TwelverShia.net Forum

Off Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 04, 2017, 10:04:55 PM

Title: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 04, 2017, 10:04:55 PM
Is the current leader of the ahmediyya/qadiani sect fluent in arabic? Is he a qualified muffasir?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 10:32:12 PM
No he's not a scholar
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 04, 2017, 10:37:58 PM
No he's not a scholar

He's meant to be the successor to the messiah isn't he?

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 10:47:01 PM

He's meant to be the successor to the messiah isn't he?


He's the successor in the administration of the movement. Since when is the head of a Jama'ah required to be an Aalim or Mufassir? Of course there are trained Ulama and Mufassireen within the Ahmadiyya movement, but the job of the Khalifa is to administer the Jama'ah. It doesn't mean he is Jahil either, he reads the Qur'an, has memorised Suwar, delivers the Khutba, and leads the Salah.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 04, 2017, 11:05:47 PM
Can you name me some if their scholars who are well versef in arabic, tafsir & fiqh?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 04, 2017, 11:14:06 PM
There have been many. Do you mean living or those who passed away included? There are even Arab scholars within the Ahmadiyya like Muhammad Sharif Odeh.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 05, 2017, 12:08:26 AM
Its not wonder he did a poor job explaining who the Sabians were. All he did is base his analysis on speculation.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 05, 2017, 12:46:57 AM
There have been many. Do you mean living or those who passed away included? There are even Arab scholars within the Ahmadiyya like Muhammad Sharif Odeh.

Yes who are the living scholars?

Tell me more about this arab scholar, what are his specialities?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 01:09:49 AM
Yes who are the living scholars?

Tell me more about this arab scholar, what are his specialities?

May I ask why are you so interested in their living scholars? Muhammad Sharif is the head of the Ahmadiyya community in Kababeer Palestine. As far as I know he specialises in Arabic grammar and Fiqh/Shari'a. He regularly comes on MTA channel to give Arabic lessons.

In Canada where I live, I know of and have personally met with their other scholars like Hadi Ali Chaudhry and Mukhtar Cheema, and also Ansar Reza, though the latter is more of a researcher and debater. An Ahmadiyya scholar is usually a graduate of the Jaamia Ahmadiyya and is referred to as a Murabbi. They complete a 7 year course, which includes mandatory learning of another language for Tabligh. Ahmadiyya community main objective in preparing scholars is for Tabligh and Da'wat ila Allah. That is what they focus on. They also tend to specialise in the Dars (study) of the Holy Qur'an. Some of them write books, but many of the contemporary books published by the Ahmadiyya are not written by individuals but are collaborative projects of a team of scholars.

Check out their English books here
https://www.alislam.org/library/
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 05, 2017, 02:26:57 AM
To me mirza ghulam ahmed never fits the description of a messiah.
He issued a challenge to a sunni that the one who lies dies first. Regardless of the official stance of this challenge, the one who issued it i.e mirza ghulam ahmed died soon after making the challenge & he died from cholera/diarrea.

That seems more befitting of a liar & false claimant than a divine man sent by god.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 02:42:19 AM
To me mirza ghulam ahmed never fits the description of a messiah.
He issued a challenge to a sunni that the one who lies dies first. Regardless of the official stance of this challenge, the one who issued it i.e mirza ghulam ahmed died soon after making the challenge & he died from cholera/diarrea.

That seems more befitting of a liar & false claimant than a divine man sent by god.

That's fair enough. But no one, at least not me, is asking you to believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a messiah. I am only presenting him as a very good reformer and someone who was filled with Ilm and Irfan, and surely you can benefit a lot from reading his writings as I have.

Now you are referring to the incident with Sanaullah Amritsari, but I'm sure you have never heard of Ghulam Ahmad's prophecies and contests with Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri, John Alexander Dowie of America and Pundit Lekh Ram (a Hindu Arya). Read about these and you will truly be amazed that they were Signs of God that favored Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 02:51:08 AM
I'll just briefly show you the heavenly Sign in favor of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani regarding his prediction about John Alexander Dowie. The latter was a false prophet in America who used to ridicule Islam and abuse the name of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Ghulam Ahmad predicted the miserable end of John Alexander Dowie, who was later exposed as a fraud embezzling donations of his followers, and as a drunkard and immoral person. When he suddenly died, a secular American newspaper, The Sunday Herald (Boston) published on their front page June 23, 1907:

GREAT IS MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD THE MESSIAH: FORETOLD PATHETIC END OF DOWIE

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uYcl1Iafz70/Ut1Eb0p_gEI/AAAAAAAAAbU/an25g1jh3es/s1600/june-23.png)

Read about the details here:
https://trueprophecies.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/dowies-prayer-duel-with-ahmad-as/
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Farid on July 05, 2017, 03:00:40 AM
Quote
Is the current leader of the ahmediyya/qadiani sect fluent in arabic? Is he a qualified muffasir?

Current leader? Perhaps this should be asked about the mutanabi Mirza Ghulam whose only contribution to Islamic sciences is his claim to being a messiah/mahdi.

I read his book on Shiasm. Pretty weak stuff. I wouldn't publish it on the site, since it is not up to par with our standards.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hadrami on July 05, 2017, 09:05:01 AM
I'll just briefly show you the heavenly Sign in favor of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani
here we go again, this guy is so not a qadiyani 😂😂

Id say died in his own shit after a mubahala might be a "heavenly Sign" too
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 09:57:42 AM

here we go again, this guy is so not a qadiyani 😂😂

Id say died in his own shit after a mubahala might be a "heavenly Sign" too

What kind of language is that on an Islamic discussion board? I already proved that there was no mubahala between Ghulam Ahmad and Sanaullah.

The kind of attack you are doing on Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani is exactly the kind of attack Christians, like David Woods, do on the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam).

Is it not true that they say the Qur'an says that if the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) were to attribute any saying to Allah that Allah didn't say, then Allah would grab the Prophet by his right hand and sever his jugular vein?

Then they present the Hadith when the Prophet عليه السلام was dying that he told Ummul Mu'mineen Aisha رضى الله عنه I feel the effects of the poisoned meat I ate at Khyber which is cutting my jugular vein.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 05, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I read his book on Shiasm. Pretty weak stuff. I wouldn't publish it on the site, since it is not up to par with our standards.

And here is a more balanced and truthful review of the same book by our friend Hani:

Quote from: Hani
I finished "secret of Caliphate" by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of the Qadiyanis.

It's a small book, Sunni in it's contents, consisting of a tiny number of arguments, the arguments are good but popular and known, nothing new, the English translation is eloquent and beautiful.

No need to recommend this book to anybody.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hadrami on July 05, 2017, 11:02:19 AM
The kind of attack you are doing on Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani is exactly the kind of attack Christians, like David Woods, do on the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam).
[/font][/size]
dont compare a false prophet who died on his poop with a true prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam. Ghulam better be compared with musaylama for all i care
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hani on July 05, 2017, 08:46:45 PM
Quote
Is the current leader of the ahmediyya/qadiani sect fluent in arabic? Is he a qualified muffasir?

Current leader? Perhaps this should be asked about the mutanabi Mirza Ghulam whose only contribution to Islamic sciences is his claim to being a messiah/mahdi.

I read his book on Shiasm. Pretty weak stuff. I wouldn't publish it on the site, since it is not up to par with our standards.

I'd say these are the issues with his book:

A- The whole book is poetic filler content and could have been written in six pages as opposed to fifty.
B- The arguments are strong but they're not new, they're very common and basic.
C- There aren't many arguments in the book.

So as I previously said, I wouldn't recommend it but I wouldn't prohibit anyone from checking it out.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 06, 2017, 12:33:38 AM

GREAT IS MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD THE MESSIAH: FORETOLD PATHETIC END OF DOWIE


What about his Prophecy where he claimed he would write 50 volumes, and ended up writing 5? When asked about it, he said the difference between 50 and 5 is just a dot.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 01:10:31 AM

What about his Prophecy where he claimed he would write 50 volumes, and ended up writing 5? When asked about it, he said the difference between 50 and 5 is just a dot.

He meant that the value of these 5 books is equivalent to 50, similar to the Hadith of Mi'raj where we learn that offering the 5 obligatory Salat is equivalent to offering 50 which was the original command of Allah.

but in fact, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote over 80 books, let alone 50, all for the same purpose of Barahin e Ahmadiyya, whose full title is actually Al Baraheen al Ahmadiyya ala Haqiyyat Kitab Allah al Quraan wan Nubuwwat al Muhammadiya

Another point to keep in mind is that if hypothetically Ghulam Ahmad said he would write 50 books but only ended up writing 5 doesn't mean he is a liar. Otherwise, I'm sure you know the story of when the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, as indicated in Surah al Kahf, that he would get the answer to the questions of the Jewish rabbis "tomorrow" without saying "In Sha Allah", then the Angel didn't come that day, and Allah reprimanded the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and said don't say I will do something tomorrow except that you say alongside "If Allah wills".

So can anyone say that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم lied (God forbid) when he said I will do it tomorrow? All I say is that don't have a double standard and keep everyone to the same standard.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 06, 2017, 01:30:18 AM

What about his Prophecy where he claimed he would write 50 volumes, and ended up writing 5? When asked about it, he said the difference between 50 and 5 is just a dot.

He meant that the value of these 5 books is equivalent to 50, similar to the Hadith of Mi'raj where we learn that offering the 5 obligatory Salat is equivalent to offering 50 which was the original command of Allah.

How do you know that's what he meant? He never explained it with the anology that you used.
Quote
Another point to keep in mind is that if hypothetically Ghulam Ahmad said he would write 50 books but only ended up writing 5 doesn't mean he is a liar.

But for this case it wasn't  missing inshallah which caused this happen. He actually replied by saying its just a dot. I mean you group donates a minimum of 6.5% of your income every month. If Mizra can get away by saying the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot, can a Qadiani donate 0.65% since all this is moving a decimal place? Or instead of donating $50 can a Qadiani donate $5 instead?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 01:36:19 AM

What about his Prophecy where he claimed he would write 50 volumes, and ended up writing 5? When asked about it, he said the difference between 50 and 5 is just a dot.

He meant that the value of these 5 books is equivalent to 50, similar to the Hadith of Mi'raj where we learn that offering the 5 obligatory Salat is equivalent to offering 50 which was the original command of Allah.

How do you know that's what he meant? He never explained it with the anology that you used.
Quote
Another point to keep in mind is that if hypothetically Ghulam Ahmad said he would write 50 books but only ended up writing 5 doesn't mean he is a liar.

But for this case it wasn't  missing inshallah which caused this happen. He actually replied by saying its just a dot. I mean you group donates a minimum of 6.5% of your income every month. If Mizra can get away by saying the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot, can a Qadiani donate 0.65% since all this is moving a decimal place? Or instead of donating $50 can a Qadiani donate $5 instead?

If the argument is regarding subscription, that you donated funds expecting 50 books and only got 5, then the answer to that specific objection is that Ghulam Ahmad wrote over 80 books let alone 50 with the money he acquired from the subscriptions. He wrote Baraheen al Ahmadiyya for the objective of proving the truth of the Quran and the Prophethood of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم that was the objective and purpose of the Baraheen e Ahmadiyya series. Now we know that in fact he wrote some 80 books for this same purpose. What difference does it make if they have a different title, the substance of the books is what matters. And his specific point about saying that the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot is a clear reference to the Hadith of Mi'raj (5 prayers = 50), it means the value of these 5 books is such that it is equivalent to 50 volumes.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 06, 2017, 01:52:14 AM
[
If the argument is regarding subscription, that you donated funds expecting 50 books and only got 5, then the answer to that specific objection is that Ghulam Ahmad wrote over 80 books let alone 50 with the money he acquired from the subscriptions. He wrote Baraheen al Ahmadiyya for the objective of proving the truth of the Quran and the Prophethood of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم that was the objective and purpose of the Baraheen e Ahmadiyya series. Now we know that in fact he wrote some 80 books for this same purpose. What difference does it make if they have a different title, the substance of the books is what matters. And his specific point about saying that the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot is a clear reference to the Hadith of Mi'raj (5 prayers = 50), it means the value of these 5 books is such that it is equivalent to 50 volumes.[/size][/font]

But that's what  not what happened. You said he wrote 80 books in total. On the contrary, for Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya alone he claimed he is going to write 50 volumes.  When asked  he replied that the difference between the 50 and 5 is just a dot. Did he reference Miraj after that? Or was this defense created after?

Also, you did not answer my question. What if a Qadiani followed the Sunnah of Mizra and wanted to donate .65% of his monthly in happiness instead of 6.5% ? Wouldn't this be considered a Sunnah of Mizra Ghulaam Ahmad?


Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 02:32:15 AM

But that's what  not what happened. You said he wrote 80 books in total. On the contrary, for Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya alone he claimed he is going to write 50 volumes.  When asked  he replied that the difference between the 50 and 5 is just a dot. Did he reference Miraj after that? Or was this defense created after?

Also, you did not answer my question. What if a Qadiani followed the Sunnah of Mizra and wanted to donate .65% of his monthly in happiness instead of 6.5% ? Wouldn't this be considered a Sunnah of Mizra Ghulaam Ahmad?

He did not explicitly reference the Mi'raj, but the comparison between 50 and 5 is an implicit reference to it. Keep in mind Ghulam Ahmad is writing for a Muslim and religious audience, it is not necessary to reference every parable explicitly, those who have even a basic knowledge of Religion will immediately discern the Ishara

As for your latter point, it is not at all the Sunnah of Mirza as you claim. In fact, Mirza sahib offered to refund those who were complaining about not receiving 50 volumes of Baraheen-e-Ahmadiyya provided they first return their 4 volumes. This fact itself destroys your entire objection.

“Any person who has any complaints regarding this issue can contact me by post and I will  arrange for the money to be returned to them. I will delegate someone in their area to take  the books back and return them their money. I also forgive them for all their abuses and  slander upon me for the sake of Allah because I don’t want anyone to be punished in the  hereafter for this. In a situation where the buyer of the book has passed away and their children would like their money back then they can get it in the same way.” (Tabligh-e-Risaalat vol. 3  page 35)
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Farid on July 06, 2017, 03:04:35 AM
Quote
Is the current leader of the ahmediyya/qadiani sect fluent in arabic? Is he a qualified muffasir?

Current leader? Perhaps this should be asked about the mutanabi Mirza Ghulam whose only contribution to Islamic sciences is his claim to being a messiah/mahdi.

I read his book on Shiasm. Pretty weak stuff. I wouldn't publish it on the site, since it is not up to par with our standards.

I'd say these are the issues with his book:

A- The whole book is poetic filler content and could have been written in six pages as opposed to fifty.
B- The arguments are strong but they're not new, they're very common and basic.
C- There aren't many arguments in the book.

So as I previously said, I wouldn't recommend it but I wouldn't prohibit anyone from checking it out.

Would you go out of your way to upload it to the site?

Also, is it the level of the work of an expert on the subject let alone a prophet?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hani on July 06, 2017, 03:46:58 AM
It's the work of a poet. His arguments were very basic and commonly found in books that preceded him. He probably quoted an argument or two from those books and filled the rest with eloquent speech. There's nothing new, I wouldn't waste my time uploading it.

As for him being a prophet, if anything this book proves he isn't even remotely qualified to write on this topic. To me, the man is an intelligent scholar with potential who was tempted with money and bought by you know who.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Farid on July 06, 2017, 04:06:52 AM
Quote
I wouldn't waste my time uploading it.

Shukran.

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 04:10:32 AM
Quote
I wouldn't waste my time uploading it.

Shukran.

You can read it and download it online:

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/sirrul/sirrulkhilafahsecretofexistence.pdf

It was originally written in Arabic and translated into Urdu. If you understand those languages you can read it here ( Arabic & Urdu parallel text)

https://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Sirrul-Khalafa-Urdu.pdf
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hadrami on July 06, 2017, 04:55:01 AM
i dont get it why some people here believes hes not a qadiyani. The guy went head over heels to defend that die in his poopoo false prophet and call him as someone who is worthy of praise. This ghulam's fan is on par with shia when it comes to lying. This is a sunni - shia forum, not a sunni qadiyani forum. Can we not waste anymore of our time with non sunni shia discussion.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Farid on July 06, 2017, 04:57:52 AM
Quote
I wouldn't waste my time uploading it.

Shukran.

You can read it and download it online:

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/sirrul/sirrulkhilafahsecretofexistence.pdf

It was originally written in Arabic and translated into Urdu. If you understand those languages you can read it here ( Arabic & Urdu parallel text)

https://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Sirrul-Khalafa-Urdu.pdf


I already said that I read it. Please be a fair judge and compare it to the quality of the articles on the site.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 05:05:22 AM

I already said that I read it. Please be a fair judge and compare it to the quality of the articles on the site.

