unflinching idealism ... since 1997 archivessitemapabouthelpfeedback
all are welcome to read, write and think
  • Home
  • InFocus
  • Themes
  • Columns
  • Articles
  • Fiction
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Unplugged
  • Writers
  • Interactors
  • Tags
Sign in | Join Chowk
web chowk
  • Article
  • Interact
  • read writer comments
  • add to favorites
  • get rss feeds
  • print
  • email this link

In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth

Mohammad Gill April 22, 2007

Latest comments   flat   threaded   latest   oldest   all
listing 1-16   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

#461 Posted by teshah on May 11, 2007 8:56:37 pm
Re: # 442
sattar

``It seems Bahais are not seen as a threat and perhaps hence largely ignored by mullah in Pakistan. They seem to be persecuted in Iran though … I don’t know the details …``

Right! Bhaies are persecuted in Iran, there home-ground and Ahmadies likewise in Pakistan. I think Bhaies may not present a challenge to the Paky Mullah but they are evidently a greater challenge to Islam as they assert that Islam, which had a life of 1200 years only, has long since expired like the other pre-Islamic Abrahamic religions. But the Paky Mullah totally ignored it because it did not affect his business. I wonder Bhais have a palatial centre here in Islamabad but few people know about it. Probably because the Mullah did not provide it negative publicity as they did in the case of Ahmadiat. In fact the greatest danger to the mullah business is the appearance of a prophet, even a false one, as they may call.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#460 Posted by sattar2 on May 11, 2007 2:36:15 pm

Urstruly,

It is laughable to have you assert belief in science … while waiting for a prophet from 2000 years ago to climb out of his grave. That’s all.

… didn’t mean to upset you over this whole Islam thing. No need to get so defensive. All you need is more faith … and everything will be alright. No, really …

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#459 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 1:30:18 pm
TOURRET SYNDROME:
One of the symptoms of Tourettes would be Coprolalia (outburst of obscenities and curse words).
cop·ro·la·li·a - cursing, uttering obscenities, the explosive utterance of foul or ``dirty`` words or more elaborate sexual, aggressive or insulting statements (e.g., racial slurs). Literally, “dung talking”, because of a compulsion to do so. ``
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#458 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 1:24:45 pm

There you go again with your Tourette Syndrome. Please explain to me what is that that compels you everytime to ``stir up the pot`` despite the fact that everytime it is you who ends up even more miserable. Look, for the thousandeth time, I have no interest in ``proving`` quadiani system of belief right or wrong, as long as you do not ascribe the name ``Islam`` to your belief system. Live and let live. You must learn to have tolerance towards the beliefs of others. Sadly, I must point this out to you the undeniable obvious, again, that Quadianiat cannot stand on its on merit.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#457 Posted by sattar2 on May 11, 2007 10:40:26 am

Urstruly,

You really are dense … and just another nutcase with superstitious beliefs. And I am ok with it (grin). Apparently Islam is flexible enough to accommodate beliefs of the uninformed (read idiots). Welcome to Islam: Bring along your superstitions; let’s have a party. Takbeer.

Next pillars of Islam: Earth is flat; white man is evil; women should be periodically beaten up to please god.

So you think Jesus will be resurrected? But he did not die in the first place! Apparently he remains alive to this day, in flesh and blood, and resides above the clouds. What resurrection??? He simply needs to descend from the clouds … that would be a good start!

+++

This would be a good time for you to stop harping about millions of Muslims who believe in evolution and science. It makes you come across as a rambling fool trying hard to sound intelligent. No?

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#456 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 6:57:35 am
Re: # 455

So Mirza Sahib was a spiritual Jesus Christ and not the real Jesus of Nazareth (pbuh). Shouldn`t then he would have faught a spiritual one-eyed fire breathing donkey at least. But anyway ``to you your belief and to me mine``. And more power to you if that is your belief.

The Muslim belief in this regard is that Jesus Christ (pbuh) will be ressurected again when the time of the Day of Final Judgement would be near, as an adult, in Damascus. Once again his reincarnation in this world would be (this time not only without father but mother as well) as miraculous as it was then when he was born to Virigin Mary (pbuh). He will unite all the Muslims around the globe and establish a glabal empire of faith during his lifetime, instead of creating a petty little cult.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#455 Posted by sattar2 on May 10, 2007 4:03:06 pm

… in other words, Issa died 2000 years ago, has been dead since then, and is expected to stay that way for times to come. I hope this is now clear (grin).

