essentials of Islam and the mainstream from among them always upheld the supremacy of the Shari'a as the Final Divine Law until Judgment Day. Yet, a sense of jealousy and rivalry resulted in the narrow minded Ulama opposing the Sufiya and all those individuals who asserted that they were conversant with Allah and therefore on a higher plane than the Ulama.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2017, 08:50:00 AM by ZulFiqar »
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #25 on: July 11, 2017, 09:11:12 AM »
The Ahmadiyya are distinguished from the Muslim mainstream in two particular issues: 1. The belief that Jesus of Nazareth is deceased 2. The belief that the prophecies in the Hadith regarding the coming Messiah were fulfilled in the person of Ghulam Ahmad

Because the Messiah Son of Mary is called a Prophet of Allah in the Hadith concerning his second advent, Ghulam Ahmad, a skilled theologian, produced the theory that the coming Messiah, though named as a Prophet, will be a Prophet in the sense understood by the Sufis, and not a real Prophet in the Shari' sense. He in fact produced this theory with the intention of upholding the doctrine of Finality of Prophethood, that no Prophet can come after sayyidina Muhammad ﷺ. In his view, the mainstream Muslim belief that Jesus, a Prophet in his own right independent of Muhammad Rasul Allah ﷺ would come back after him could not be reconciled with the doctrine of Finality of Prophethood. Hence he formulated this theory that the coming Messiah will in fact be an Ummati (follower) of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ acting as an Imam for the Muslims, and though the Hadith has called him a Prophet, he is not a Prophet in the real or technical sense, but in the sense understood as possible by the mystics of Islam.

How ironic is it then that Ghulam Ahmad and his followers were expelled from Islam in the name of defense of Finality of Prophethood doctrine, the very doctrine that Ghulam Ahmad was motivated to uphold in formulating his theory regarding the reality of the second coming of Messiah!

So apart from these 2 differences, the Ahmadiyya are like the orthodox Muslims in both practice and conception of Islam. The Ahmadiyya are generally adhering the the mainstream Hanafi school of jurisprudence and the orthodox creed of Islam as elucidated by the great Sunni Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal. They are strict in their practice of the 5 Pillars of Islam and observing the rules of the Shari'a, and uncompromising regarding the Articles of Faith.

Now if we briefly analyze the distinct and salient doctrines of the numerous contemporary Muslim sects today, we see that their beliefs are a much more serious and fundamental departure from the orthodox conception of Islam, despite the fact that none of these sects have officially been declared as non-Muslims by any Muslim government;

1. The Imamiya Shia who believe that 12 Imams are Infallible like Prophets and even superior to all the Prophets with the exception of Muhammad Rasul Allah ﷺ

2. Those among them, especially the Akhbaris, who openly confess their belief that the Holy Qur'an was not preserved but the text we read from today is distorted and interpolated!

3. The Alawis or Nusairis who believe that sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib is God incarnate or a demigod.

4. The Barelwis who believe the Prophet ﷺ is the Knower of the Unseen, Omnipresent, is literally Light (Nur) in substance, and call upon the deceased for assistance and granting of prayers (grave worship)

5. The Deobandis who believe it is possible for Allah to Lie and do any conceivable thing since "He has power over all things" (Imkan al-Kidhb)

6. The Hadith-rejecters who say only the text of the Quran and not the Sunnah is the primary source of the Religion. Some of them reject the 5 times daily Salat and other Pillars of Islam, or practice them in an altogether unrecognisable manner.

*The 5 times daily Salat is considered the main symbol of Islam without which there is no Islam
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #26 on: July 11, 2017, 05:29:20 PM »
Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti was well known for saying "Love for All, Hatred for None!"

He also claimed to be the Second Jesus

دم بدم روح القدس اندر معینی می دمد
من نمی دانم مگر عیسیٰ ثانی شدم


http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2014/10/khwaja-moinuddin-hasan-chishti-claims.html

So I find it interesting that when Moinuddin Chishti claims to be the second Jesus he becomes a Saint and his tomb in Ajmer is worshiped as an idol by the so called Muslims. But when Ghulam Ahmad claims the exact same thing he is declared a Dajjal


The Sufi saints do not make their claims binding on ummah, whereas Mirza did. His claim that he is the lowest level Nabi is kufr. On the contrary I have seen some scholars accept the Lahoris to be Muslim.