It isn't meant to be a long winded academic refutation of Shi'ism, only a defense of the Khulafa al Rashidin Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman رضى الله عنهم against the accusations of the Shi'a. Its objective is to elucidate Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani's creed and position regarding the contentious issue of Khilafa and the status of the Sahaba. It's a book written for the laity, i.e. ordinary Muslims, not for academics, hence why it is not as "technical" as you guys think it should be. Furthermore, Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani himself writes in this book that he doesn't want to delve into the chronicles and historical accounts, but present his creed regarding the status of the Khulafa al Rashidin and Sahaba in light of the Holy Qur'an.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 06, 2017, 05:15:52 AM

He did not explicitly reference the Mi'raj, but the comparison between 50 and 5 is an implicit reference to it. Keep in mind Ghulam Ahmad is writing for a Muslim and religious audience, it is not necessary to reference every parable explicitly, those who have even a basic knowledge of Religion will immediately discern the Ishara
The analogy is flawed various reasons.

Mirza said he would write 50 volumes and wrote 5. While for the 50 prayers it was ordered, and then requested to be cut down to 5. Next the how Miraj occurred is not agreed upon by all Muslims. The Mutazilla were  the first Muslims to believe it was a dream. So how would you explain this analogy to them? In fact they don't even believe this 50 prayers event.  The hadith on the Miraj are not muatwatir. The only binding information is what's in the Quran.
Also, if 50 was metaphorical number then how come Mizra become literal when it comes to sending lanat. He literally wrote lana 1000x.

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-51qzSPYSEBo/U4dzW8GD9RI/AAAAAAAAAak/L7ed9xk3IC4/s1600/16.jpg)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WKxLcfKp9Ak/U4dzXKTKcQI/AAAAAAAAAao/8Y2XmqWVsd0/s1600/17.jpg)




Quote
As for your latter point, it is not at all the Sunnah of Mirza as you claim. In fact, Mirza sahib offered to refund those who were complaining about not receiving 50 volumes of Baraheen-e-Ahmadiyya provided they first return their 4 volumes. This fact itself destroys your entire objection.
I am not even referring to people funding the people did toward Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. What I am taking about is the money donation you give to your Ahmadiyah jamaat of 6.5% every month. Can one pay .65% as a Sunnah of Mirza Ghulaam instead of 6.5%?


Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 06, 2017, 06:10:35 AM
Mirza said he would write 50 volumes and wrote 5. While for the 50 prayers it was ordered, and then requested to be cut down to 5.

The point is that Allah said the offering of these 5 Maktoobaat prayers is equivalent to offering 50 prayers. Not only this, there are many Ahadith which suggest that good deeds are multiplied tenfold; so the offering of a single good deed with utmost sincerity is equivalent to its tenfold in the sight of Allah. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "There will come a time in which whoever does a tenth of what he has been ordered shall be saved." (Tirmidhi: Isnaduhu Hasan)

Quote
Next the how Miraj occurred is not agreed upon by all Muslims. The Mutazilla were  the first Muslims to believe it was a dream. So how would you explain this analogy to them?

Whether the Mi'raj was a dream or not is irrelevant to the point. If you are a Mu'tazilite that is your business, but the majority of Muslims accept this Hadith of the story of how 50 prayers was reduced to 5. I cannot amend my arguments to accommodate the doubts of all sorts of bizarre and obscure sects.

In fact, I also believe that the Mi'raj was not a bodily ascension but rather the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was raised up in spirit. Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani has explained that in Mi'raj, the Spirit of the Prophet took on the form of a body of light which was able to travel up into the Heavens, whereas, the earthen flesh and blood body Jasad al-Unsari is unable to withstand the realities of other dimensions beyond this, and cannot survive or travel at such speed into the 7 Heavens. So I also believe it was a kind of powerful Vision which happens through spiritual ascension, though not merely an ordinary dream as you say the Mu'tazila believed.


Quote
In fact they don't even believe this 50 prayers event.

As I said, what they believe is irrelevant. We are going by what is said in the Hadith which is accepted by the majority of Muslims of Ahlus Sunnati wal-Jama'ah.

Quote
Also, if 50 was metaphorical number then how come Mizra become literal when it comes to sending lanat. He literally wrote lana 1000x.

This is totally immaterial and going off track. I never said 50 is a "metaphorical" number. Only that the 5 volumes that Ghulam Ahmad wrote, due to their quality and brilliance, are equivalent to 50 volumes.

Quote
I am not even referring to people funding the people did toward Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. What I am taking about is the money donation you give to your Ahmadiyah jamaat of 6.5% every month. Can one pay .65% as a Sunnah of Mirza Ghulaam instead of 6.5%?

First you have to prove that it is the Sunnah of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. You are bringing up all sorts of red herrings. We are talking about describing the quality of something by comparing with quantity. For example, I can say "this man is so strong. He is equivalent to five men", it means his strength is such that he is the match of five men. This is comparing the quality of his strength and quantifying it for the comparison. But this cannot apply to the value of money. You cannot say "my five dollars is equivalent to fifty dollars" because money's value is only in its quantity, not in its quality.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Farid on July 06, 2017, 05:45:09 PM

I already said that I read it. Please be a fair judge and compare it to the quality of the articles on the site.

It isn't meant to be a long winded academic refutation of Shi'ism, only a defense of the Khulafa al Rashidin Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman رضى الله عنهم against the accusations of the Shi'a. Its objective is to elucidate Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani's creed and position regarding the contentious issue of Khilafa and the status of the Sahaba. It's a book written for the laity, i.e. ordinary Muslims, not for academics, hence why it is not as "technical" as you guys think it should be. Furthermore, Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani himself writes in this book that he doesn't want to delve into the chronicles and historical accounts, but present his creed regarding the status of the Khulafa al Rashidin and Sahaba in light of the Holy Qur'an.

Nah, I have seen books that are written for the laity that aren't too complicated as well, and the authors do a much better job than MGA.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 07, 2017, 12:44:36 AM


Whether the Mi'raj was a dream or not is irrelevant to the point. If you are a Mu'tazilite that is your business, but the majority of Muslims accept this Hadith of the story of how 50 prayers was reduced to 5. I cannot amend my arguments to accommodate the doubts of all sorts of bizarre and obscure sects.

That's why I am interested in learning what Mirza Ghulaam said in response to writing 5 volumes instead of 50. He never used the Miraj example, all he did is state that the difference is a dot. Your claim that it is similar to Miraj is irrelevant because if Mirza was your Prophet surely he would have more to say on the topic other than the stating that the difference between the two is zero.

Also, just because majority of the Muslim accept a narration doesn't automatically mean it qualifies as a Mutawatir. Since, its not a Mutawatir, it would not be kufr to reject the narration.
 
Quote
In fact, I also believe that the Mi'raj was not a bodily ascension but rather the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was raised up in spirit. Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani has explained that in Mi'raj, the Spirit of the Prophet took on the form of a body of light which was able to travel up into the Heavens, whereas, the earthen flesh and blood body Jasad al-Unsari is unable to withstand the realities of other dimensions beyond this, and cannot survive or travel at such speed into the 7 Heavens. So I also believe it was a kind of powerful Vision which happens through spiritual ascension, though not merely an ordinary dream as you say the Mu'tazila believed.[/size][/font]
Yes there are different points of view. However, if the narration is not qualified as a mutawatir its not binding on the Muslim.


Quote

As I said, what they believe is irrelevant. We are going by what is said in the Hadith which is accepted by the majority of Muslims of Ahlus Sunnati wal-Jama'ah.
But I want Mirza Ghulam's defense. I don't want your personal defense or explanation.

 


Quote

This is totally immaterial and going off track. I never said 50 is a "metaphorical" number. Only that the 5 volumes that Ghulam Ahmad wrote, due to their quality and brilliance, are equivalent to 50 volumes.
So his other books do not have this quality and brilliance?

Quote
I

First you have to prove that it is the Sunnah of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. You are bringing up all sorts of red herrings. We are talking about describing the quality of something by comparing with quantity. For example, I can say "this man is so strong. He is equivalent to five men", it means his strength is such that he is the match of five men. This is comparing the quality of his strength and quantifying it for the comparison. But this cannot apply to the value of money. You cannot say "my five dollars is equivalent to fifty dollars" because money's value is only in its quantity, not in its quality.

Its Sunnah because Mirza Ghulaam said the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot. Likewise the difference between 6.5% and .65% percent is just a decimal place if we were to look at it his way.

Also, you quoted this hadith:

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "There will come a time in which whoever does a tenth of what he has been ordered shall be saved." (Tirmidhi: Isnaduhu Hasan)

With the current economical challenges such as high rent, low income, debt, taxes a Qadiani should be able to pay .65% instead of 6.5%
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 07, 2017, 01:10:13 AM

That's why I am interested in learning what Mirza Ghulaam said in response to writing 5 volumes instead of 50. He never used the Miraj example, all he did is state that the difference is a dot. Your claim that it is similar to Miraj is irrelevant because if Mirza was your Prophet surely he would have more to say on the topic other than the stating that the difference between the two is zero.

Sir I already answered this objection of yours. Let me repeat what I said:

Quote
He did not explicitly reference the Mi'raj, but the comparison between 50 and 5 is an implicit reference to it. Keep in mind Ghulam Ahmad is writing for a Muslim and religious audience, it is not necessary to reference every parable explicitly, those who have even a basic knowledge of Religion will immediately discern the Ishara


Quote
Also, just because majority of the Muslim accept a narration doesn't automatically mean it qualifies as a Mutawatir. Since, its not a Mutawatir, it would not be kufr to reject the narration.

But it is misguidance and deviation from the truth to so carelessly reject an authentic Hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم especially such a Hadith which has been accepted by the vast majority of the Umma.
 

Quote
if the narration is not qualified as a mutawatir its not binding on the Muslim.

That is incorrect. Whatever is authentically established from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is binding upon the Muslims to accept and have faith in. To disbelieve in what is authentically established from Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم especially so carelessly and arbitrarily, is undoubtedly severe misguidance from the straight path, even if you say it's technically not Kufr.

Quote
So his other books do not have this quality and brilliance?

Of course they do. Affirming the virtue of something doesn't entail negating the virtue of something else. Simple logic.

Quote
Its Sunnah because Mirza Ghulaam said the difference between 50 and 5 is a dot. Likewise the difference between 6.5% and .65% percent is just a decimal place if we were to look at it his way.

Also, you quoted this hadith:

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "There will come a time in which whoever does a tenth of what he has been ordered shall be saved." (Tirmidhi: Isnaduhu Hasan)

With the current economical challenges such as high rent, low income, debt, taxes a Qadiani should be able to pay .65% instead of 6.5%

Firstly where are you getting this 6.5% figure from? The figure is 6.25% (chanda aam). And in fact the Ahmadiyya Jama'at does accept chanda lower than this from its registered members if they are having any kind of personal financial difficulties (high rent, low income, debt, taxes, etc.).

But my point is that the value of money is fixed and is not qualitative, whereas the value of things like books is qualitative. Something which is qualitative can be compared as being the equivalent of x number of something of the same genus. Simple logic. It can be said, this book is of such quality that it is equivalent to x number of books on the same subject. But it cannot be said, this $1 dollar bill is of such quality that it is equivalent to 10 other $1 dollar bills, because the value of money is quantitative not qualitative.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 07, 2017, 01:36:21 AM


Sir I already answered this objection of yours. Let me repeat what I said:
That's the issue. I don't want your personal answer. I want to see how Mirza responded other than saying the difference is zero.
 


Quote
He did not explicitly reference the Mi'raj, but the comparison between 50 and 5 is an implicit reference to it. Keep in mind Ghulam Ahmad is writing for a Muslim and religious audience, it is not necessary to reference every parable explicitly, those who have even a basic knowledge of Religion will immediately discern the Ishara

But who made it an implicit reference? Did Mizra Ghulaam say its an implicit reference, or did the people after say this is the case.




Quote

But it is misguidance and deviation from the truth to so carelessly reject an authentic Hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم especially such a Hadith which has been accepted by the vast majority of the Umma.



The hadith are not protected the way the Quran is projected. On top of that majority of the ummah are not scholars. 
 
 

Quote

That is incorrect. Whatever is authentically established from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is binding upon the Muslims to accept and have faith in. To disbelieve in what is authentically established from Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم especially so carelessly and arbitrarily, is undoubtedly severe misguidance from the straight path, even if you say it's technically not Kufr.
The hadith are not protected like the Quran. So differences can occur and its not a severe misguidance. In reality its not kufr at all. On the contrary, this is not the case with Muatawir hadith.







Quote

Firstly where are you getting this 6.5% figure from? The figure is 6.25% (chanda aam). And in fact the Ahmadiyya Jama'at does accept chanda lower than this from its registered members if they are having any kind of personal financial difficulties (high rent, low income, debt, taxes, etc.).
Okay, I didn't know this. Thanks

Quote
But my point is that the value of money is fixed and is not qualitative, whereas the value of things like books is qualitative. Something which is qualitative can be compared as being the equivalent of x number of something of the same genus. Simple logic. It can be said, this book is of such quality that it is equivalent to x number of books on the same subject. But it cannot be said, this $1 dollar bill is of such quality that it is equivalent to 10 other $1 dollar bills, because the value of money is quantitative not qualitative.[/size][/font]

But the issue is he said he is going to write 50 volumes, and he didn't and then made an excuse that the difference between 50 and 5 is just zero.

However, when he wanted to send lana 1000x he actually literally wrote it. Couldn't he just write it once and say its equal to 1000, and then respond by saying its only 3 dots after 1?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 07, 2017, 01:45:40 AM
@zulfiqar

Ironic that you tell off the brother rationalist for going against the majority of the ummah & an authentic hadith😂😂😂😂

I honstly can't take you serious at this point.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 08, 2017, 12:30:12 PM
@zulfiqar

You cite a proof of mirzas position the hadith of the lunar & solar eclipse.

Tell me is this hadith authentic or week/fabricated?

Also it states the beginning and middle of ramadan and not the 15th/28th. (Please don't do you tawil & try to give a different meaning to the beginning & middle of the month).

Finally, mirza claimed he is right as no other claimant made the claim regarding the eclipses, yet history documents several figures before and after him.





Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 02:01:50 PM
@zulfiqar

You cite a proof of mirzas position the hadith of the lunar & solar eclipse.

Tell me is this hadith authentic or week/fabricated?

Also it states the beginning and middle of ramadan and not the 15th/28th. (Please don't do you tawil & try to give a different meaning to the beginning & middle of the month).

Finally, mirza claimed he is right as no other claimant made the claim regarding the eclipses, yet history documents several figures before and after him.

The Hadith is certainly not fabricated, though it may have weakness. Now keep in mind this Hadith contains a prophecy. Hypothetically if you came across a prophecy from a weak Hadith which you saw as being fulfilled or knew for sure had been fulfilled, would you still deny the Hadith because of some weakness in its Sanad? In fact there are narrations that we know for a fact are outright fabrications, yet some of today's Ulama cling to them and quote them because they contain predictions which have turned out to be true. Hamza Yusuf (I assume you know of him) quoted a Hadith which is weak as containing an accurate prediction regarding Daesh. It it attributed to sayyidina Amir ul Mumineen رضى الله عنه and says:
إِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الرَّايَاتِ السُّودَ فَالْزَمُوا الأَرْضَ فَلا تُحَرِّكُوا أَيْدِيَكُمْ ، وَلا أَرْجُلَكُمْ ، ثُمَّ يَظْهَرُ قَوْمٌ ضُعَفَاءُ لا يُؤْبَهُ لَهُمْ ، قُلُوبُهُمْ كَزُبَرِ الْحَدِيدِ ، هُمْ أَصْحَابُ الدَّوْلَةِ ، لا يَفُونَ بِعَهْدٍ وَلا مِيثَاقٍ ، يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْحَقِّ وَلَيْسُوا مِنْ أَهْلِهِ ، أَسْمَاؤُهُمُ الْكُنَى ، وَنِسْبَتُهُمُ الْقُرَى ، وَشُعُورُهُمْ مُرْخَاةٌ كَشُعُورِ النِّسَاءِ ، حَتَّى يَخْتَلِفُوا فِيمَا بَيْنَهُمْ ، ثُمَّ يُؤْتِي اللَّهُ الْحَقَّ مَنْ يَشَاءُ
"When you see black flags, remain where you are and do not move your hands or your feet. Thereafter there shall appear a feeble folk to whom no concern is given. Their hearts will be like fragments of iron. They are the representatives of the State [AsHab al-Dawla]. They will fulfill neither covenant nor agreement. They will invite to the Truth though they are not from its people. Their names will be Kunaa (i.e. Abu Musab, Abu Bakr, etc.), and their ascriptions will be to Quraa (villages, towns i.e. al-Zarqawi, al-Baghdadi). Their hair will be long like that of women. They will remain so till they differ among themselves, and then God will bring forth the Truth from whomsoever He wills." (Kitab al-Fitan of Nuaym b. Hammad)

Now this Hadith is weak and before the emergence of Daesh one would have considered it as nothing more than an anti-Abbasid fabrication. But Hamza Yusuf was so moved by this Hadith on how incredibly accurate it is in describing Daesh and its Fitna that he quoted it in a sermon and despite knowing about its weakness declared it a true prophecy which must have come from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

So we come to know that a Hadith which has weakness, if it contains a prediction which has so obviously come to pass then there could be some truth to it in originating from Rasul Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم

So while there is some weakness in the Hadith about the lunar and solar eclipse occurring in the month of Ramadan as one of the heavenly signs of the Mahdi, it does have a supporting narration from Sharik as quoted in al-Hawi Lil Fatawa of Imam Suyuti:

وأخرج نعيم عن شريك قال : بلغني أنه قبل خروج المهدي ينكسف القمر في شهر رمضان مرتين

As for your point regarding the beginning and middle of Ramadan, if you mean to say that the moon should be eclipsed on the first night of Ramadan then that is impossible. Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyya said that the lunar eclipse can only occur on the 13th, 14th and 15th of the month (Majmu al Fatawa: Bab Khusuf al Qamar)

Likewise the solar eclipse will be in the middle of the possible days it can occur (27th, 28th, or 29th) so would have to occur on the 28th of the month.