Your ullema believing in science and evolution is fine and dandy; I am impressed!! But pray tell us, how do they suppose this Issa will come back? Climb out of his grave, or descend from skies where he supposedly has been residing all this time …???

... we are all curious, you know ...
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#454 Posted by sattar2 on May 10, 2007 2:24:06 pm

Urstruly,

I am glad we are discussing basic, little things … which adequately highlight your sheer stupidity.

According to Mirza Sahib, Issa died almost 2000 years ago and has been buried in Kashmir ever since. He is not going to climb out of his grave.

Furthermore, reappearance of Issa is a spiritual metaphor, which has been fulfilled in prophethood of Mirza Sahib.

Got it, little genius??

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#453 Posted by Urstruly on May 10, 2007 2:00:31 pm
Re: # 452

The truth is on the record that Mirza claimed to be the very Jesus Christ who was saved from cross and brought to Kashmir. He claimed that in no uncertain terms. There is no innuendo. So either you are lying about your own belief or all the records of Mirza`s accounts are wrong. In both cases you should repent and seek forgiveness from Allah for your indiscretion and transgression.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#452 Posted by sattar2 on May 10, 2007 1:50:45 pm

Urstruly,

Ahamdi-Muslims believe that Issa died at an old age, like a normal human being. His reappearance refers to a prophet among Muslims who will bear spiritual resemblance to Issa.

Is this too difficult to understand?? I’ll wait for your answer before going further, you idiot!!

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#451 Posted by Urstruly on May 10, 2007 1:16:35 pm
Let me get this straight. According to Quadiani beliefs God can resurrect Jesus Christ (pbuh), who was living somewhere else but clouds, in the physical person of Mirza Quadiani, but cannot resurrect humanity in physical appearance on the Day of Final Judgment? As a Qura`n thumping Mirzai would you also care to explain when Qura`n says that `` At length, when they reach the (Fire), their hearing, their sight, and their skins will bear witness against them, as to (all) their deeds.``

Well, I can imagine the sense of hearing and sight of spiritual beings but what about ``skin``.

Here is the detail. Fear the Day.



``On the Day that the enemies of Allah will be gathered together to the Fire, they will be marched in ranks.
At length, when they reach the (Fire), their hearing, their sight, and their skins will bear witness against them, as to (all) their deeds.
They will say to their skins: ``Why bear ye witness against us?`` They will say: ``(Allah) hath given us speech,- (He) Who giveth speech to everything: He created you for the first time, and unto Him were ye to return.
``Ye did not seek to hide yourselves, lest your hearing, your sight, and your skins should bear witness against you! But ye did think that Allah knew not many of the things that ye used to do!
``But this thought of yours which ye did entertain concerning your Lord, hath brought you to destruction, and (now) have ye become of those utterly lost!``

…………….Chapter - (Signs) Explained 41:19-23

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#450 Posted by sattar2 on May 10, 2007 10:51:09 am

Urstruly,

When I saw the pic, my immediate reaction was to think that Jesus has been sighted on the moon! May be in the next pic you post ...??

Resurrection on the Day of Judgment would be spiritual, and not physical, in nature. Similarly, reappearance of Jesus refers to coming of a prophet in the spirit of Jesus. Got it, little genius? Refer to #377 for details.

Moving on

Are you are telling us that Jesus has been residing above clouds for past two thousand years … will descend down to earth on shoulders of two angels … and will fight a one-eyed monster who will be riding a giant fire-breathing donkey …??

It is fine for you to be superstitious. Just don’t harp about millions of Muslims believing in evolution and science and such stuff. It comes across as double-talk. And as you suggested, one either has faith, or he does not; belief has little to do with reason and cannot be questioned.

Next pillar of your Islam: earth is flat! We’ve been there … it was called “dark ages”. Thanks, but no, thanks.

And as zeemax explained, Islam does not support superstition, but is flexible enough to accommodate beliefs of the uninformed (read “idiots”).

Got any more cool pics??
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#449 Posted by Folio on May 10, 2007 9:55:02 am
Urstruly,

U mean 2 say that the line u see on the moon was made by Muhammed?