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #27 on: July 11, 2017, 05:34:52 PM »
I did a search through the Christian view, and most of them are in an agreement with Lahori sect that Joseph was already married to Mary. So why would you argue that it happened after? Is this a Qadiani belief?

We are talking about the existence of Joseph Carpenter, nor whether he was married to Mary or even when they became married. Suppose, for the sake of argument, they were married before Jesus was born, that doesn't prove that Joseph was Jesus's father or that Mary wasn't a virgin when Jesus was born. It is possible that marriage doesn't equate consummation of marriage.

No u did mention the idea when u wrote:

There is no explicit or even implicit denial of the fact that she did not get married later on after the birth of Jesus.

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #28 on: July 14, 2017, 08:19:43 AM »

The Sufi saints do not make their claims binding on ummah, whereas Mirza did. His claim that he is the lowest level Nabi is kufr. On the contrary I have seen some scholars accept the Lahoris to be Muslim.

This is tantamount to saying that the claims of Ghulam Ahmad, in their essence, are not Kufr. For you the only thing which is Kufr is to make such claims "binding on the Ummah".
Yet all of those Ulama who issued Fatawa of Kufr against Ghulam Ahmad did so on the premise that his claims, in their essence, are Kufr.
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2017, 02:02:49 AM »
I don't know why I am put in a position to defend the Sufi saints.
MGA on the other hand himself claimed he is a Prophet and this is accepted by the Qadianis. This is where the Kufr lies.

Saying he is not a law bearing Prophet makes no difference. He is kaffir by claiming the title Nabi.


ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2017, 03:23:41 AM »
I don't know why I am put in a position to defend the Sufi saints.
MGA on the other hand himself claimed he is a Prophet and this is accepted by the Qadianis. This is where the Kufr lies.

Saying he is not a law bearing Prophet makes no difference. He is kaffir by claiming the title Nabi.

Can you explain on what basis is a claim to non-law bearing Prophethood in its essence considered Kufr?
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2017, 03:53:49 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani said:

وسُمِيّتُ نبيّا من الله على طريقة المجاز لا على وجه الحقيقة

"I have been named as 'Nabi' from Allah by way of metaphor (figuratively), and not upon face value (literally)" (Zamima Haqiqat-ul-Wahi pp. 64-65

My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2017, 04:18:22 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani said:

جھوٹے الزام مجھ پر مت لگا‌ؤ کہ حقیقی طور پر نبوّت کا دعوی کیا
"Do not lie upon me and accuse me of claiming Nubuwwah in the literal sense." (Siraaj-e-Muneer, p.2)

My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2017, 04:44:59 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani said:

اس جگہ کسی کو یہ وہم نہ گذرے کہ اس تقریر میں اپنے نفس کو حضرت مسیح پر فضیلت دی ہے کیونکہ یہ ایک جزئی فضیلت ہے جو غیر نبی کو نبی پر ہوسکتی ہے اور تمام اہل علم اور معرفت اس فضیلت کے قائل ہیں

"At this juncture no one should be under the illusion that in this speech I have given excellence to myself over the Messiah; because this is a partial excellence which a non-Prophet may have over a Prophet, and all of the people of knowledge and gnosis accept this (partial) excellence." (Tiryaaq-ul-Quloob, p.157)

*In this quote, Ghulam Ahmad has clearly stated that as a non-Prophet he does not have excellence over sayyidina Eesaa alaihis salaam, but only a partial excellence, because it is possible that a non-Prophet has partial excellence over a Prophet, and this is something which all of the people of knowledge and gnosis are aware of.