Finally you say that history documents the repetition of this sign many times in the past. The point is that has any claimant of being the Mahdi pointed to the occurrence of this Sign as being in his favor?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 08, 2017, 02:40:01 PM
It clearly states the first night of ramadan.

The fact that its weak & the event has never occurred may explain why many wouldn't cite it as evidence?

What is clear is that mirza ghulam proved he is a liar by amending the dates on this weak hadith to make his claim.

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 08, 2017, 02:44:08 PM
It clearly states the first night of ramadan.

The fact that its weak & has never occurred is may explain why many wouldn't cite it as evidence?

What is clear is that mirza ghulam proved he is a liar by amending the dates on this weak hadith to make his claim.

I'm not here to be an apologist for Ghulam Ahmad. But honesty and objectivity demands that if hypothetically the Hadith were to be authentic with this wording then no person of knowledge would interpret it as meaning the lunar eclipse is suppose to occur on the first night of Ramadan, since that is impossible as Shaykh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyya رحمه الله said.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 08, 2017, 03:05:38 PM
So its weak, its impossible in the sense it has never occurred thus far.

Mirza clearly lied by altering the first night to the middle of ramadan.



Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 09, 2017, 01:17:05 AM

The Hadith is certainly not fabricated, though it may have weakness. Now keep in mind this Hadith contains a prophecy. Hypothetically if you came across a prophecy from a weak Hadith which you saw as being fulfilled or knew for sure had been fulfilled, would you still deny the Hadith because of some weakness in its Sanad? In fact there are narrations that we know for a fact are outright fabrications, yet some of today's Ulama cling to them and quote them because they contain predictions which have turned out to be true. Hamza Yusuf (I assume you know of him) quoted a Hadith which is weak as containing an accurate prediction regarding Daesh. It it attributed to sayyidina Amir ul Mumineen رضى الله عنه and says:
إِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الرَّايَاتِ السُّودَ فَالْزَمُوا الأَرْضَ فَلا تُحَرِّكُوا أَيْدِيَكُمْ ، وَلا أَرْجُلَكُمْ ، ثُمَّ يَظْهَرُ قَوْمٌ ضُعَفَاءُ لا يُؤْبَهُ لَهُمْ ، قُلُوبُهُمْ كَزُبَرِ الْحَدِيدِ ، هُمْ أَصْحَابُ الدَّوْلَةِ ، لا يَفُونَ بِعَهْدٍ وَلا مِيثَاقٍ ، يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْحَقِّ وَلَيْسُوا مِنْ أَهْلِهِ ، أَسْمَاؤُهُمُ الْكُنَى ، وَنِسْبَتُهُمُ الْقُرَى ، وَشُعُورُهُمْ مُرْخَاةٌ كَشُعُورِ النِّسَاءِ ، حَتَّى يَخْتَلِفُوا فِيمَا بَيْنَهُمْ ، ثُمَّ يُؤْتِي اللَّهُ الْحَقَّ مَنْ يَشَاءُ
"When you see black flags, remain where you are and do not move your hands or your feet. Thereafter there shall appear a feeble folk to whom no concern is given. Their hearts will be like fragments of iron. They are the representatives of the State [AsHab al-Dawla]. They will fulfill neither covenant nor agreement. They will invite to the Truth though they are not from its people. Their names will be Kunaa (i.e. Abu Musab, Abu Bakr, etc.), and their ascriptions will be to Quraa (villages, towns i.e. al-Zarqawi, al-Baghdadi). Their hair will be long like that of women. They will remain so till they differ among themselves, and then God will bring forth the Truth from whomsoever He wills." (Kitab al-Fitan of Nuaym b. Hammad)

I know the scholars that still reject the hadith. A hadith based on some truth is not binding on someone's aqeeda. 
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:40:25 AM
I know the scholars that still reject the hadith. A hadith based on some truth is not binding on someone's aqeeda.

You said that you don't consider anything binding unless it has Tawaatur. Does that mean you don't consider the facts of Nuzul al Masih, Adhab al Qabr, Zuhur al Mahdi, Khuruj ad Dajjal, the Mizan, the Sirat, Sun rising from West before Judgment Day, etc., are not part of the Aqida?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 04:56:23 AM
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,
Seeing the antics and trickery of the closet-Qadiani in our midst here, I cannot help but remember what brother Nouman Ali Khan said regarding this religion.  Not verbatim but he said something to the effect that Allah (swt) blesses people when they approach the Qur'an in whatever context he or she approaches it.  If they come seeking guidance, Allah (swt) will guide them.  However, if they come to find criticism, they find that in abundance as well (although the "criticism" they find, I must say, is nothing but a manifestation of their own ignorance).
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 05:12:25 AM
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,
Seeing the antics and trickery of the closet-Qadiani in our midst here, I cannot help but remember what brother Nouman Ali Khan said regarding this religion.  Not verbatim but he said something to the effect that Allah (swt) blesses people when they approach the Qur'an in whatever context he or she approaches it.  If they come seeking guidance, Allah (swt) will guide them.  However, if they come to find criticism, they find that in abundance as well (although the "criticism" they find, I must say, is nothing but a manifestation of their own ignorance).

This is the same Nouman Ali Khan who doesn't know basic Arabic vocabulary and has somehow become a big shot Mufassir of the Holy Qur'an. Remember when he said the dog mentioned in Surah al Kahf has to be an animal because it says its paws were outstretched, and he said the word ذِرَاعَيْهِ means "its paws". What an embarrassment!

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 05:12:39 AM
I'll just briefly show you the heavenly Sign in favor of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani

I'll extensively show you the shameful existence of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani in this world and we all know his despicable end which did not afford him to even recite the shahada, due to extreme dehydration that made it impossible for him to speak or recite anything.

On May 22, 1893 lasting till June 5, 1893, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad debated Abdullah Khan Atham, a retired deputy commissioner and a Christian.  Toward the end of the debate, the Christians brought one blind, one deaf, and one paralyzed individual to the debate and challenged Mirza to cure them as Jesus (asws) had done.  Mirza was not able to cure any of them and seeing his embarrassment, it is reported in Roohani Khazaen that many Qadianis left Mirza and converted to Christianity.

Following the debate, on June 5th 1893, Mirza said that he had received a prophecy from Allah (swt) and said, "When I humbly entreated and implored God Almighty and prayed to Him to show me the details of the matter, He indicated to me that the liar will die within 15 months (before September 5, 1894), provided he does not return to the truth (Islam); and he who is on the truth and believes in true God, his honor will be restored and when this prophecy is fulfilled some blind man will start seeing, paralyzed start walking, and deaf start hearing.  I admit that if this prophecy proves to be False, I am prepared for every punishment.  My face should be blackened and I should be hanged.  I swear by the Mighty Allah that what I have said will happen.  It must happen.  It is possible that the earth may be changed for another earth and the sky may be replaced by another sky, but it is not possible for God's word to change -- prepare for me a cross if my falsehood is exposed and curse me more than the Satans and the evil persons are cursed."  (Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 6, P. 292-293; Jang-i-Maqaddas, P. 188)

After many failed attempts at Atham's life, Mirza pronounced many other prophecies (regarding the fate of Atham) none of which came true.  You can read all the detailed accounts at http://www.irshad.org/qadianism/prophecb.php

You might also find his "Heavenly Sign" if you read about his debate with Dr. Abdul Hakim, an ex-Qadiani who left Qadianism during the lifetime of Mirza while challenging and badly exposing him: http://irshad.org/qadianism/prophecg.php
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 05:17:39 AM
This is the same Nouman Ali Khan who doesn't know basic Arabic vocabulary and has somehow become a big shot Mufassir of the Holy Qur'an. Remember when he said the dog mentioned in Surah al Kahf has to be an animal because it says its paws were outstretched, and he said the word ذِرَاعَيْهِ means "its paws". What an embarrassment!

Funny that you should quote a nutjob like Abu Mussab who would not hesitate a second to call you a kaffir and make your blood halaal for the ummah.  Having said that, Nouman Ali Khan can school your fifth "Caliph", the one who cannot even speak basic Arabic, let alone have a strong grip on classical Arabic.

Out of curiosity, do you live in Toronto?  If yes, are you an Afghan converted to Qadianism?  Way back in the days, I used to visit an Afghan forum where we had an Afghan convert to Qadianism from Toronto high on "Love for All, Hatred for None" BS, loaded with Qadiani funds to propagate his filth among the online Afghan community.  Speaking of dogs, he was chased away like a dog....and he didn't even have paws, at least not literally.  Metaphorically....well, I will let you have at it since splitting hair is a Qadiani specialty.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 05:28:11 AM
Funny that you should quote a nutjob like Abu Mussab

Abu Mussab is irrelevant. The point is your Nouman Ali Khan who has the audacity to give Tafsir of the Qur'an al-Karim to the public didn't even know the meaning of the word ذراع something that even a child would know from an Arabic speaking family. So I guess a young kid from an Arabic speaking family is better qualified to give Tafsir than Numan Ali Khan!

Quote
Out of curiosity, do you live in Toronto?  If yes, are you an Afghan converted to Qadianism?  Way back in the days, I used to visit an Afghan forum where we had an Afghan convert to Qadianism from Toronto high on "Love for All, Hatred for None" BS, loaded with Qadiani funds to propagate his filth among the online Afghan community.  Speaking of dogs, he was chased away like a dog....and he didn't even have paws, at least not literally.  Metaphorically....well, I will let you have at it since splitting hair is a Qadiani specialty.

You're talking about a brother named Tamim Yusufzai. He is a very intelligent and lovely brother. No I'm not him and I do live in Toronto. If you want I will debate any of your mullas in person here in Toronto then we will see who runs like a dog.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 05:41:25 AM
Abu Mussab is irrelevant.

He is very relevant as we shall find soon.

Quote
The point is your Nouman Ali Khan who has the audacity to give Tafsir of the Qur'an al-Karim to the public didn't even know the meaning of the word ذراع something that even a child would know from an Arabic speaking family.

The point - and here is where Abu Mussab becomes relevant - is that Abu Mussab is saying that Nouman Ali Khan said such and such without any reference to any of his video clips or publications.  And you thought I did not know your Qadiani tactics?

Quote
So I guess a young kid from an Arabic speaking family is better qualified to give Tafsir than Numan Ali Khan!

No, but a young kid from an Arabic speaking family can definitely help your fifth "Caliph" learn the basics of Arabic.

Quote
You're talking about a brother named Tamim Yusufzai. He is a very intelligent and lovely brother.

Yes, I am glad now I know his real name. 

Quote
If you want I will debate any of your mullas in person here in Toronto then we will see who runs like a dog.

You first get through a single member here on this website and then ask for our scholars who, by the way, are too much to deal with for your entire lot.  However, while I have forced you to tell the truth which you were hiding otherwise (that you are a Qadiani), now would be a good time to address the debates with Atham and Dr. Abdul Hakim.  You were hoping we only knew about Sanaullah Amritsari, lol!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 05:57:26 AM

I'll extensively show you the shameful existence of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani in this world and we all know his despicable end which did not afford him to even recite the shahada, due to extreme dehydration that made it impossible for him to speak or recite anything.


As usual you get all your information from some websites online without having ever actually read any of the books you're quoting and researched the historical events objectively. Otherwise the verdict of Islam is that it is enough to call a person a liar who simply repeats whatever he has heard. Those who were witnesses at the time of Ghulam Ahmad's final moments in this life such as his son and successor Mirza Mahmud Ahmad testify that throughout these final moments before he died there was only one word on the tongue of his father "ALLAH"

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7hruRDk_CEQ/WWGaSQ44J1I/AAAAAAAACfk/9gqlV05jcQokmUegzxA9D9qDFNI-vpYRQCLcBGAs/s640/title.png)

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-83HX0efatcY/WWGaTn4An_I/AAAAAAAACfo/bAxkWnZwYugV-0jGDbfgXHUbBIIkSabtwCLcBGAs/s1600/2.png)

As you can see, I'm not merely quoting some website unlike you, but giving you a real reference from an actual book in my possession.

According to other reports his last words were اللہ میرے پیارے اللہ "Allah, my beloved Allah"


Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 06:14:42 AM
You might also find his "Heavenly Sign" if you read about his debate with Dr. Abdul Hakim, an ex-Qadiani who left Qadianism during the lifetime of Mirza while challenging and badly exposing him: http://irshad.org/qadianism/prophecg.php

As for Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan of Patiala, I've written a detailed article about him and his prophecy on my blog with actual references unlike the resource you are quoting from

http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2016/12/the-apostasy-of-dr-abdul-hakim-khan-of.html

Now let's analyze the lies and deceptions from the resource you are quoting from (irshad.org):

Lie #1
"When Mirza Ghulam's claims became completely outrageous and obviously unIslamic, Dr. Hakim separated from the "Ahmadi" movement"

The Truth: Dr. Abdul Hakim was expelled from the Ahmadiyya Jama'at by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad because of his doctrines which constitute apostasy from Islam. Dr. Abdul Hakim introduced a new doctrine that a person can obtain salvation only by acknowledging Tawhid (the Oneness of Allah) but it is not necessary for salvation to believe in the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. (Al-Zikr al-Hakim No.4) - you can see the original references on the link of my blog I gave earlier

So your hero Dr. Abdul Hakim was actually a Murtad from Islam, how ironic is that!

Lie #2
"Mirza Ghulam, he refused the debate, and instead announced: "Abdul Hakim will die during my life-time, as he insults and disgraces me.  He shall not live to insult me."

Truth: Irshad.org team has quoted this without any reference whatsoever!

Lie #3
"Mirza Ghulam died suddenly and unexpectedly, on the morning of May 25, 1908.  Allah(SWT) made the prophecy of Dr. Hakim come true and rejected all the prophecies of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani in this regard."

The prophecy of Dr. Abdul Hakim himself abrogated his own prophecy that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad will die before 4th August, 1908. He amended his prophecy and declared that Ghulam Ahmad will die on the actual date of 4th August 1908 not before it! (Paisa Akhbar, Lahore and Ahle Hadith, Amritsar: 15th May, 1908)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad therefore died on May 26th, 1908, thus fulfilling his own inspiration that Dr. Abdul Hakim will be disgraced and proven a liar.

Another person whom you mentioned, Maulawi Sanaullah Amritsari, was very upset because Dr. Abdul Hakim had changed his prophecy:

"However, we cannot refrain from saying what is true. Had the doctor stopped at what he had stated before, that is, his prediction of Mirza's death within fourteen months and not fixed a specific date as he has done then those objections could have never been raised as are being raised today by the Paisa Akhbar of the 27th, wherein it is stated that had the prophecy been left as, ‘up to the 21st of Saavan’ and not altered to, ‘on the 21st of Saavan’ it would have, indeed, been wonderful. But alas, his revelation that Mirza will die on the 21st of Saavan, that is 4th of August, has been published in the Ahle Hadith issue of 15th May, 1908. We wish that he would have left his earlier revelations unaltered, without giving a specific date. Then there could have been no excuse.”
(Ahle Hadith, 12 June 1908)

What an embarrassment!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 06:26:55 AM
As usual you get all your information from some websites online without having ever actually read any of the books you're quoting and researched the historical events objectively. Otherwise the verdict of Islam is that it is enough to call a person a liar who simply repeats whatever he has heard.

Unfortunately for you, I can speak Urdu and the image you have shared - as though your revised printed books are hujjah upon me - says, "bimari ke waqt sirf ek hi lafz aap ke zabaan (na)mubaarak par thhaa aur wo lafz Allah thhaa". 

Now, I will do with you what you do with the Qur'an and our books upon which you have no rights.  The quote says that at the time of illness, there was only word on his tongue and that was the word of Allah (swt).  That - to give you a dose of your own Qadiani buffoonery - does not prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad recited the shahadah when his soul departed his body as he was breathing his last while taking a dump.  For the sake of argument, I will concede that Mirza had the word of Allah (swt) on his tongue (while he was ill), how does that prove that he recited the shahada when his soul departed his body?