Was the ring-band around Saturn cud be the foreskin of the prophet?? Plz clarify.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#448 Posted by Urstruly on May 10, 2007 7:06:22 am

``How will Allah ressurect Jesus Christ (pbuh), residing in heavens?``

It is the same question that jahil kaffir beduines used to ask Holy Prophet (pbuh), as to how will Allah ressurect us all on the Day of Final Judgment from mere dust and bones. It is Allah who showed those Beduines how He can split the moon in half just as Holy Prophet (pbuh) waved his finger.

Look at this and be humble:

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#447 Posted by sattar2 on May 9, 2007 9:21:10 am

OK, I’ll stir the pot once again … to bring the discussion back to issue raised in this article …

Is Issa coming down or not …?

zeemax, you were supposed to reach consensus with Urstruly and Naqsh.
What’s the verdict?

Urstruly, let’s set aside them millions of Muslims who believe in evolution and science and stuff … question remains … how is this Issa supposed to reappear? Don’t be hard on yourself ... I suspect your faith has become weak … in which case Issa may scrap the plan altogether. “What’s the point?”, he’d wonder …

On the other hand, how long can he stay above clouds?? Global warming may make the heat unbearable for him … or he may simply fall through the hole in ozone layer … No???
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#446 Posted by Folio on May 8, 2007 2:38:13 pm
And this video has the images of our farthest known universe, ever taken by human beings.......

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#445 Posted by Folio on May 8, 2007 1:39:58 pm
B4 this article goes into the archives...............



People like Echoboom, Urstruly etc can have peace in rejecting these facts BUT `People Like Us` (PLUS) would amaze at the wonders of this Universe...........looking at these objecs with a critical view than from the standpoint of `belief`.


The BIGGEST stalemate of this world (btw belivers and non-believers) continues..........




reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#444 Posted by sattar2 on May 8, 2007 9:58:35 am

Urstruly,

If Issa is still above clouds and Solomon talked to ants, then anything is possible.

You think that either one believes, or he does not; faith is beyond question ... beyond reason ... and has little to do with sense. Takbeer. Verily, Allah does what He wills …

… so what about them Muslims who believe in science and evolution. I reckon their faith is weak. No??

... or we could wait for your Issa to descend from the clouds and settle this matter. Till then you are only making a fool of yourself ...
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#443 Posted by Urstruly on May 8, 2007 9:39:30 am

Re: # 440

I am only letting you get away with these lies and false quadiani propaganda, because I am too bored with this subject at the moment.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#442 Posted by sattar2 on May 8, 2007 7:55:37 am

teshah,

… you’re welcome.

It seems Bahais are not seen as a threat and perhaps hence largely ignored by mullah in Pakistan. They seem to be persecuted in Iran though … I don’t know the details …

Regarding the riddle: this child may or may not be considered illegitimate, depending upon who you ask. For the mother, it is legitimate; for the father it is not. Others may form opinions based upon hearsay. A court could decide by looking at circumstantial evidence, DNA tests etc. So no clear cut answers at this point …

Although if the child has a mole on its butt right where the father has one ... chances are it is his kid indeed ...
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#441 Posted by teshah on May 7, 2007 9:37:36 pm
Re: # 439

Sattar2

Thank you for the clarification.

But Bhaaies used almost all paraphernalia of Islam minus rituals without claiming to be Muslim and so the Paky Mullah is not after them for that reason.

My question is; what would you call a person whom one`s wife claims to be her son or is supposed to be so but her husband doesn`t consider him to be so? Will he not technically be called an illegitimate son?



reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#440 Posted by sattar2 on May 7, 2007 4:48:42 pm

khuram,

My post #439 to Zeena addresses some of the points you seemingly alluded to.

Mirza Sahib claimed to be the prophet of Islam raised by Allah, foretold by Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). For him and his followers, Islam represents a complete way of life.

Disbelievers tend to ostracize prophet and his followers, who, in response, develop an identity separate from that of non-believers. I don’t think there is anything new or unusual here.

Parallels between early Muslims and Ahmadi-Muslims …

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) foretold revival of Islam by its future prophet. Ahmadis claim to have accepted this prophet. It is therefore fitting for them to draw parallels between themselves and early Muslims.

Some details … Early Muslims were persecuted for declaring their faith in Islam; today Ahamdi-Muslims are imprisoned for declaring their faith in Islam. In both cases this persecution has been harshest in the land of the prophet. Early Muslims bore this persecution with patience, without retaliating with violence. Same is the case with Ahamdi-Muslims – despite their violent persecution, you will be hard pressed to find incidents where Ahmadis engaged in violence.