My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2017, 05:11:30 AM »
In addressing the false prophet John Alexander Dowie (1847-1907), regarding whom Ghulam Ahmad accurately predicted his demise on the basis of true Ilhaam, Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani said:

وانك تفترى على الله في دعوى النبوة والنبوة قد انقطعت بعد نبينا صلّى الله عليه وسلّم
"ِAnd verily you lie upon Allah in claiming Nubuwwah; and Nubuwwah has been terminated after our Prophet peace be upon him" (Zamima Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, p.64)

My Blog
Forbidden_Link

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2017, 05:21:14 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani said:

بعد آنحضرت صلعم کوئی نبی نہیں آسکتا اس لۓ اس شریعت میں نبی کے قائم مقام محدّث رکھے گۓ

"After Prophet MuhammadSWS no Prophet can come because in this Shari'ah the Muhaddath has been put in the place of a Prophet." (Shahaadat-ul-Quraan, p.28)

My Blog
Forbidden_Link

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2017, 07:14:54 AM »
I don't know why I am put in a position to defend the Sufi saints.
MGA on the other hand himself claimed he is a Prophet and this is accepted by the Qadianis. This is where the Kufr lies.

Saying he is not a law bearing Prophet makes no difference. He is kaffir by claiming the title Nabi.

Can you explain on what basis is a claim to non-law bearing Prophethood in its essence considered Kufr?

I believe you guys differ on the definition of Nabi.
For the mainstream Muslims a Rasool (Messenger) is one who bring the law and a Nabi is the one who follows that law. On top of that all Rasools are Nabi, but not all Nabis are Rasools. So the Seal of Prophethood means no Prophet (Nabi) will come after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Remember Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was both a Rasool and a Nabi.
 

Rationalist

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2017, 07:17:45 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani said:

وسُمِيّتُ نبيّا من الله على طريقة المجاز لا على وجه الحقيقة

"I have been named as 'Nabi' from Allah by way of metaphor (figuratively), and not upon face value (literally)" (Zamima Haqiqat-ul-Wahi pp. 64-65



Again there is no such thing as  a metaphorical Nabi. You even admitted  in your beliefs despite of what saints have said there was no other man in history that was Prophet in a metaphorical sense. In your view even Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jillani did not become this.

zaid_ibn_ali

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2017, 10:05:18 AM »
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani said:

وسُمِيّتُ نبيّا من الله على طريقة المجاز لا على وجه الحقيقة

"I have been named as 'Nabi' from Allah by way of metaphor (figuratively), and not upon face value (literally)" (Zamima Haqiqat-ul-Wahi pp. 64-65



What is a metaphorical non literal prophet?

ZulFiqar

Re: Difference Between Qadianis and Lahori Ahmadis
« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2017, 01:53:18 PM »
I believe you guys differ on the definition of Nabi.
For the mainstream Muslims a Rasool (Messenger) is one who bring the law and a Nabi is the one who follows that law. On top of that all Rasools are Nabi, but not all Nabis are Rasools. So the Seal of Prophethood means no Prophet (Nabi) will come after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Remember Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was both a Rasool and a Nabi.

Can you cite the evidence that is the basis for this distinction, i.e., that a Rasool is the one who brings the law and a Nabi is the one who follows the law? Is this distinction based on an Ayah of the Quraan or an authentic Hadeeth?

The Holy Qur'an says that IliyaasAS was a Messenger (Sura 37:123) LootAS was a Messenger (37:133), and YoonusAS was a Messenger (37:139)
What Shari'ah or Law did these three Messengers bring?

IliyaasAS was a Prophet of Bani Israaeel who was upon the Sharee'ah of sayyidina MoosaaAS, and the same is true of Yoonus bin MattaaAS.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2017, 01:56:26 PM by ZulFiqar »
My Blog
Forbidden_Link

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3451 Views
Last post October 17, 2017, 10:44:13 PM
by GreatChineseFall
6 Replies
4739 Views
Last post January 17, 2015, 07:28:07 PM
by Hani
4 Replies
763 Views
Last post July 22, 2017, 12:21:32 PM
by zaid_ibn_ali
6 Replies
313 Views
Last post September 20, 2020, 05:36:37 PM
by Soccer