Having said that, I will address a few points your "very intelligent and lovely" brother makes in this video.  I found this video thanks to you because now I have that murtad's name.

In the video posted below, your "very intelligent and lovely" brother says that his father ensured that he had an Islamic upbringing.  Then he reads from a script, the same tale we find in nearly all of the fake ex-Muslim videos on YouTube.  Tamim says that while he was at a book stall, a man approached him and informed him about Imam Mahdi (as) prior to which he did not know anything about Imam Mahdi (as) or his prophesied coming.  Sounds a lot like those (fake) ex-Muslims who say that they were pious, observing Muslims but did not know Jesus (asws) until a certain someone introduced them to him.

Secondly, Tamim - much like the fake ex-Muslims - says that he met the same man again who told Tamim that he was constantly praying for him *violins*  Again, a lot like what almost every fake ex-Muslim says!

Thirdly, Tamim, at that Afghan forum, used to pass himself off as someone who was an expert in Arabic.  Listening to his Arabic recitation, he sounds like a novice.  And for someone who claims to have lived in Canada his entire life, his English - at best - can be described as "conversational" with a noticeable Afghan accent.  This is important, especially the latter part, because a few members on that forum were convinced that Tamim is a liar who is on Qadiani payroll.  Having watched this video (or I should say, heard to its audio), I am almost convinced of the same.

Lastly, Tamim says that he became a Qadiani when he found "proof" for the fact that Jesus (asws) "had died".  Too much to ask from a blind, deaf and dumb individual like yourself (like the rest of your lot), but do you see the problem with that?  Allow me to help you.  Your "very intelligent and lovely" brother accepted Qadianism not on its merits or irrefutable proofs (though there is none) but because he, in his mind, substantiated the claim that Jesus (asws) "had died".  For that to make Qadianism true (at best) is extrapolation.  And the dishonest liar he is, he says in the clip that he was the least concerned with things such as where Jesus (asws) died, etc.  He only wanted to know IF Jesus (asws) died or not.  Well, the place of Jesus's (asws) death - if he was honest - is very important.  How did he end up on Indian subcontinent?

To wrap up my winded post, if you see your "very intelligent and lovely" brother, tell him what the Afghan king said to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad when he (Mirza) tried to mimic the Prophet (saw) and sent a letter to him inviting him to Qadianism.  The Afghan king replied with two words, "inja beya" translated "come here".

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 06:42:59 AM

On May 22, 1893 lasting till June 5, 1893, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad debated Abdullah Khan Atham, a retired deputy commissioner and a Christian.  Toward the end of the debate, the Christians brought one blind, one deaf, and one paralyzed individual to the debate and challenged Mirza to cure them as Jesus (asws) had done.  Mirza was not able to cure any of them and seeing his embarrassment, it is reported in Roohani Khazaen that many Qadianis left Mirza and converted to Christianity.

Following the debate, on June 5th 1893, Mirza said that he had received a prophecy from Allah (swt) and said, "When I humbly entreated and implored God Almighty and prayed to Him to show me the details of the matter, He indicated to me that the liar will die within 15 months (before September 5, 1894), provided he does not return to the truth (Islam); and he who is on the truth and believes in true God, his honor will be restored and when this prophecy is fulfilled some blind man will start seeing, paralyzed start walking, and deaf start hearing.  I admit that if this prophecy proves to be False, I am prepared for every punishment.  My face should be blackened and I should be hanged.  I swear by the Mighty Allah that what I have said will happen.  It must happen.  It is possible that the earth may be changed for another earth and the sky may be replaced by another sky, but it is not possible for God's word to change -- prepare for me a cross if my falsehood is exposed and curse me more than the Satans and the evil persons are cursed."  (Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 6, P. 292-293; Jang-i-Maqaddas, P. 188)

After many failed attempts at Atham's life, Mirza pronounced many other prophecies (regarding the fate of Atham) none of which came true.  You can read all the detailed accounts at http://www.irshad.org/qadianism/prophecb.php

Now as for the debate with Abdullah Atham, why didn't you quote Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's response to the staged drama of bringing a blind, deaf and paralyzed for him to cure? He gave a beautiful reply and see how he turned the tables on the Christians. He said that it isn't my belief that the Messiah literally cured blind and paralyzed people, but that is allegorical language in the scriptures talking about spiritual life. But since you insist that the blind, deaf and paralyzed should be healed literally, then your own Bible says "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you." (Matthew 17:20) "And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease." (Matthew 10:1) "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." (Mark 16:17-18)

Then Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pointed to the blind, deaf and paralyzed person brought forth by the Christians and challenged the Christians to heal them to prove that they possessed even a mustard grain of faith, and if they were true believers they had to possess this ability according to their own Scripture.

As for the prophecy of Abdullah Atham dying within 15 months, as Ghulam Ahmad explicitly stated, it was a conditional prophecy subject to not turning back to the truth. Your irshad.org team put Islam in brackets but that it a dishonest interpolation on their part.

So what is the truth?

The reason he did not die in the fifteen months was because of him stopping his mockery and him repenting. When the last day of the fifteen months had arrived, Atham did not die. A lot of people tried to claim that the prophecy was not fulfilled. It was already shown that this prophecy was conditional based upon the repentance of Atham. The silence of Atham showed that he repented and developed a fear of Allah. In reply to all of the allegations of the Mullahs and the Christians, Ghulam Ahmad made a announcement where he offered 4000 rupees to Atham if he can claim that he has not repented.
 
Ghulam Ahmad stated:
 
“Now, if Atham swears on oath (that he has not repented) the promise of one year is conclusive and categorical, with which there are no conditions. And the decree is unchangeable. And if Atham does not take the oath, even then God would not let a culprit go unpunished who tried to deceive the world by hiding the truth. The days are near, not distant.”( Announcement, ‘4000 Rs. Reward’, p. 11, 27 October 1894)
 
Seven months after this announcement and challenge was made, Atham passed away without mocking the Prophetsaw for the rest of his life. He was not able to step up to this challenge because he clearly repented. Why else would he not accept free money, if he truly denied the truthfulness of Muhammadsaw?

Ghulam Ahmad wrote: “In your book Adruna-e-Bible, you have called our Holy Prophetsaw Dajjal, whereas I believe him to be a true messenger, and I firmly believe Islam to be from God. Now this is something that will be decided by heaven. The heavenly decree is that whichever of us is false in his statement and unjustly declares the true messenger to be a liar and dajjal, and whichever of us is an enemy of the truth, shall be cast in Hawia [hell] within fifteen months from today, in the lifetime of the truthful one; unless he turns to the true i.e desists from calling the righteous and true Prophetsaw Dajjal and refrains from impertinence and abuse. I said this because the mere denial of a religion does not merit punishment in this world, it is audacious, impertinent and insolent vilification that makes one deserve punishment. Thus when Atham was apprised of this prophecy in this gathering of more than seventy people, he blanched visibly, his face turned pale, and his hands started to tremble. He immediately took his tongue out of his mouth, touched his ears with both hands, and began to shake his head and hands just like frightened culprit who vehemently denies any wrongdoing, repents and shows great humility. With a quivering tongue, he kept saying, I repent! I repent! I am not guilty of any disrespect or blasphemy; and I have never called the Holy Prophet saw Dajjal. All the while he was trembling and this spectacle was not only be held by Muslims but his humble attitude was also witnessed by a large number of Christians. His denial seemed to signify that his statement in his book Andruna-e-Bible was not meant as an insult. In any case, he ended up retracting the word Dajjal before this gathering of about seventy people, and it was this one word that had occasioned this prophecy. He escaped death within a period of fifteen months, because he had recanted that blasphemous word on which the prophecy depended and God would surely never forget the condition that he himself had attached….”(Nuzulul Masih, Ruhani Khazain Vol 18. Pp 541-545)
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 06:43:04 AM
As for Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan of Patiala, I've written a detailed article about him and his prophecy on my blog with actual references unlike the resource you are quoting from

Your articles, as far as I am concerned, hold the same status as your Qadiani books.  Even my trash can is too good to throw them in it.

Quote
The Truth: Dr. Abdul Hakim was expelled from the Ahmadiyya Jama'at by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad .....

So your hero Dr. Abdul Hakim was actually a Murtad from Islam, how ironic is that!

Being expelled from Qadianism, to correct your misunderstanding, does not make one murtad.  The concept of becoming a "murtad" is built within Islam and Qadianism is outside Islam.  Please take a moment to reflect on that.

Quote
Lie #2
"Mirza Ghulam, he refused the debate, and instead announced: "Abdul Hakim will die during my life-time, as he insults and disgraces me.  He shall not live to insult me."

Truth: Irshad.org team has quoted this without any reference whatsoever!

Actually, Irshad.org has published Mirza's statement and then gives a detailed account from Mirza's book.

"Another enemy has appeared now; his name is Abdul Hakim Khan and he is a doctor who lives in state of Patiala. He claims that I shall die in his life-time, before the fourth of August 1908, as the sign of his truthfulness. He claims to have been inspired that I am a dajjal (impostor), kafir (unbeliever), and kazzab (habitual liar). At first, he had taken bayat with me and for twenty years he had continuously been in my Jama'at (movement) and one of my disciples; however, now he has become an unbeliever (e.g. not a Qadiani)� God has informed me, however, that he will be afflicted with torturous punishment and God will perish him. I shall, on the other hand, remain safe from his mischief. This is a matter in the control of God. Undoubtedly, God will help those who are truthful..."(Chashma-e-Maeroofat, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 23, P. 337; Ain-ul-Marifa, P. 321-322, May 1908)

In the end, Mirza died in the lifetime of Dr. Abdul Hakim as it happened with many others he debated.  Almost all outlived Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Quote
The prophecy of Dr. Abdul Hakim himself abrogated his own prophecy

As previously stated, Mirza died in the lifetime of Dr. Abdul Hakim.

Quote
What an embarrassment!

Indeed but which account is more embarrassing?  The failed debates?  The failed prophecies?  The failed existence?  Or, the despicable end while taking a dump?  Your pick!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 06:48:45 AM
Now as for the debate with Abdullah Atham, why didn't you quote Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's response to the staged drama of bringing a blind, deaf and paralyzed for him to cure? He gave a beautiful reply and see how he turned the tables on the Christians. He said that it isn't my belief that the Messiah literally cured blind and paralyzed people, but that is allegorical language in the scriptures talking about spiritual life.

Leaving the rest of your psycho-babble BS aside, allow me to refute the foundation within your post and the rest of your lie will be flushed down much like how Mirza's life came out his rear end and was flushed down the toilet.

Who in the living blue hell cares about Mirza's personal beliefs?  Beautiful reply?  I say here is another embarrassment.  What difference does it make that Mirza believed that Jesus' (asws) miracles were allegorical?  The Muslims believe his miracles were literal, actual and tangible.  The Christians, too, believe the same. 

Furthermore, Mirza neither understood classical Arabic (it is claimed he received basic Arabic education) nor Aramaic or Hebrew or English to pass judgment on Islamic sources and Judeo-Christian texts.

You shot yourself in the foot by quoting Mirza's desperate attempt to escape from the challenge because it proves that Mirza's beliefs were antithetical to Islam, just like yours!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 07:00:12 AM

Now as for the debate with Abdullah Atham, why didn't you quote Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's response to the staged drama of bringing a blind, deaf and paralyzed for him to cure? He gave a beautiful reply and see how he turned the tables on the Christians. He said that it isn't my belief that the Messiah literally cured blind and paralyzed people, but that is allegorical language in the scriptures talking about spiritual life.

Leaving the rest of your psycho-babble BS aside, allow me to refute the foundation within your post and the rest of your lie will be flushed down much like how Mirza's life came out his rear end and was flushed down the toilet.

Who in the living blue hell cares about Mirza's personal beliefs?  Beautiful reply?  I say here is another embarrassment.  What difference does it make that Mirza believed that Jesus' (asws) miracles were allegorical?  The Muslims believe his miracles were literal, actual and tangible.  The Christians, too, believe the same. 

Furthermore, Mirza neither understood classical Arabic (it is claimed he received basic Arabic education) nor Aramaic or Hebrew or English to pass judgment on Islamic sources and Judeo-Christian texts.

You shot yourself in the foot by quoting Mirza's desperate attempt to escape from the challenge because it proves that Mirza's beliefs were antithetical to Islam, just like yours!  It is absurd to believe that someone with no understanding of Arabic can ascribe allegorical meanings to Jesus' (asws) literal miracles.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 07:02:53 AM
Unfortunately for you, I can speak Urdu and the image you have shared - as though your revised printed books are hujjah upon me - says, "bimari ke waqt sirf ek hi lafz aap ke zabaan (na)mubaarak par thhaa aur wo lafz Allah thhaa". 

Now, I will do with you what you do with the Qur'an and our books upon which you have no rights.  The quote says that at the time of illness, there was only word on his tongue and that was the word of Allah (swt).  That - to give you a dose of your own Qadiani buffoonery - does not prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad recited the shahadah when his soul departed his body as he was breathing his last while taking a dump.  For the sake of argument, I will concede that Mirza had the word of Allah (swt) on his tongue (while he was ill), how does that prove that he recited the shahada when his soul departed his body?

You have just committed the logical fallacy known as petitio principii or "begging the question", that is, you are attempting to prove a proposition (Mirza is false because his last words weren't the Shahada) based on a premise (the last words of true believers is always the Shahada) that itself requires proof.

Now let me give you an Ilzami Jawab (since you know Urdu). Prove to me from a Hadith that the last words uttered by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم were the Shahadah or Shahadatain.

In fact, his last words were اللَّهُمَّ الرَّفِيقَ الأَعْلَى and not the Shahada according to the authentic Hadith.

So when you said: "I will concede that Mirza had the word of Allah (swt) on his tongue (while he was ill), how does that prove that he recited the shahada when his soul departed his body?" you shot yourself in the foot, because the last words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was not the shahada either.

As for your point that Mirza was saying "Allah" during his final illness and not at the exact time of his death, we are talking about last words before dying. The Hadith about the Prophet's last words likewise say he was saying those words after he recovered from falling unconscious while his head was resting on the lap of our Mother Aaisha رضى الله عنها
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 07:16:56 AM

Being expelled from Qadianism, to correct your misunderstanding, does not make one murtad.

Another logical fallacy and strawman argument! You nakedly misrepresented what I said and you know it.

I never claimed Dr. Abdul Hakim became an apostate due to him being expelled from the Ahmadiyya. I said he became an apostate due to his Aqida that a person can be saved from Hell merely by believing in the Oneness of Allah, and it is not necessary to believe in the Risalah of sayyidina Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Now if you are an honest person you too will confess that Dr. Abdul Hakim if he held such a view was in reality a Murtad from Islam. But you will never do that simply because of your blind animosity to Ghulam Ahmad which is making you blinded by hatred. Allah Most High has definitely described your condition in the Holy Quran.


Quote
Actually, Irshad.org has published Mirza's statement and then gives a detailed account from Mirza's book.

"Another enemy has appeared now; his name is Abdul Hakim Khan and he is a doctor who lives in state of Patiala. He claims that I shall die in his life-time, before the fourth of August 1908, as the sign of his truthfulness. He claims to have been inspired that I am a dajjal (impostor), kafir (unbeliever), and kazzab (habitual liar). At first, he had taken bayat with me and for twenty years he had continuously been in my Jama'at (movement) and one of my disciples; however, now he has become an unbeliever (e.g. not a Qadiani)� God has informed me, however, that he will be afflicted with torturous punishment and God will perish him. I shall, on the other hand, remain safe from his mischief. This is a matter in the control of God. Undoubtedly, God will help those who are truthful..."(Chashma-e-Maeroofat, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 23, P. 337; Ain-ul-Marifa, P. 321-322, May 1908)

What you quote doesn't match your claim or the claim of Irshad.org. It merely says that God will punish Dr. Abdul Hakim, there is no timeframe given nor is it explicitly stated that Dr. Abdul Hakim will die before Ghulam Ahmad. And it is know that Dr. Abdul Hakim died from lung disease in a pitiable condition. Furthermore, as I already proved, Ghulam Ahmad was saved from the mischief of Dr. Abdul Hakim who proclaimed that the former will die exactly on the date of August 8, 1908.

Quote
In the end, Mirza died in the lifetime of Dr. Abdul Hakim as it happened with many others he debated.  Almost all outlived Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.