Early Muslims were not allowed to perform Haj; today Ahmadi-Muslims are not allowed to perform Haj. Demise of the Prophet in each case led to establishment of institution of khilafat.

Parallels are quite obvious to the discerning eye.

Furthermore … Abu Jehal, staunchest leader of opposition, was killed as he fought against the Prophet (pbuh) and his people. Quran tell us that Pharaoh died a humiliating death as he opposed Prophet Moses (pbuh) and his people. 3 kings of our times who were instrumental in persecution of Ahmadis … Faisal, Bhutto, Zia … all died most horrible deaths: one was killed by his own nephew, one was hanged like an animal, and one was blown up in the sky.

Ahmadi-Muslims are justified in interpreting these events as signs of divine support. History of early Islam is full of such events ... often cited by Muslims, even today, to support truthfulness of Islam.

Once again, I insist that you use same criterion in both cases.

National Assembly

Transcripts of “Ahmadi hearings” of 1973 by National Assembly remain a secret. The government refused to make them public. One can only wonder what government and their ullema are hiding.

”True” Muslims

You are incorrect in suggesting that Ahmadis do not consider rest of Muslims as “true” Muslims. Yours is an erroneous view. While Ahmadis have accepted Imam of this age, they consider rest of Muslims as Muslims indeed.

Intelligence and wisdom

I am not sure what to make of your comment regarding Ahmadis trapped in ideas of superiority of intelligence and wisdom …

One may also argue that … Muslims are trapped in idea of superiority of intelligence and wisdom of Prophet Muhammad and his Caliphs. So what does it all mean??

Ahmadis do study works of prominent Muslim scholars and hold them in esteem … unless of course, they tell us that suicide-bombings are jihad. Such ullema we call jamaatis :-)

I remain unsure of basis or purpose of your “superiority” comments. Without explanation or proper context, they come across as ill-thought out.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#439 Posted by sattar2 on May 7, 2007 1:39:01 pm

Zeena (#428),

You are using double-standards here …

One may also argue that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) should have simply remained a philosopher and a saint, without claiming prophethood.

My answer would be … Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) claimed to be a prophet because Allah made him a prophet.

Similarly, Mirza Sahib claimed to be a prophet since Allah Almighty made him a prophet.

You further asked:

”… why he and his new religion never got accepted among majority of Muslims? …”

But first you must ask … “why Muhamamd (pbuh) and his new religion never got accepted among majority of people of the world?

Even after 1400 years, 80% of world population has not accepted Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Why??

+++

teshah (#429),

Since Allah Almighty calls believers “Muslim” in Quran, Ahmadis consider themselves Muslims. Others may consider them non-Muslims … that’s their choice.

As Munir report showed, politics of definition of “Muslim” is pitiful. When asked, ullema could not agree to a definition of Muslim. At the same time each considered his definition to be the correct one, and that those who disagree with him are non-Muslims. It was a joke ...

Leader of Ahmadi-Muslim community is their “khalifa”. Wives of khulfaa are considered “ummulmomieen” by the community. The khalifa may be called “Abulmomineen” if there is such a term. Actually he is called “ameer-ul-momineen” … just like khulfaa Abu-bakr, Omar, Usman, Ali were referred to by early Muslims.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#438 Posted by sattar2 on May 7, 2007 9:48:17 am

khuram

Well-written posts, with proper context, albeit a few caveats. A few comments:

#416: I don’t know about Mirza Sahib’s direct invitation to the Queen to accept Islam. He may have offered it. A prophet’s role is to invite everyone to religion of Allah, so I would not be surprised if he did; will try to find out more as time permits.

#427: I am not sure what claim came first: that of Mahdi or Issa; will try to follow up on this too.

Aik ghalti ka izala had to do with beliefs regarding Prophet Issa. One of the first books of Mirza Sahib was Buraheen-e-Ahmadiyya, which he wrote before attaining prophethood. In Buraheen-e-Ahmadiyya he elucidated strength, completeness of Islam. Here he also expressed support for “Islamic” belief that Issa was alive. This turned out to be incorrect, as was later revealed to him by Allah Almighty.

To correct this error, which he had made as a human without divine help, he wrote Aik ghalti ka izala. In this book he corrected his mistake and argued that Issa had indeed died like any other mortal human. He cited verses from Quran and reasoned in support of this view. This view was a major step forward in reconciliation of Quran with reason.