Another lie. Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri, who is highly venerated by the Barelwis and Hanafis of the Indian subcontinent, supplicated to Allah to destroy Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1896. But the very next year Ghulam Dastagir himself suddenly died, while Mirza Ghulam Ahmad lived for eleven more years.
see my blog for original references http://islamsalvationfromhell.blogspot.ca/2014/11/hanafi-mullah-ghulam-dastagir-qasuris.html

Likewise on this very thread I acquainted the readers with John Alexander Dowie and how his miserable death predicted by Ghulam Ahmad was acknowledged by the Sunday Herald of Boston, an American non-Muslim newspaper, which proclaimed on its front page "GREAT IS MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD THE MESSIAH"

Then you can study about the prophecy regarding the Arya Samajist Lekh Ram, whose violent death Ghulam Ahmad not only accurately predicted, but even predicted its exact time as occurring close to the day of Eid. And there are many other examples I can give.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 07:17:23 AM
You have just committed the logical fallacy known as petitio principii or "begging the question",

The logical fallacy I have committed is that I have engaged in a discussion with a Qadiani because I have chosen to reason with an illogical individual who rides high on fallacious positions.  However, I was only giving you a dose of your own medicine.  Much like your lot splits hair over matters that are quite clear, I thought I'd ask you to prove how your excerpt proves that Mirza recited the shahada as his soul was departing.

Quote
So when you said: "I will concede that Mirza had the word of Allah (swt) on his tongue (while he was ill), how does that prove that he recited the shahada when his soul departed his body?" you shot yourself in the foot, because the last words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was not the shahada either.

Thank you very much!  You walked right into my trap, much like your "very intelligent and lovely" brother did years ago.  He used to claim that he loved the Prophet (saw) more after he became a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.  However, it is clear to see that every time a Qadiani is pressed, they equate him with the Prophet (saw).  Knowing the lofty position of the Prophet (saw) and lowly status of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, other than walking into my trap, you have committed the logical fallacy of comparing two unlike things known as "faulty comparison".

Also, what you are ascribing to our Prophet (saw) is the same as believing that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  Therefore, you are sure that he (saw) did not recite the shahada (although we can get into why one needs to recite the shahada in his or her last moments and we know the Prophet (saw) was promised the highest of high statuses in this world and Paradise and everywhere in between).  However, in the case of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, there is evidence of absence.

"When I reached Hazrat Saheb and saw his condition, then he addressed me and said: 'MIR SAHEB. I HAVE DEVELOPED EPIDEMIC CHOLERA'.  I think after that he (MIRZA) did not say anything clear till he died next day at 10 am."  (Hayat-e-Nasir, p.14)

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 07:27:38 AM
Being expelled from Qadianism, to correct your misunderstanding, does not make one murtad.

Thank you for admitting that expulsion from Qadianism does not equate to becoming a murtad.  You have differentiated between Islam and Qadianism which is what I like.  Do whatever you will; don't call yourselves "Muslims" and don't refer to your temples as "mosques" or "masaajid". 

I also like how you are confused; you do not even know whether to engage me as a "Muslim" or Qadiani to save face when in reality (and I wish I had saved the scan of that certificate) one Afghan brother - to expose the conniving lies of your "very intelligent and lovely" brother - had got his hands on an expulsion certificate (which he scanned and posted online) from the highest authority within Qadianism.  It stated that a certain person someone had became murtad (and was excommunicated from Qadianism) because she married a non-Qadiani Muslim.

Quote
I said he became an apostate due to his Aqida

My point was that the man rejected your false prophet and outlived him despite your false prophet hoping for him to die in his lifetime.  I am the least concerned with how you define Dr. Abdul Hakim's faith.  If you can make a one-eyed, Dajjal look-alike out to be a (false) prophet (in your own mind at least), I bet you can have unicorns come visit you flying on UFO vessels.

Quote
Another lie. Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri, who is highly venerated by the Barelwis and Hanafis of the Indian subcontinent, supplicated to Allah to destroy Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1896. But the very next year Ghulam Dastagir himself suddenly died, while Mirza Ghulam Ahmad lived for eleven more years.

....which is why I said, "In the end, Mirza died in the lifetime of Dr. Abdul Hakim as it happened with many others he debated.  Almost all outlived Mirza Ghulam Ahmad."
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 07:41:41 AM
Thank you very much!  You walked right into my trap, much like your "very intelligent and lovely" brother did years ago.  He used to claim that he loved the Prophet (saw) more after he became a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.  However, it is clear to see that every time a Qadiani is pressed, they equate him with the Prophet (saw).  Knowing the lofty position of the Prophet (saw) and lowly status of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, other than walking into my trap, you have committed the logical fallacy of comparing two unlike things known as "faulty comparison".

Look now you are running but you have nowhere to run because you are cornered. You cannot answer my questions so you accuse me of not loving the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم because you think I'm comparing him to Ghulam Ahmad. I was not comparing personalities, I was citing a proof from our Religion that reciting the Shahadah as one's last words in this Dunya is not a condition for salvation. Yes it is a condition for salvation that a person remains upon the Shahada and believes in it sincerely until he dies. So unless a person renounces the Shahada before his death (God forbid), you cannot say that a Muslim who died but his last words were not the Shahada is doomed to Hell.

As for your nonsense about "absence of evidence", when sayyida Aaisha رضى الله عنه is testifying that the last words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was "O Allah put me with the Rafeeq-ul-'Alaa" before he died, then that is evidence that his last words were NOT the Shahada. Please learn simple logic. Either his last words were the Shahada or his last words were اللَّهُمَّ الرَّفِيقَ الأَعْلَى

I let the reader judge for himself or herself.


Quote
"When I reached Hazrat Saheb and saw his condition, then he addressed me and said: 'MIR SAHEB. I HAVE DEVELOPED EPIDEMIC CHOLERA'.  I think after that he (MIRZA) did not say anything clear till he died next day at 10 am."  (Hayat-e-Nasir, p.14)

Point #1: Mir Nasir Nawab said "I think" so he was not sure and it is not a definite thing

Point #2: He said "anything clear". Obviously when a person is dying it is hard for him to speak clearly, so he is speaking in a low almost whispery voice. This is absolutely normal for anyone who has seen a dying person on his deathbed in a hospital

Point #3: In Urdu expression, a person will say I have such and such illness, exaggerating the illness though technically it is not that illness. For example even in English people say I have pneumonia but they actually means they have the common cold, etc.

Point #4: In Lahore of 1908 there was no report of any outbreak of cholera. The only way to suddenly catch cholera which is a contagion is if one has come into contact with someone else having the illness. Thus, Ghulam Ahmad obviously did not die from cholera. If he did, all those around him would have become infected too

Point #5: The medical certificate was produced for Ghulam Ahmad in order for his body to be transported by rail back to Qadian according to the British regulation of that time. The medical certificate did not say he died of cholera. If he died of cholera they wouldn't have allowed his body to be transported, because cholera can spread even from a dead body.

Point #6: The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in his final illness while he was dying told sayyida Aaisha:

 قَالَتْ عَائِشَةُ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ كَانَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ فِي مَرَضِهِ الَّذِي مَاتَ فِيهِ ‏ "‏ يَا عَائِشَةُ مَا أَزَالُ أَجِدُ أَلَمَ الطَّعَامِ الَّذِي أَكَلْتُ بِخَيْبَرَ، فَهَذَا أَوَانُ وَجَدْتُ انْقِطَاعَ أَبْهَرِي مِنْ ذَلِكَ السَّمِّ

Narrated `Aisha: The Prophet (ﷺ) in his ailment in which he died, used to say, "O `Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison." (Bukhari Sharif)

Now it remains to be seen whether anyone believes that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم actually died from the poison of the meat he had eaten years earlier in Khaibar. Medically this is impossible. Yet the Prophet was complaining during his last illness that he feels as though his jugular vein is being cut by that poison, even though the Holy Quran says:

وَلَوْ تَقَوَّلَ عَلَيْنَا بَعْضَ الْأَقَاوِيلِ ﴿٤٤﴾ لَأَخَذْنَا مِنْهُ بِالْيَمِينِ ﴿٤٥﴾ ثُمَّ لَقَطَعْنَا مِنْهُ الْوَتِينَ
And if Muhammad had made up about Us some [false] sayings, (44) We would have seized him by the right hand; (45) Then We would have cut from him the aorta.
(Surah 69:44-46 Saheeh International translation)
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 07:56:06 AM
Being expelled from Qadianism, to correct your misunderstanding, does not make one murtad.

Thank you for admitting that expulsion from Qadianism does not equate to becoming a murtad.  You have differentiated between Islam and Qadianism which is what I like.  Do whatever you will; don't call yourselves "Muslims" and don't refer to your temples as "mosques" or "masaajid". 

"Being expelled from Qadianism, to correct your misunderstanding, does not make one murtad" <<<are these my words or your words? Why are you so brazenly lying on a discussion board where it is so easy to see what every user has written? If you want to lie this is the worst place to do it, you will always be caught red handed.

For your information, the word "Murtad" has a linguistic meaning but also a technical Shari' definition. For example, Mawdudi (founder of the Jama'at-e-Islami party) used to call those people who left his Jama'at as "Murtad" obviously in the linguistic sense of going back or retracing one's steps, not in the technical Shari' sense of leaving the fold of Islam.

And if Mirza Ghulam Ahmad really was a Dajjal and false Prophet as you accuse him, why did Ghulam Dastagir (a Sunni Hanafi Muslim) prayer against him fail and end up rebounding on him? He published his prayer against Ghulam Ahmad in 1896, then suddenly dies the next year in 1897, while Ghulam Ahmad lives on until 1908.

How could Allah refuse the Du'a of a Muslim scholar against a "Dajjal" and "False Prophet"? Do you have any logical answer?

Now even if certain enemies of Ghulam Ahmad survived after his death and outlived him, what does that prove? Didn't Musaylima the Liar and Aswat al-Ansi the False Prophet outlive the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم? In fact, our beloved Prophet saw in a vision that there were two gold bangles on his arms. So he was inspired to blow on them and he did so, causing the bangles to vanish into thin air. He interpreted this Vision of the two bangles as referring to Musaylima and Aswat al Ansi. But both of these liars and false prophets outlived the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, so it is not necessary that if a Prophet makes a prophecy against his enemy it means that enemy will die in his own lifetime.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 10:46:02 AM
Quote
Look now you are running but you have nowhere to run because you are cornered. You cannot answer my questions so you accuse me of not loving the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم because you think I'm comparing him to Ghulam Ahmad.

Running away?  Like your "very intelligent and loving" brother who claimed that if not for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he would not have loved the Prophet (saw) like he did, you walked into the same trap.  When confronted with bitter realities concerning your false prophet, you had to resort to bringing our Prophet (saw) into the equation.  And of course you are comparing him to our beloved Prophet (saw).  After all, Mirza, in his own words, stated that he was on par with Prophet Muhammad (saw).  Now you might bring excerpts where he said something to the contrary but it would be like the famous aged Muslim - Qadiani debate on YouTube which took place in UK in someone's residence where Muslims proved that Mirza believed that anyone who believes that Jesus (asws) died was bound to Hell.  Later, he changed his own aqeedah on the matter and had his blind-followers marching on it.

Quote
I was citing a proof from our Religion that reciting the Shahadah as one's last words in this Dunya is not a condition for salvation. Yes it is a condition for salvation that a person remains upon the Shahada and believes in it sincerely until he dies. So unless a person renounces the Shahada before his death (God forbid), you cannot say that a Muslim who died but his last words were not the Shahada is doomed to Hell.

Fine but all said and done, the Prophet (saw) was guaranteed Paradise whereas we must do everything to reserve our place in Paradise.  Did your false prophet recite the shahada?  No!  In fact, he was debilitated due to the dryness of his mouth.

Quote
As for your nonsense about "absence of evidence", when sayyida Aaisha رضى الله عنه is testifying that the last words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was "O Allah put me with the Rafeeq-ul-'Alaa" before he died, then that is evidence that his last words were NOT the Shahada.

I am surprised that unlike when it is time to confirm your own buffoonery, you've chosen one narration in this matter while there are other reports with the one narrated by Aisha (ra) being the most authentic.  I give you that but what you do not understand (or you are trying to evade) is that your false prophet died in a state of humiliation while not having the ability to even recite the shahada.  I will expound on his humiliation in a bit.

Quote
Point #1: Mir Nasir Nawab said "I think" so he was not sure and it is not a definite thing

Here is another proof without the use of the phrase, "I think".

"Huzoor (Mirza Ghulam) could not talk two hours before death.  Dr. Mirza Yaqoob Baig and Dr. Syed Mohammad Hussein Shah were the attending physicians. Huzoor asked for paper and wrote on it: 'I have too much dryness.  I can't talk.' and some other words which could not be read." (Al-Fazl, Vol. 25, No. 274, November 24, 1937)

Quote
Point #4: In Lahore of 1908 there was no report of any outbreak of cholera. The only way to suddenly catch cholera which is a contagion is if one has come into contact with someone else having the illness. Thus, Ghulam Ahmad obviously did not die from cholera. If he did, all those around him would have become infected too

Are you assuming that you can only get cholera through an outbreak?  You did not know you are dealing with a Biology major so let me assure you that you are wrong to say that the only way to catch cholera is to come into contact with someone else having the illness.  WebMD says, "It is not likely you will catch cholera just from casual contact with an infected person."  It is only when Vibrio cholerae, the bacterium that causes cholera, usually found in food or water contaminated by feces from a person with the infection, enters the body that you get the disease.  (http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/cholera-faq#1)

And are you sure there were no outbreaks of cholera in Lahore in 1908?  How about the 6th cholera pandemic which lasted from 1899 to 1923?  It started in India (surprise)!  Although not a reliable source, Wikipedia states, "The sixth cholera pandemic (1899–1923) was a major outbreak of cholera beginning in India, where it killed more than 800,000 people, and spreading to the Middle East, North Africa, Eastern Europe and Russia".  However, it reports this fact from CBC's website.  You can visit the Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1899%E2%80%931923_cholera_pandemic and check the references there.

On this note, I must remind you that Mirza Ghulam used to say that cholera or plague is Allah's (swt) wrath on mankind for their wrong doing.  A befitting end to a false prophet!  Hopefully now you understand why I was stressing on his inability to even recite the shahada and you have been utterly destroyed on the cholera claim (that there was no cholera outbreak in India in 1908).

Quote
Point #6: The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in his final illness while he was dying told sayyida Aaisha

True Qadiani colors on display now!  When the going gets tough, the liars start misquoting and they rely on misinformation spread by the enemies of Islam.  Firstly, the two words do not add up.  The Qur'an uses al-wateen whereas the hadith employs al-abhar.  Secondly, the phrase that the Prophet (saw) uttered was a common Arabic idiom used to denote death in any form, regardless of whether the aorta was literally cut off or not.  Thirdly, we can distinguish between "literal" and "metaphorical" when Mirza's (dis)honor is on the line when he failed to reproduce the miracles of Jesus (asws) thereby lowering Jesus' (asws) status but we must only look at Islamic literature through the Qadiani lens and lower the status of the Prophet (saw) too only to bail out Mirza, again.  Some Muslim you are!

I know your kind.  I am only doing this to cause you to open yourself up to everyone on this forum.

Quote
Why are you so brazenly lying on a discussion board where it is so easy to see what every user has written? If you want to lie this is the worst place to do it, you will always be caught red handed.

Here is exactly what you said: "The Truth: Dr. Abdul Hakim was expelled from the Ahmadiyya Jama'at by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad because of his doctrines which constitute apostasy from Islam."  You made the two factors as dependent on each other.  That having outlandish beliefs in respect to Islam can cause one to be excommunicated from Qadianism.  If such is the case then Qadianis should start applying the "murtad" definition (linguistic or technical) to their own selves first.  How the heck can I take you or your one-eyed Dajjal look-alike false prophet seriously for labeling someone murtad for some spurious beliefs you say he had when you and your false prophet have beliefs antithetical to foundational Islam like the finality of the Prophet (saw), the miracles of Jesus (asws), etc?

For Mirza, or you, to declare someone a murtad for having outlandish beliefs with regards to Islam is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Quote
And if Mirza Ghulam Ahmad really was a Dajjal and false Prophet as you accuse him, why did Ghulam Dastagir (a Sunni Hanafi Muslim) prayer against him fail and end up rebounding on him? He published his prayer against Ghulam Ahmad in 1896, then suddenly dies the next year in 1897, while Ghulam Ahmad lives on until 1908.

Do you want a list of people that outlived Mirza despite your false prophet claiming that he - via Divine Revelation - was informed that they would die in his lifetime?  I mean, the man was so desperate that when his prophecy time was close by, he distributed sweets among kids bribing them to pray for the death of Atham.  This on top of many attempts made on Atham's life by Mirza's obedient dogs.

Quote
Now even if certain enemies of Ghulam Ahmad survived after his death and outlived him, what does that prove? Didn't Musaylima the Liar and Aswat al-Ansi the False Prophet outlive the Prophet

Finally!  After several posts, you have mentioned names that are on the same pedestal as your false prophet, Musaylma and Aswat al-Ansi.  Those two people are of the same category as Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.  As for what it proves (that his enemies outlived Mirza)?  Well, Mirza prophesied that they would die in his lifetime.  Like Sanaullah Amritsari, like Atham, etc.  Our Prophet (saw), on the other hand, never said that Musaylma and Aswat would die in his lifetime.  That was too much for a dimwit Qadiani to understand but I hope you get it now that I've broken it down for you.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 10:46:09 AM
The point - and here is where Abu Mussab becomes relevant - is that Abu Mussab is saying that Nouman Ali Khan said such and such without any reference to any of his video clips or publications.  And you thought I did not know your Qadiani tactics?


Now let me expose another one of your deceptions in lying against brother Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari too! You said that he he said "such and such" without any reference to any of his video clips:

&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 09, 2017, 11:02:13 AM
Now let me expose another one of your deceptions in lying against brother Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari too! You said that he he said "such and such" without any reference to any of his video clips

Two points:

1.  Nouman Ali Khan starts by saying, "and then there are some other people......" so he is only quoting them.  What he refers to as "paws" is translated as "forelegs" in more than one translation.  I highly doubt that the word used can only have one rigid meaning or Nouman may have erred.  No one claims he is infallible.

2.  Do you take Abu Mussab as a reliable source of Islamic information?  I am really interested in your answer without deflecting or performing your Qadiani-mandated religious dance a.k.a dancing around the issue, something your "very intelligent and lovely" brother was an expert in!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 12:04:02 PM
Mirza, in his own words, stated that he was on par with Prophet Muhammad (saw).

Bring your proof if you are truthful.

Quote
Mirza believed that anyone who believes that Jesus (asws) died was bound to Hell.

Bring your proof if you are truthful.


Quote
Fine but all said and done, the Prophet (saw) was guaranteed Paradise whereas we must do everything to reserve our place in Paradise.  Did your false prophet recite the shahada?  No!  In fact, he was debilitated due to the dryness of his mouth.

First prove that if a Muslim's last words are not the Shahada he will go to Hell. What about a mute person who cannot talk? So you are saying anyone who doesn't have the ability to verbalise the Shahadah, despite believing in it in his or her heart, is doomed to Jahannam?

Quote
"Huzoor (Mirza Ghulam) could not talk two hours before death.  Dr. Mirza Yaqoob Baig and Dr. Syed Mohammad Hussein Shah were the attending physicians. Huzoor asked for paper and wrote on it: 'I have too much dryness.  I can't talk.' and some other words which could not be read." (Al-Fazl, Vol. 25, No. 274, November 24, 1937)

If it is true what does it prove? I already said it's totally normal for a dying person to have difficulty in speaking. Is that suppose to be a proof that someone is going to Jahannam that his throat is dry? How absurd your ideas are.

Narrated Aisha:I never saw anybody suffering so much from sickness as Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) (Sahih Bukhari, Vol 7 Book 70 Hadith 549)


Quote
Are you assuming that you can only get cholera through an outbreak?  You did not know you are dealing with a Biology major so let me assure you that you are wrong to say that the only way to catch cholera is to come into contact with someone else having the illness.  WebMD says, "It is not likely you will catch cholera just from casual contact with an infected person."  It is only when Vibrio cholerae, the bacterium that causes cholera, usually found in food or water contaminated by feces from a person with the infection, enters the body that you get the disease.  (http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/cholera-faq#1)

Why didn't Ghulam Ahmad's companions who were around him when he was dying become infected with cholera? Dr Col Sutherland, a Chief Civil Surgeon of Lahore and Principal of King Edward Medical College, certified the cause of the death as intestinal irritation and not cholera. With this certificate the corpse of Ghulam Ahmad was allowed to be transported by rail from Lahore to Qadian for the burial. Dr. Cunningham; Civil Surgeon Lahore, thus signed that certificate of Dr. Sutherland to testify the authenticity of his diagnosis.

Quote
And are you sure there were no outbreaks of cholera in Lahore in 1908?  How about the 6th cholera pandemic which lasted from 1899 to 1923?  It started in India (surprise)!  Although not a reliable source, Wikipedia states, "The sixth cholera pandemic (1899–1923) was a major outbreak of cholera beginning in India, where it killed more than 800,000 people, and spreading to the Middle East, North Africa, Eastern Europe and Russia".  However, it reports this fact from CBC's website.  You can visit the Wikipedia article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1899%E2%80%931923_cholera_pandemic and check the references there.

We are talking about Lahore specifically, not India which is such a vast country. Use some common sense.

Quote
True Qadiani colors on display now!  When the going gets tough, the liars start misquoting and they rely on misinformation spread by the enemies of Islam.  Firstly, the two words do not add up.  The Qur'an uses al-wateen whereas the hadith employs al-abhar.

Ever heard of synonyms? Go and look up the meaning of these two words

Quote
  Secondly, the phrase that the Prophet (saw) uttered was a common Arabic idiom used to denote death in any form, regardless of whether the aorta was literally cut off or not.

Any proof of that it is merely an idiom?


Quote
Here is exactly what you said: "The Truth: Dr. Abdul Hakim was expelled from the Ahmadiyya Jama'at by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad because of his doctrines which constitute apostasy from Islam."  You made the two factors as dependent on each other.  That having outlandish beliefs in respect to Islam can cause one to be excommunicated from Qadianism.

There is no such thing as being "excommunicated from Qadianism". Dr. Abdul Hakim was excommunicated from the Jama'at not from a religion. He was excommunicated from the Jama'at on account of his apostasy from Islam not from "Qadianism". This is like if a father kicks out his son from his house if the son became a Christian and is old enough to live on his own. The father is a Muslim and tells his son 'get out you can no longer live in this house'. The son has been excommunicated from the house because of his apostasy from the religion. It hardly means the house is equivalent to Islam.

Quote
For Mirza, or you, to declare someone a murtad for having outlandish beliefs with regards to Islam is like the pot calling the kettle black.

And for someone to say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad denied Finality of Prophethood while believing that Prophet Jesus will come back in the future after the Last Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is what?

Quote
Do you want a list of people that outlived Mirza despite your false prophet claiming that he - via Divine Revelation - was informed that they would die in his lifetime?


I've already given detailed answers about Sanaullah Amritsari, Abdullah Atham and Dr. Abdul Hakim Patialvi. Who else is in your "list"? Bring it on you're giving me an opportunity to debunk all the lies of your Mullas. Remember the people reading this discussion are educated English speakers, not some Mullas from Chichawatni
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 12:09:53 PM
Nouman may have erred.  No one claims he is infallible.

Not only did Nouman err, you also erred by declaring boldly that Abu Mussab lied about him and there was no video clip. Now that I have brought out the video clip you are tucking your tail between your legs but still don't have the decency to admit that you yourself "erred". Don't you know that the thing Allah hates the most is arrogance?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 12:47:51 PM
Did mirza have a mastery of the arabic language?

Also you didn't respond to my post that mentioned that mirza relied on a weak hadith, changed the dates from the first night (which even by your definition provided on hilal etc should still be the first week at least & not the middle of the month) as you say its impossible for it to occur on the first night.

So either mirza relied upon a lie of shia narrator & then had to extend the lie by altering the dates or if the hadith is still acceptable then mirza again still lied on it.

This is clear proof to me he was fake.
 
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:03:41 PM
Did mirza have a mastery of the arabic language?

Absolutely. He wrote books in Arabic which astounded even the Arab scholars of his time. He claimed that Allah taught him 40,000 Arabic consonantal roots in a single night. This was in fact one of his Karamaat.

https://www.alislam.org/library/links/80-books.html#chapter-18
Quote
Karamatus Sadiqeen (The Miracles of the Truthful)
Written in the Arabic language.
In January 1893, Maulvi Mohammad Hussain published an article in his newspaper Ishaatus Sunna to the effect that Hadhrat Ahmad (as) did not know the Arabic language and that he was also ignorant of the meaning and true interpretation of the Holy Qur'an and therefore did not deserve any heavenly help. He called him a liar and a dajjal.

Hadhrat Ahmad (as) had told Maulvi Mohammad Hussain to draw lots and pick a sura of the Holy Qur'an for writing its commentary in the Arabic language and at the end of this commentary there should be 100 couplets in praise of the Holy Prophet, Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. He had also told him that the Maulvi could call others also to his help - including his teacher, Nazir Hussain.

Maulvi Mohammad Hussain said that he was ready to do so but did nothing about it. His silence really meant that he felt he was not capable of doing so. This being the situation, Hadhrat Ahmad (as) wrote Karamatus Sadiqeen. It contains four Euologies (poems written in praise) and a commentary on the Sura Fatiha.

Quote
Khutba Ilhamiyya (The Revealed Sermon)
On 11th April 1900, the day of Eid-ulAzha, Hadhrat Ahmed (as) delivered the sermon in the Arabic language and on his instructions it was noted word for word by Hadhrat Maulvi Nurud Deen and Hadhrat Maulvi Abdul Karim, Hadhrat Ahmad< (as) who knew the nature of this sermon (that it was a revelation), instructed the two of them to ask him at the same time if they missed any word for, once missed, it would be gone (which meant that he would not be able to repeat it).
When Maulvi Abdul Karim was rendering the Khutba into Urdu Hadhrat Ahmad (as) fell down in prostration for offering thanks to God and when he raised his head up he remarked that he had seen the word 'Mubarak' (Blessed) written in red ink and it was an indication of acceptance.

Hadhrat Ahmad (as) says that he got up to deliver the sermon in Arabic and God the Almighty granted him power from Himself and the words were being uttered by him spontaneously, in a way that did not at all lie in his power. 'It was like a hidden fountain gushing forth and I did not know whether it was I who was speaking or an angel was speaking through his tongue. The sentences were just being uttered and every sentence was a sign of God for me.'

Quote from: zaid_ibn_ali
Also you didn't respond to my post that mentioned that mirza relied on a weak hadith, changed the dates from the first night (which even by your definition provided on hilal etc should still be the first week at least & not the middle of the month) as you say its impossible for it to occur on the first night.

You got my definition wrong. I quoted Shaykh ul Islam Ibn taymiyya as saying that a lunar eclipse can only occur on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of a lunar month. So the "first of Ramadan" means the first of the nights in which it is possible for a lunar eclipse to occur, i.e., the 13th of Ramadan. And likewise, a solar eclipse is only possible on the 27th, 28th, and 29th of the lunar month, so the "middle of Ramadan" means the middle of those nights in which is a solar eclipse is possible, i.e., the 28th of Ramadan.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:12:26 PM

Also you didn't respond to my post that mentioned that mirza relied on a weak hadith, changed the dates from the first night (which even by your definition provided on hilal etc should still be the first week at least & not the middle of the month) as you say its impossible for it to occur on the first night.

The moon for the first night of the month is called Hilal (crescent). But the Hadith doesn't use the word Hilal when talking about the eclipse on the first of Ramadan but rather Qamar, clearly indicating it means the eclipse of the moon on the first of the possible nights in which a lunar eclipse can occur, i.e., the 13th.

https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/new/TruthAboutEclipses.html
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 01:18:45 PM
Any proof of his mastery of the arabic language from a non ahmadi source?

Please provide the passage from ibn taymiyyah so we can get a better feel of what he is discussing.

Is he actually explaining the hadith to mean the middle of the month or is he debunking it as a fabrication by citing its error?

Or is his discussion on the matter not related to the particular narration at all?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 01:21:53 PM

Also you didn't respond to my post that mentioned that mirza relied on a weak hadith, changed the dates from the first night (which even by your definition provided on hilal etc should still be the first week at least & not the middle of the month) as you say its impossible for it to occur on the first night.

The moon for the first night of the month is called Hilal (crescent). But the Hadith doesn't use the word Hilal when talking about the eclipse on the first of Ramadan but rather Qamar, clearly indicating it means the eclipse of the moon on the first of the possible nights in which a lunar eclipse can occur, i.e., the 13th.

https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/new/TruthAboutEclipses.html

You yourself cited from lizan al arab etc the defintion being from the 2nd or 3rd onwards.
So even in this setting it would be the first week & not the middle of the month.
To say the 'first of the possible nights', who's words are these? Yours & mirzas or ibn taymiyyah or anyone else?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:26:07 PM
Any proof of his mastery of the arabic language from a non ahmadi source?

The proof is in the pudding. All you have to do is read any one his numerous Arabic books, for example, Sirr ul Khilafah, Hammamatul Bushra, Karamat us Saadiqeen, Khutbat ul Ilhaamiyah.

Imam Albani, although he said Ghulam Ahmad was a Dajjal, nevertheless confessed that he was knowledgeable in an audio recording (see from 9:30)



Quote
Please provide the passage from ibn taymiyyah so we can get a better feel of what he is discussing.

Is he actually explaining the hadith to mean the middle of the month or is he debunking it as a fabrication by citing its error?

Or is his discussion on the matter not related to the particular narration at all?

I already quoted Ibn Taymiyya's reference, but I think you hastily glossed over it. You can go back and check. It was from his Majmu al Fatawa: Bab Khusuf al Qamar

And I quoted him for the express purpose of showing you that he knew the lunar eclipse can only occur on the 13th, 14th, and 15th on the lunar month, not to quote his comments on the Hadith in question.

I encourage you to read this article from the Ahmadiyya point of view for a detailed analysis with all the evidences on the matter
https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/new/TruthAboutEclipses.html
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 01:29:03 PM
You yourself cited from lizan al arab etc the defintion being from the 2nd or 3rd onwards.

Completely false. I did not such thing.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 02:25:13 PM
My bad. Apologies, I mixed you up with another qadiani source I was reading:

http://aaiil.org/text/articles/light/solarlunar_pf.shtml

Which states:

Lisan-al-Arab is another famous Arabic lexicon. Under the term qamar it writes:
[Arabic omitted]
that is, the term qamar is used after the third night up to the end of the month.

So the (weak) hadith would be at least interpreted as the first week if not literally the first night.

As for citing Ibn Taymiyya then we all seem to be in agreement that historically it occurs in the middle of the month.

So this brings us back to the following:

The prophet muhammad SAW would not utter a false prophecy.

So either the shia narrator lied & fabricated this report to mohammad al baqir or if you want to accept the narration then conclude the event has never occurred thus far in history.

Mirza relied upon a weak/fabricated narration by an extremist shia attributed to someone other than the prophet mohammad SAW, which means he was not very well versed in hadith science.

You didn't answer my question who's words are 'the first of the possible nights'?

The narration is weak/fabricated by a shia extremist attributed to someone other than the prophet SAW, its apparent words are the first night, linguistically it could be first week but does not state middle of the month or first possible date the event can occur.

True messiah or a fake imposter?



Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 09, 2017, 02:55:41 PM
My bad. Apologies, I mixed you up with another qadiani source I was reading:

http://aaiil.org/text/articles/light/solarlunar_pf.shtml

Which states:

Lisan-al-Arab is another famous Arabic lexicon. Under the term qamar it writes:
[Arabic omitted]
that is, the term qamar is used after the third night up to the end of the month.

So the (weak) hadith would be at least interpreted as the first week if not literally the first night.

As for citing Ibn Taymiyya then we all seem to be in agreement that historically it occurs in the middle of the month.

So this brings us back to the following:

The prophet muhammad SAW would not utter a false prophecy.

So either the shia narrator lied & fabricated this report to mohammad al baqir or if you want to accept the narration then conclude the event has never occurred thus far in history.

Mirza relied upon a weak/fabricated narration by an extremist shia attributed to someone other than the prophet mohammad SAW, which means he was not very well versed in hadith science.

You didn't answer my question who's words are 'the first of the possible nights'?

The narration is weak/fabricated by a shia extremist attributed to someone other than the prophet SAW, its apparent words are the first night, linguistically it could be first week but does not state middle of the month or first possible date the event can occur.

True messiah or a fake imposter?

I've already answered the objection that this Hadith is weak. It is not fabricated but has weakness for sure. Yet the weakness of the Hadith doesn't mean it is fabricated. The fact that it contains a prophecy is what needs to be focused on. If the prophecy has come true than the hadith should be accepted. Otherwise it may be discarded as false. That is where the discussion should revolve around.

The next issue is whether the prophecy of this Hadith is pointing to something that is astronomically impossible or should be interpreted as being a heavenly Sign that nevertheless does not defy the physical laws of the universe.

For this issue we need to consult the Quran and Sunnah.

لَا تَبْدِيلَ لِخَلْقِ اللَّـهِ
There is no change in the Creation of Allah (Sura 30:30)

وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ حُسْبَانًا ۚ ذَٰلِكَ تَقْدِيرُ الْعَزِيزِ الْعَلِيمِ
The Sun and Moon (are for) calculation. That is the determination of the Mighty, the Knowing. (Sura 6:96)

لَا الشَّمْسُ يَنبَغِي لَهَا أَن تُدْرِكَ الْقَمَرَ
The sun cannot overtake the moon (Sura 36:40)

And there are many Ayaat of Quran which speak of the fact that the moon has been created for calculating the months, and that these laws governing the bodies of the cosmos do not change until Judgment Day.