He later wrote another book “Masih Hindustan MeiN” (Issa in Hindustan). In this book he quoted from Quran as well as Biblical accounts to show how events unfolded as Jews conspired with Roman Judge (Pontius Pilate) to have Issa-ibne-Marriam crucified. To sum things up, Issa was nailed to cross, he became unconscious, was assumed dead, was taken down while still alive, and was nursed back to health. He then migrated from Jerusalem in search of remaining tribes of Israel. He traveled eastwards, reaching Kashmir, where he eventually died his natural death.

As Quran explains, Issa was sent for reformation of Israelites. During this time, out of 12 tribes of Israel, only 2 were to be found in Jerusalem. Remaining 10 tribes had migrated eastwards owing to wars and persecution. Even today, tribal people of Kashmir trace their roots to Israelite tribes.

Mirza Sahib wrote some 80-odd books … mostly in Arabic, Urdu, and Persian.

He wrote Islamic Usool Ki Philosophy (Philosophy of Principles of Islam) in 1895. This book was written as a paper to be presented at a inter-religious conference, organized by a Hindu scholar. Mirza Sahib could not attend this conference. This paper was read on his behalf by a companion of his. The paper was well-received. The conference was extended beyond its allocated days in order to allow time for this paper to be fully read.

More later …

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#437 Posted by zeemax on May 6, 2007 9:42:05 am
#436 by Tehsinabbasi,

Tehsin, I would be glad to do that. However, I don`t like to be ridiculed. That`s fair, isn`t it? You have seen a non-Muslim i.e. Kaalchakra understand and contemplate and then come out in his tremendous intellect in trying to expound on what I say. That`s his choice. And his choice is not an easy one. It takes walking through hell`s fire and brimstones to do that.

If you want to find the `Principles`, do those on your own. If you can`t find them, I wish you the best of luck.

But, I could help you. However, I`m not very welcoming to vile abuse. To you your God, to me my Allah.

Regards.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#436 Posted by Tehsinabbasi on May 6, 2007 8:20:53 am
#432 by zeemax

“If a liberally inclined Muslim understands and accepts as true the underlying principles of Islamic society”

May be you can elaborate on these fundamental principles. Better yet why don’t you define them first and then just describe them with some examples.

Thanks!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#435 Posted by Folio on May 6, 2007 12:28:48 am
Echoboom has produced a palque that reads that Muhammed is the LAST prophet from Al-Lah.

Why so?

Does self-proclamation by Muhammed is enough? It`s at best is self-aggrandisement on the pat of Muhammed.

Muhammed is a human being and Al-lah is supreme. He/She (al Lah) can choose to communicate with his people as and when he pleases. It`s foolish that he spoke some 1400 years ago and kept quiet from then on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It appears that self-appointed thekedar like Muhammed had many followers and these guyz must be known as Muhammedans. Let people who believe in the prophethood of Ali be called as Shias (they are being called, in fact) and people who believe in the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed be called Ahmadis.

Whoever believes in Al Lah is a Muslim.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#434 Posted by khuram on May 6, 2007 12:11:14 am
Re: # 432

I like Wasif Ali Wasif and Ghamidi and likes because they are meeting the religious and intellectual problems of our present day. They don`t just stay in the false pride of past glory. They are meeting the challenges of today.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#433 Posted by Zeena on May 5, 2007 10:39:52 pm
#430 zeemax

Re:- Very clear concept.

zeemax

You have closed the whole discussion in to few words and said it all. Very well said.

Exactly, I felt the samething. If, you re read my post # 428, it is almost the same concept.
Now i am more clear about all this mess.....
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#432 Posted by zeemax on May 5, 2007 10:29:23 pm
#431 by khuram,

If they do not like to study Maududi,, then they should listen to let`s say Ghamidi,

Yes. Ghamdi in my opinion is the best and sincere scholar who can bridge the divide between the estranged Liberals who quote things like ``there is no compulsion in religion`` and take it as a license to lead any kind of a life as convenient while still claiming to be Muslims, and the hardliners who believe Islamic Principles above all are to dictate daily conduct of individuals.

This is not saying that Ghamdi is right. He tends to attempt to rationalise the basic Principles in light of current environment, but side steps the heated contentious issues. However, his manner of interpretation is one which reduces conflict. And that is a significant contribution.