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described the solar and lunar eclipse as two Signs from the Signs of Allah, and if we witness them we should offer a special Salat (Bukhari Sharif)

So the lunar and solar eclipse have been described as 2 Signs even though they are not supernatural but natural occurrences. Now it is scientifically known that in the Islamic lunar months, the lunar eclipse can only occur on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of the month, and the solar eclipse during the 27th, 28th, and 29th of the month. This is the decree and determination of Allah. If there is any Hadith which speaks of their eclipses in Ramadan as a Sign of the Mahdi, they have to be understood in this context as signs of nature that are occurring under extraordinary circumstances and a rarity, but not as something supernatural or breaking the laws of physics which is impossible.

https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/new/TruthAboutEclipses.html
Quote
As the Promised Messiah as has mentioned, the purpose of the Hadith is not to promise some extraordinary prodigy but to provide a criterion for the recognition of the Imam Mahdi which is not shared by any other person (Zameema Nuzoolul Masih, Roohani Khazain, Vol.19, p.141).
[/size][/font]
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on July 09, 2017, 03:38:47 PM
The narrator of the report is a known shia extremist & liar.

Why would a true messiah rely on the words of liars?

You can write a whole essay on the cosmos & astronomy it doesn't change the fact that you have had to change the clear apparent meaning of a report narrated by a liar to support your messiah's claim.

You won't admit the ignorance of mirza in hadith sciences nor admit that the event described in the report has never occurred thus far.

I've asked you twice already who's words are the premise 'the first possible date it can occur'? You seem to keep ignoring this question.

So i'm asking a third time now.

Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Rationalist on July 09, 2017, 07:56:34 PM
I know the scholars that still reject the hadith. A hadith based on some truth is not binding on someone's aqeeda.

You said that you don't consider anything binding unless it has Tawaatur. Does that mean you don't consider the facts of Nuzul al Masih, Adhab al Qabr, Zuhur al Mahdi, Khuruj ad Dajjal, the Mizan, the Sirat, Sun rising from West before Judgment Day, etc., are not part of the Aqida?

Just to give you a background I don't believe in the 73 sects hadith. 
As for those events yes, those even are not binding to on the ummah to be a muslim or even a momin.
As for punishment of the grave, I believe that is in the Quran.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 12:17:01 AM

I've asked you twice already who's words are the premise 'the first possible date it can occur'? You seem to keep ignoring this question.

So i'm asking a third time now.

I've answered this question already if you carefully read through my posts. Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani himself gave this interpretation based on the wording of the Hadith (which has Qamar instead of Hilal) and other points.  See Ruhani Khaza'in V.8 P.198 (Nurul Haq p.10)

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Q7MAOpkB4hQ/WWKct0zH8BI/AAAAAAAACgg/wIVHZDUHPtI9hKWnSz9V5q7d-X2ZmYFjgCLcBGAs/s1600/Untitled.png)
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 10, 2017, 06:55:45 AM
Quote
Bring your proof if you are truthful.

"I am that same prophet , the very Incarnation of the 'Seal of Prophets' and twenty years back in the Book Baraheen-i-Ahmadiah, I was called by God by the names of Muhammad and Ahmad and was declared by God Himself to be the very prophet in fresh and blood."  (Eik Ghalati-ka-Izala, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani)

"It is a fact that Muhammad (pbuh) worked only three thousand miracles...  My Miracles exceed one million in numbers"  (Ijaze-e-Ahmadi, Page 79; Tadhkira tul Shahadatain, Page 41)

...and many more!

Quote
Bring your proof if you are truthful.



Quote
First prove that if a Muslim's last words are not the Shahada he will go to Hell.

I think I clarified that I was highlighting the humiliating death your false prophet suffered.  I pronounced it clearly but apparently it is too much to ask a Qadiani to read what is being written for its apparent meaning and not add to it their own spin.

Quote
If it is true what does it prove?

It proves - if you read my posts in their entirety - that your false prophet considered cholera to be the wrath of Allah (swt) and the same wrath consumed his life.  Allah (swt) made an example of him through his own (mis)adventures and missed prophecies but apparently your lot is too blind to see it.

Quote
Why didn't Ghulam Ahmad's companions who were around him when he was dying become infected with cholera?

Did his companions have a ritual of eating his feces?  Had you not been a dimwit, you would have visited the WebMD link or read the excerpt I shared from it which clearly says that you get cholera when you eat or drink anything that came in contact with fecal matter of an infected person.

Quote
We are talking about Lahore specifically, not India which is such a vast country. Use some common sense.

Lahore, in 1908, was a part of India, genius!  Had you read what I quoted, the 6th cholera pandemic started in India and reached Russia, Middle East and Eastern Europe.  And you want us to believe that it somehow missed Lahore. 

This is excellent display of Qadiani stupidity; your lot forsakes what is written explicitly for their own imaginations and wishful thinking.

Quote
Ever heard of synonyms? Go and look up the meaning of these two words

Wow, Qadiani boy!  So now we are to lump synonyms because it suits your position?  Whatever happened to "literal", "allegorical", "metaphorical" and "technical" along with the rest of the semantics you are fed by your British-owned masters to confuse the Muslim masses?!

Quote
Any proof of that it is merely an idiom?

Linguist expert and Qu'ranic exegete, Imam az-Zamakhshari in his book Assaas al-Balaagha [The Fundamentals of Rhetoric], pages 121-122 demonstrates that the phrase of the Prophet (peace be upon him) could be used metaphorically to denote one's passing away and perishing.  Ibn al-Abbar in his book 'Itaab al-Kitaab, Volume 1, page 42 cites a poem by Abdul Malik ibn Idris using the phrase in a sense denoting death and not literal cutting of the vein.  Pre-Islamic poet Bishr ibn abi Khaazim in his poem Ghashayta li-layla bi-sharqin Muqaama, similarly used the phrase in a metaphorical way denoting death.

Quote
And for someone to say Mirza Ghulam Ahmad denied Finality of Prophethood while believing that Prophet Jesus will come back in the future after the Last Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is what?

....will be called a Muslim who acts upon and upholds the words of the Prophet (saw).  The Prophet (saw) said that there will be no prophet after him.  We obey!  He (saw) also said that Jesus (asws) will have a second-coming but not as a law-bearing prophet but as a Muslim to uphold Islam. 

On the other hand, the "Love for All, Hatred for None" pigs - including you and your "very intelligent and lovely" brother - are kaafir because they take an one-eyed, pirate-lookalike, Dajjal-resembling British agent to be a prophet after, and equal to, Muhammad (saw).

Quote
Remember the people reading this discussion are educated English speakers, not some Mullas from Chichawatni

What is Chichawatni?  Is that your holiest Qadiani shrine?  Let me guess, the toilet in which Mirza died?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 10, 2017, 07:39:52 AM
"I am that same prophet , the very Incarnation of the 'Seal of Prophets' and twenty years back in the Book Baraheen-i-Ahmadiah, I was called by God by the names of Muhammad and Ahmad and was declared by God Himself to be the very prophet in fresh and blood."  (Eik Ghalati-ka-Izala, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani)

No page number? No original text? A translation or paraphrasing by your Irshad.org team. You keep exposing yourself as someone who doesn't verify anything. "It's enough to make someone a liar who keeps on repeating what he heard."

The book Ek Ghalati Ka Izala is available online for anyone to read. Why don't you quote from the original book where this passage is written? And if you don't understand Urdu the English translation is available too
https://www.alislam.org/library/browse/volume/Ruhani_Khazain/book/Aik_Ghalati_Ka_Azala/?l=English#page/-9/mode/1up

Keep in mind this is a small booklet of not more than two dozen pages. Don't be lazy, read the book and then tell me where this fabricated quote is from.

Quote
"It is a fact that Muhammad (pbuh) worked only three thousand miracles...  My Miracles exceed one million in numbers"  (Ijaze-e-Ahmadi, Page 79; Tadhkira tul Shahadatain, Page 41)

Old and useless objection that has been debunked so many times
http://ahmadianswers.com/ahmad/allegations/writings/miracles/

But the fact that even then you were unable to quote the passage in full with the context reveals your intent to deceive and pull the wool over people's eyes.

Quote



Where in this entire video was it quoted that Ghulam Ahmad said whoever believes Jesus is deceased will burn in hell? I ask you to prove something but you bring something else. Brazen deception and very pathetic of you.

Quote
I think I clarified that I was highlighting the humiliating death your false prophet suffered.  I pronounced it clearly but apparently it is too much to ask a Qadiani to read what is being written for its apparent meaning and not add to it their own spin.

Look how you are running like a chicken without a head. I ask you to prove about the Shahada and you dodge the question to say Ghulam Ahmad suffered a humiliating death. How did he suffer a humiliating death? You haven't proven that either. All you keep proving is how stupid and weak you are.

Quote
Lahore, in 1908, was a part of India, genius!

Are you that stupid to think that every single part of India was having an epidemic cholera simultaneously from 1899 to 1923? Are you ever stupider to say that the cholera pandemic that reached Russia, Middle East, and Eastern Europe engulfed those places in their entirety as well? Surely you must be.

Quote
Wow, Qadiani boy!  So now we are to lump synonyms because it suits your position?  Whatever happened to "literal", "allegorical", "metaphorical" and "technical" along with the rest of the semantics you are fed by your British-owned masters to confuse the Muslim masses?!

Classic deflection. You keep exposing how you have absolutely nothing but ad hominems.

Quote
Linguist expert and Qu'ranic exegete, Imam az-Zamakhshari in his book Assaas al-Balaagha [The Fundamentals of Rhetoric], pages 121-122 demonstrates that the phrase of the Prophet (peace be upon him) could be used metaphorically to denote one's passing away and perishing.  Ibn al-Abbar in his book 'Itaab al-Kitaab, Volume 1, page 42 cites a poem by Abdul Malik ibn Idris using the phrase in a sense denoting death and not literal cutting of the vein.  Pre-Islamic poet Bishr ibn abi Khaazim in his poem Ghashayta li-layla bi-sharqin Muqaama, similarly used the phrase in a metaphorical way denoting death.

Did you clarify if they are speaking about the passage in Surah al Haaqah or commenting on the Hadith in Bukhari about the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم saying I feel the poison is cutting up my aorta?

Quote
He (saw) also said that Jesus (asws) will have a second-coming but not as a law-bearing prophet but as a Muslim to uphold Islam. 

You just proved that a Prophet can come as long as he isn't a law-bearing prophet and is a Muslim upholding Islam. Well done.

Quote
What is Chichawatni? 

Wow what an idiot you are. Chichawatni is the headquarters of your anti-Ahmadi group called Majlis-e-Ahrar. Thanks for calling it a toilet though.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 11, 2017, 04:44:01 AM
The book Ek Ghalati Ka Izala is available online for anyone to read. Why don't you quote from the original book where this passage is written? And if you don't understand Urdu the English translation is available too
https://www.alislam.org/library/browse/volume/Ruhani_Khazain/book/Aik_Ghalati_Ka_Azala/?l=English#page/-9/mode/1up

Keep in mind this is a small booklet of not more than two dozen pages. Don't be lazy, read the book and then tell me where this fabricated quote is from.

As far as textual integrity is concerned, I can expect nothing from a group known for intellectual dishonesty of the highest order.  If you can try to change the word of Allah (swt), how hard is it to modify your own books?  What your booklet says online versus what I have quoted shall be reconciled in due time when I get to the video.

Quote
Old and useless objection that has been debunked so many times

Again, thank you for bringing this up because in due time - next point specifically - I will prove that your false, "Pirate of the Caribbean" prophet was known for changing his mind sooner than you change your clothes.

Quote
Where in this entire video was it quoted that Ghulam Ahmad said whoever believes Jesus is deceased will burn in hell? I ask you to prove something but you bring something else. Brazen deception and very pathetic of you.

Going through a debate exceeding 12 clips, I shared the wrong link.  My apologies to everyone, including you.  Here is the actual link.  If you can expect me to read a booklet, I expect you to watch the preceeding and proceeding videos (in case you miss the point).



In case you missed the point - and truth usually evades Qadianis even if it hits them between their eyes - allow me to highlight the main points.

1.  In Baraaheen-e-Ahmadia, Mirza aligned himself with the Islamic position (that Jesus (asws) is alive) and it is said that he wrote that book with "Divine Revelation from Allah (swt)".  I think we can both agree that going against such a belief - against something Divinely Revealed - is tantamount to kufr and worthy of punishment of Hellfire in the Hereafter.  Keep reading; this will be reaffirmed in point # 3.

2.  Then, despite the matter being "Divinely Revealed" to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he changed his position on this matter (please refer to the video and the helpless and laughable rebuttal by your brothers).  And this should prove to everyone your entire cult's dishonest ways.  So is it any wonder that what I have quoted for you from your texts are missing today or has something to the contrary in another book authored by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?  The man could not even stick to one position for more than a day.

3.  He maintained the position that Jesus (asws) was alive for 52 years of his life.  Then suddenly, Mirza claimed that Allah (swt) had "revealed" to him new information that Jesus (asws) had died and everyone who does not believe it (that Jesus (asws) has died) is a mushrik (refer to the video please).  Since you claim to know logic, if disbelieving in the death of Jesus (asws) makes one mushrik, logic necessitates that prior to the "revelation of this new information" to Mirza, those who disbelieved in Jesus (asws) being alive were bound to Hellfire according to Muslims and Mirza (who held that belief for 52 years of his life before changing it).

Quote
Look how you are running like a chicken without a head. I ask you to prove about the Shahada and you dodge the question to say Ghulam Ahmad suffered a humiliating death. How did he suffer a humiliating death? You haven't proven that either. All you keep proving is how stupid and weak you are.

Dying while taking a dump with your life leaving through your rear-end is quite an honor, right?

Quote
Are you that stupid to think that every single part of India was having an epidemic cholera simultaneously from 1899 to 1923? Are you ever stupider to say that the cholera pandemic that reached Russia, Middle East, and Eastern Europe engulfed those places in their entirety as well? Surely you must be.

The burden of proof is upon you to prove that Lahore was spared from this pandemic since your original claim - that there was no cholera outbreak in Lahore - has been challenged and refuted.  You had the audacity to refer to me as a "chicken without a head" but watch how I will slice yours.

Lahore, if you know the history of the subcontinent, was the capital of Punjab.  I have two sources that say, "According to Leonard Rogers, following an outbreak of cholera at the Haridwar Kumbh Mela, the epidemic spread to Europe via Punjab, Afghanistan, Persia, and southern Russia."

Sources: 1.  R. Dasgupta. "Time Trends of Cholera in India : An Overview" (PDF). INFLIBNET. Retrieved 13 December 2015.

2.  Rogers, L. (1926). The Conditions Influencing the Incidence and Spread of Cholera in India. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 19(Sect Epidemiol State Med), 59–93.

Quote
Classic deflection. You keep exposing how you have absolutely nothing but ad hominems.

I can give you an ad hominem which will make the remains of the filthy body of your one-eyed Dajjal quake in his grave but I will save it for a later time.

Quote
You just proved that a Prophet can come as long as he isn't a law-bearing prophet and is a Muslim upholding Islam. Well done.

Wow, dimwit, again falling for absence of evidence being evidence of absence.  I clearly said that Jesus (asws) will come as a Muslim to uphold Islam.  It isn't your fault; your lot are trained to read your own desires into texts and insert them into others' words.

Quote
Wow what an idiot you are. Chichawatni is the headquarters of your anti-Ahmadi group called Majlis-e-Ahrar. Thanks for calling it a toilet though.

Either ways, with all due respect to those who live in Chichawatni, it must be a "toilet" metaphorically because it is the center for the demise of Qadianis, just like another toilet served as the death place of your one-eyed Dajjal.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 11, 2017, 06:31:04 AM

As far as textual integrity is concerned, I can expect nothing from a group known for intellectual dishonesty of the highest order.  If you can try to change the word of Allah (swt), how hard is it to modify your own books?  What your booklet says online versus what I have quoted shall be reconciled in due time when I get to the video.

This insinuation shows just how ignorant you are. Your own mullas who claim to be champions of disparaging the Ahmadiyya sect have never said that the Ahmadiyya books lack textual integrity. Even they know that there isn't a single example of the Ahmadiyya interpolating their own books. This is why they quote not only from the older prints and newer prints, but also from the Ahmadiyya official website (www.alislam.org) when trying to refute "Qadiyanism".

Quote
1.  In Baraaheen-e-Ahmadia, Mirza aligned himself with the Islamic position (that Jesus (asws) is alive) and it is said that he wrote that book with "Divine Revelation from Allah (swt)".  I think we can both agree that going against such a belief - against something Divinely Revealed - is tantamount to kufr and worthy of punishment of Hellfire in the Hereafter.  Keep reading; this will be reaffirmed in point # 3.

Look how Allah has exposed you as a plain Liar. لَّعْنَتَ اللَّـهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

You originally claimed that Ghulam Ahmad said anyone who believes Jesus is dead will burn in Hell. Now you made a complete 180 degree U turn like and like a donkey is just braying in disgrace. You couldn't find an explicit statement to that effect so now you are putting words in his mouth and making your own inference. Furthermore, you said Baraheen e Ahmadiyya was written under "divine revelation" but did not clarify what kind of revelation, i.e., Wahi al Jali, Wahi al Khafi, Ilham, Tahdith. Obviously because you are too dumb to know what these kinds of revelation even are, nor are you even able to quote anything from Barahin e Ahmadiyya unless Irshad.org website has it because you are too lazy to actually pick up a book and read it. And even then you cannot find out if the claim regarding Barahin e Ahmadiyya is general or not.

Quote
2.  Then, despite the matter being "Divinely Revealed" to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he changed his position on this matter (please refer to the video and the helpless and laughable rebuttal by your brothers).  And this should prove to everyone your entire cult's dishonest ways.  So is it any wonder that what I have quoted for you from your texts are missing today or has something to the contrary in another book authored by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?  The man could not even stick to one position for more than a day.

I'd like you to explain this Hadith:

قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ وَإِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "He (Dajjal) is in the sea of Sham (Mediterranean) or the Sea of Yemen (Arabian Sea). No, rather he is in the direction of the East." (Abu Dawud sharif)

 فَإِنَّهُ أَعْجَبَنِي حَدِيثُ تَمِيمٍ أَنَّهُ وَافَقَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أُحَدِّثُكُمْ عَنْهُ وَعَنِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَمَكَّةَ أَلاَ إِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ ما هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ إِلَى الْمَشْرِقِ
"this account narrated by Tamim Dari was liked by me for it corroborates the account which I gave to you in regard to him (Dajjal) at Medina and Mecca. Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he is in the east, he is in the east, he is in the east, and he pointed with his hand towards the east. " (Sahih Muslim)

Now look how the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changed his Aqida several times regarding the Dajjal. First he said he agrees with the story of Tamim al Dari that Dajjal is on an island because it agrees with what he had been saying all along. Then he said Dajjal is in the Mediterranean. Then he changed and said Dajjal is in the Red Sea. Finally, his last view was that Dajjal is in the East.

So please explain this Hadith that if the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changes his Aqida about the location of Dajjal based on divine inspiration it is okay, but if Ghulam Ahmad changes his Aqida about Jesus being alive or dead then he must be a liar.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hadrami on July 11, 2017, 06:35:29 AM
can we pleeeeeeeeaaassseee ignore this "died in his own poop" false prophet's admirer? I hate looking at this forum's last posting filled with his various post. This is sunni shia forum!!!!
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: ZulFiqar on July 11, 2017, 07:23:49 AM

Dying while taking a dump with your life leaving through your rear-end is quite an honor, right?

Another oft repeated lie of shameless mullas. Where is your proof? I've already exposed you as a liar several times. You have absolutely no credibility left.

Quote
The burden of proof is upon you to prove that Lahore was spared from this pandemic

Now you don't even know the principle that governs whose shoulders upon the burden of proof rests. The one who makes a claim of something unusual has the burden of proof.

Nevertheless, I present the documented evidence that there was no cholera outbreak in Lahore of May 1908. And you claim to know so much about cholera, then you should also know that water borne diseases including cholera spread during the rainy season (monsoon), and that is not the season in Lahore in the month of May.


&feature=youtu.be


Quote
Wow, dimwit, again falling for absence of evidence being evidence of absence.  I clearly said that Jesus (asws) will come as a Muslim to uphold Islam.

Answer these questions and we will then see who is dimwitted:

Quote from: ZulFiqar
1. Is Jesus a Prophet of Allah?

2. During the second advent, will Jesus retain his status and office of being a Prophet?

3. Will Jesus be demoted in status and become a non-Prophet during his second advent?

4. Will it remain an article of faith to believe in Jesus as a Prophet of Allah during the second advent?

5. If Jesus remains a Prophet, will his Nubuwwah be operable and functioning during the second advent?

6. Will the forty some parts of Nubuwwah continue to be manifested by Jesus during his second advent?

7. Will Jesus continue to receive Wahi from Allah during his second advent?
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 21, 2017, 11:46:13 PM
This insinuation shows just how ignorant you are. Your own mullas who claim to be champions of disparaging the Ahmadiyya sect have never said that the Ahmadiyya books lack textual integrity.

So if our scholars have not made that claim (that your texts are incoherent and lack textual integrity) that makes me ignorant?  Following a swimming-in-poo false prophet, you have forgotten that when we say a certain person is a "false prophet", his entire creed is akin the poo he died in.  Same applies to everything that this false prophet said or wrote.

Our scholars say it politely and indirectly; I say it like it is.

Quote
This is why they quote not only from the older prints and newer prints, but also from the Ahmadiyya official website (www.alislam.org) when trying to refute "Qadiyanism".

Unfortunately, they've to stoop to your level to engage with you dimwits.

Quote
You originally claimed that Ghulam Ahmad said anyone who believes Jesus is dead will burn in Hell. Now you made a complete 180 degree U turn like and like a donkey is just braying in disgrace.

Your crap-dwelling false prophet held that belief for 52 years and said that anyone who believed Jesus (asws) was dead was a mushrik.  Later, he changed his mind and asked his followers to try a new nuskha (that Jesus (asws) had died).  You glossed over that point but look at your donkey-like representatives in that video and how their braying went silent after that point was established.

Quote
Furthermore, you said Baraheen e Ahmadiyya was written under "divine revelation" but did not clarify what kind of revelation, i.e., Wahi al Jali, Wahi al Khafi, Ilham, Tahdith.

He received it as "Wahi al diarrhea".

Quote
Obviously because you are too dumb to know what these kinds of revelation even are, nor are you even able to quote anything from Barahin e Ahmadiyya unless Irshad.org website has it because you are too lazy to actually pick up a book and read it.

I am not lazy to pick up a book and read it.  I just don't touch poo-filled books written by those who live and die in poop.

Quote
So please explain this Hadith that if the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changes his Aqida about the location of Dajjal

Location of Dajjal is not a matter of aqeedah as is the issue of Jesus (asws) being dead or alive because even Allah (swt) attests to it (that Jesus (asws) was alive).  Also, both narrations end with specifying that Dajjal is in the East.  So I don't know if you have a point at all?  Going further, Sahih Muslim outweighs Abu Dawud's collection.  Lastly, comparing a false prophet to the Best of Creation (saw) is a fallacious and criminal position you have assumed many times and once again just now.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 22, 2017, 11:40:45 PM
So please explain this Hadith that if the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changes his Aqida about the location of Dajjal based on divine inspiration it is okay, but if Ghulam Ahmad changes his Aqida about Jesus being alive or dead then he must be a liar.

And how dare you compare Mirza Ghulam Ahmed to our beloved Prophet (saw)?  You (yourself) quoted Mirza to another member here, brother Zaid to be specific, that Mirza never claimed to be a prophet and that at best, he was a mujaddid.

Thus far, we have two contradictions from you (that I can count).

1.  You mocked brother Nouman Ali Khan when discussing with me but then sang his praises to a Shia brother in another topic.

2.  You presented Mirza as a mujaddid but then compare him to the Prophet (saw).  And this is the "sunnah" of the one who came from human waste and died in it.  Kept changing his mind; claimed to be a mujaddid and tested the waters with it.  Then, he claimed to be the Mahdi (as).  Thereafter, he was the reincarnation of Jesus (asws).  Finally, he was the upgraded version of the Prophet (saw).  May Allah's (swt) curse be upon those who lie upon the pure religion of Muhammad (saw).
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: muslim720 on July 22, 2017, 11:49:38 PM
Again, please read scholarly historical accounts of the 6th cholera pandemic.  Here is a simple read along with a map.  It clearly states that the outbreak spread to the rest of the world through Punjab and unless you're a Qadiani dimwit, you would know that Lahore was the capital of Punjab.

https://cholera1.wikispaces.com/Pandemic+6
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Hadrami on July 23, 2017, 03:26:25 AM
Again, please read scholarly historical accounts of the 6th cholera pandemic.  Here is a simple read along with a map.  It clearly states that the outbreak spread to the rest of the world through Punjab and unless you're a Qadiani dimwit, you would know that Lahore was the capital of Punjab.

https://cholera1.wikispaces.com/Pandemic+6
Do we really need to know whether there was cholera outbreak or not? That cursed false prophet died on his own faeces after mubahala which of course that qadiyani denies. Ghulam qadiyani spewed filth and he died in filth. What a well deserved ending
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Ibn Taymiyya on April 29, 2019, 07:41:12 PM
That's fair enough. But no one, at least not me, is asking you to believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a messiah. I am only presenting him as a very good reformer and someone who was filled with Ilm and Irfan, and surely you can benefit a lot from reading his writings as I have.

Now you are referring to the incident with Sanaullah Amritsari, but I'm sure you have never heard of Ghulam Ahmad's prophecies and contests with Ghulam Dastagir Qasuri, John Alexander Dowie of America and Pundit Lekh Ram (a Hindu Arya). Read about these and you will truly be amazed that they were Signs of God that favored Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.


WELL overnight the guy who declared everyone not believing in him out of fold of islam becomes a defender of islam i am only amused(tadhkira page 519 in case dont know what i m referring to you)
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Ibn Taymiyya on April 29, 2019, 07:54:23 PM
The Hadith is certainly not fabricated, though it may have weakness. Now keep in mind this Hadith contains a prophecy. Hypothetically if you came across a prophecy from a weak Hadith which you saw as being fulfilled or knew for sure had been fulfilled, would you still deny the Hadith because of some weakness in its Sanad? In fact there are narrations that we know for a fact are outright fabrications, yet some of today's Ulama cling to them and quote them because they contain predictions which have turned out to be true. Hamza Yusuf (I assume you know of him) quoted a Hadith which is weak as containing an accurate prediction regarding Daesh. It it attributed to sayyidina Amir ul Mumineen رضى الله عنه and says:
إِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الرَّايَاتِ السُّودَ فَالْزَمُوا الأَرْضَ فَلا تُحَرِّكُوا أَيْدِيَكُمْ ، وَلا أَرْجُلَكُمْ ، ثُمَّ يَظْهَرُ قَوْمٌ ضُعَفَاءُ لا يُؤْبَهُ لَهُمْ ، قُلُوبُهُمْ كَزُبَرِ الْحَدِيدِ ، هُمْ أَصْحَابُ الدَّوْلَةِ ، لا يَفُونَ بِعَهْدٍ وَلا مِيثَاقٍ ، يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْحَقِّ وَلَيْسُوا مِنْ أَهْلِهِ ، أَسْمَاؤُهُمُ الْكُنَى ، وَنِسْبَتُهُمُ الْقُرَى ، وَشُعُورُهُمْ مُرْخَاةٌ كَشُعُورِ النِّسَاءِ ، حَتَّى يَخْتَلِفُوا فِيمَا بَيْنَهُمْ ، ثُمَّ يُؤْتِي اللَّهُ الْحَقَّ مَنْ يَشَاءُ
"When you see black flags, remain where you are and do not move your hands or your feet. Thereafter there shall appear a feeble folk to whom no concern is given. Their hearts will be like fragments of iron. They are the representatives of the State [AsHab al-Dawla]. They will fulfill neither covenant nor agreement. They will invite to the Truth though they are not from its people. Their names will be Kunaa (i.e. Abu Musab, Abu Bakr, etc.), and their ascriptions will be to Quraa (villages, towns i.e. al-Zarqawi, al-Baghdadi). Their hair will be long like that of women. They will remain so till they differ among themselves, and then God will bring forth the Truth from whomsoever He wills." (Kitab al-Fitan of Nuaym b. Hammad)

Now this Hadith is weak and before the emergence of Daesh one would have considered it as nothing more than an anti-Abbasid fabrication. But Hamza Yusuf was so moved by this Hadith on how incredibly accurate it is in describing Daesh and its Fitna that he quoted it in a sermon and despite knowing about its weakness declared it a true prophecy which must have come from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

So we come to know that a Hadith which has weakness, if it contains a prediction which has so obviously come to pass then there could be some truth to it in originating from Rasul Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم

So while there is some weakness in the Hadith about the lunar and solar eclipse occurring in the month of Ramadan as one of the heavenly signs of the Mahdi, it does have a supporting narration from Sharik as quoted in al-Hawi Lil Fatawa of Imam Suyuti:

وأخرج نعيم عن شريك قال : بلغني أنه قبل خروج المهدي ينكسف القمر في شهر رمضان مرتين

As for your point regarding the beginning and middle of Ramadan, if you mean to say that the moon should be eclipsed on the first night of Ramadan then that is impossible. Shaikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyya said that the lunar eclipse can only occur on the 13th, 14th and 15th of the month (Majmu al Fatawa: Bab Khusuf al Qamar)

Likewise the solar eclipse will be in the middle of the possible days it can occur (27th, 28th, or 29th) so would have to occur on the 28th of the month.

Finally you say that history documents the repetition of this sign many times in the past. The point is that has any claimant of being the Mahdi pointed to the occurrence of this Sign as being in his favor?

well this argument is also a heap of trash,for you to argue, since it came true thus has to be authentic you have to ist overule the conspiracy theory, you will have to prove that mirza ghulam ahmed wasnt back peddling and claiming just to place himself within the predictions of hadith.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Ibn Taymiyya on April 29, 2019, 08:05:04 PM
This insinuation shows just how ignorant you are. Your own mullas who claim to be champions of disparaging the Ahmadiyya sect have never said that the Ahmadiyya books lack textual integrity. Even they know that there isn't a single example of the Ahmadiyya interpolating their own books. This is why they quote not only from the older prints and newer prints, but also from the Ahmadiyya official website (www.alislam.org) when trying to refute "Qadiyanism".

on that note let us demonstrate the interpolation between the texts, tadhkira p 519 urdu edtion
the one who doesnt believe in mirza ghulam ahmed isnt a muslim, i challenge you to find this in english edition which remains on your websie since 2009, that is just a single example sufficent for you if you seek truth.
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Ibn Taymiyya on April 30, 2019, 05:32:18 PM
It isn't meant to be a long winded academic refutation of Shi'ism, only a defense of the Khulafa al Rashidin Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman رضى الله عنهم against the accusations of the Shi'a. Its objective is to elucidate Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani's creed and position regarding the contentious issue of Khilafa and the status of the Sahaba. It's a book written for the laity, i.e. ordinary Muslims, not for academics, hence why it is not as "technical" as you guys think it should be. Furthermore, Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani himself writes in this book that he doesn't want to delve into the chronicles and historical accounts, but present his creed regarding the status of the Khulafa al Rashidin and Sahaba in light of the Holy Qur'an.
mashallaha we know how much respect this man mirza ghulam ahmed had for sahaba,
1.commenting on a couplet of mirza ghulam ahmed his son mirza bashir the "divinely" appointed khalifah of qadiyanis says
"this couplet doesnt mean mirza ghulam ahmed is superior to a 100 hussain( r.a ) rather it means an hour long service of mirza ghulam ahmed is far superior than martyrdom of a 100 hussain r.a "
2.since mirza ghulam couldnt escape the beat of ABU HUrrairah r.a narrating explicit hadith on the second coming of jesus of nazreth, he just said abu hurraira r.a was ghabi (stupid ) we say curse be on those who curse the companions
3.mirza doesnt stop here, he goes on to say about his companion abdul lateef who was killed by afghans just for declaring jihad against british to be haram for afgahanis(this was an obvious threat to the sovereignty of afghanis)

Code: [Select]
abdul lateefs martyrdom is superior to the martyrdom of hussain r.a
ask me for references/scans of any single of the claims i made and dont litter this forum with falsehood
Title: Re: Qadiyani's
Post by: Ibn Taymiyya on April 30, 2019, 05:56:20 PM


Quote
قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ وَإِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "He (Dajjal) is in the sea of Sham (Mediterranean) or the Sea of Yemen (Arabian Sea). No, rather he is in the direction of the East." (Abu Dawud sharif)

 فَإِنَّهُ أَعْجَبَنِي حَدِيثُ تَمِيمٍ أَنَّهُ وَافَقَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أُحَدِّثُكُمْ عَنْهُ وَعَنِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَمَكَّةَ أَلاَ إِنَّهُ فِي بَحْرِ الشَّامِ أَوْ بَحْرِ الْيَمَنِ لاَ بَلْ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ ما هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ مِنْ قِبَلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مَا هُوَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَأَوْمَأَ بِيَدِهِ إِلَى الْمَشْرِقِ
"this account narrated by Tamim Dari was liked by me for it corroborates the account which I gave to you in regard to him (Dajjal) at Medina and Mecca. Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he is in the east, he is in the east, he is in the east, and he pointed with his hand towards the east. " (Sahih Muslim)

Now look how the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changed his Aqida several times regarding the Dajjal. First he said he agrees with the story of Tamim al Dari that Dajjal is on an island because it agrees with what he had been saying all along. Then he said Dajjal is in the Mediterranean. Then he changed and said Dajjal is in the Red Sea. Finally, his last view was that Dajjal is in the East.

So please explain this Hadith that if the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم changes his Aqida about the location of Dajjal based on divine inspiration it is okay, but if Ghulam Ahmad changes his Aqida about Jesus being alive or dead then he must be a liar.[/size][/font]

why dont you quote the full hadeeth it will once for all prove what a truthful man mirza ghulam ahmed was. to him dajjal means means media christian missionary, and what not...........