In my opinion, the basic societal principles of Islam are inviolable. The only thing which can be open to a compromise in light of current environment is the penal code. Other things like the manner of female dress, work, intermingling of the sexes in normal day-today activities, mandatory prayers, curbs on entertainment and other such are just the harsh remedies also allowed in the vast spectrum of political Islam, but their implementation hardened and compounded by Islamophobist propoganda.

There have indeed been Islamic societies which imposed these, but only as an extreme measure to regiment a wayward society and to curb the lose family and sexual mores as in Iran during Pehlavi time, or even in Afghanistan during Nadir shah, therefore the tough sanctions imposed by Khomeini and the Taliban. I see this phenomenon as no different than when Mao imposed identical uniforms on men and women so it was hard to tell which one was which. But none of these were there in the original Islamic societies of Muhammad himself and his Companions.

If a liberally inclined Muslim understands and accepts as true the underlying principles of Islamic society, rest would be easy. The lament is that none of these do because for them identity is not important. Their daily rations and the freedoms that selfishness brings are.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#431 Posted by khuram on May 5, 2007 9:09:48 pm
Yes Mirza has used Islam ... and Islamic teachings as a try to get recognition in the eyes of whole Muslim Ummah. But it was the demand of his nature of claims as well. He had the claims of being ``Imam Mehdi for Muslims``,, and ``Issa - who was to appear among Muslim in the capacity of a sub-ordinate to the Prophet of Islam (PBUH). So with these types of claims, he just could not go outside the teachings of Islam. He only has ``interpretated`` many Islamic teachings in a particular way.

And yes I had been thinking of what could be the exact need of forming a new community. My findings are same as pointed out by Zeemax as well; that the exact reason was only his claims. Those who accepted those claims, became a separate party and then eventually organized into the form of a community.

Ahmedies got themselves more isolated when they started making analogy of their own community with the early period of Islam. One of the posts of Sattar also reveals this thing where he pointed out resemblence of Muslim attitude with Ahmedies and the early Kuffars`s attitude with the early Muslims.

In this way, Ahmedies became an isolated community. Perhaps they also do not consider rest of Muslims to be ``true`` Muslims for the reason that rest of Muslims have been failed in rescognizing true Imam Mehdi. I think that this was the main reason of why National Assembely declared then to be ``Non-Muslims``.

Sattar also had pointed out resemblance of this community with the early Christian community. Hazrat Issa also had not crossed the boundaries of the Shariah of Hazrat Musa but still formed a separate community.

Ahmedies do are trapped in false ideas of some ``superiority of intelligence and wisdom`` of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed and his Caliphs. My advice to them is that they should study the works of other prominent Muslim Scholars in order to know that there are many other more intelligent and wise people in Muslims. If they do not like to study Maududi,, then they should listen to let`s say Ghamidi,, or should study Wasif Ali Wasif.

Regards!

Regards!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#430 Posted by zeemax on May 5, 2007 7:32:31 pm
#427 by khuram,

Regretfully you have failed again in answering my query. Claiming to be Jesus Christ is a `Claim`, not a teaching. Claiming to be Mahdi is a `Claim`, not a teaching. Khatme-Nabuwwat or lack of it is a `Claim`, not a teaching. His being intelligent if you say so is nothing special. Hundreds of others were much more intelligent. I hope you follow me.

By using his `claims` and `intelligence`, all he taught was for his followers to undermine Jihad. To act as fifth columnists within the Muslim community posing as one of them, and to infiltrate into their highest echelons. To work in the interests of British and get rewarded in return, and to ultimately become the power elite in the Muslim ranks.

That is why they were exposed and kicked out of Muslims ranks. That is solely what Mirza ever taught. Nothing else. Other pranks of his were just `claims`.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#429 Posted by teshah on May 5, 2007 7:06:37 pm
Re: # 382

khuram

Well done dear! Keep it up. In fact we also need people like Zeena and Zeemax who represent a childish mindset which can exist only in an obscurantist make-believe world. I wonder their only objection against Ahmadies is why they call themselves Muslim.

I personally found Ahmedies very good people and wonder why they called themselves Muslim, which is at best an ambiguous term as per famous Munir Inquiry Report.

What I personally found anything objectionable against them was when I saw in Rabwah the plaque of `Ummulmomineen` fixed on a grave. The grave was of Ms Bashir, wife of Khalifah II of Ahmadies, if rightly recollect. But strange enough no epithet of `Abulmomineen` I found recorded on the grave of her husband, Mirza Bashir, Khalifa II of Ahmadies.

What does this mean? Were Ahmadi Momineens also `fatherless`?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#428 Posted by Zeena on May 5, 2007 6:51:38 pm
#425/427 khuram sahib

Thanks for your answers. Now I have more clear concept of this new cult called mirzaism.

But, my question is still there.......Why Mr.Mirza invented this new cult? There was absolutely NO need of that cult.

Yes, if,( as you posted) MrMirza was a scholar, then he could have remained scholar, but, there was NO need of announcing that he was mesiah or Jesus Christ or a prophet....That was the main reason Mirzaism is not considered Islam.

After reading all your posts thoroughly, in my pov, Mirzais is a separate cult or religion than Islam. Yes, the biggest mistake that Mr.Mirza did was to use Islam and Quran as his basic weapons and twisted them to invent a new cult or religion. It would be better for him NOT to use Islam or Quran as the basis of his ideology.

Mr.Mirza , if, would have invented his own ideology without using the clutches of Islam, he would have have had been more respectful among others.

What he did was a terrible blunder. I do not think this man was intellignet to use his own mind rather than twisting Quranic ideology to suit his mind. He reminds of of some ignorant Mullahs who have had been abusing Quran by twisting Quranic verses for their own convenience.


Now, as he claimed to be the messiah or prophet or jesus christ....question is, why he and his new religion never got accepted among majority of Muslims?

Only he was able to make few disciples......

Almost all Muslim world rejected his twisted teachings. And did not recognize him as a prophet or messiah or jesus christ. You know why? b/c no one is stupid to follow him blindly while knowing the facts.......thanks for your feedback, though.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#427 Posted by khuram on May 5, 2007 9:21:35 am
Basically he was an emerging Muslim Scholar. His activities were Manazaras or books writings intended to save Islam from the attacks of other religions like Arya Samaj and Christianity. He got some popularity and then started claiming spiritual experiences. He started projecting his predictions and some people became inspired. Ahmedies believe that some major enemies of Islam were died un-natural deaths only because of Mirza`s predictions. Then Mirza came with various major claims not at once but successively. At first step he realized that Hazrat Issa died a normal death,,, at other stage,,, he claimed to be that ``Issa`` who was to appear among Muslims,,, I don`t know whether he claimed to be Imam Mehdi before or after it. Then he got in problem with the issue of Khatm-e-Nabuwat. Perhaps at first he did some mistake about the issue of ``Khatam-e-Nabuwat`` ... but then he clarified the mistake in a separate booklet .. i think ``aik ghalti ka azala``..

I don`t know whether he was right or wrong in his claims ... but he was intelligent enough that he made a complete case of his claims in his many books ... I think he wrote perhaps more than 50 books. For example, in order to show that Hazrat Issa really died,,, he collected many proofs out of Quran, Hadith, writings of many Muslim Scholars as well as historical evidences.

Similarly, he also has made a detailed case about the issue of Khatam-e-Nabuwat as well as the issue of jihad. I already stated that I have read his book ``Islami Usool Ki Philosophy``. In fact this book was read allowed in an all India inter-religion manazara. And this book won that manazara even though some other promionent Muslim scholars also participated in that manazara. Ahmedy beliefs are more rational in nature. In fact Ahmedy beliefs are like a blend of fundamentalism with the approach of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. Mirza takes symbolic meanings of many Quranic terms. But unlike Sir Syed,, he tends to give proof of those symbolic meanings out of same Quran.

Regards!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#426 Posted by zeemax on May 5, 2007 7:42:16 am
#424/425 by khuram

But what did he teach? The question remains unanswered Khuram, despite all your attempts.

Just give bulleted points on what he taught that was different from Islam.

Thanks.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#425 Posted by khuram on May 5, 2007 6:25:12 am
Re: # 424

correction: shame (first lines) = shape
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#424 Posted by khuram on May 5, 2007 6:20:57 am
# 422 and 423 .. Zeemax & Zeena

``My questions is simply that, what is Mirza`s essential teaching different from Islam other than claiming to be the second coming of Christ and expunging Jihad for his followers?``

I suspect the answer is ``Nil``.

So why did he then invent this religion? To teach what? Or was it just to produce loyal servants of the British empire who rather than resisting, would actually work in advancing its colonial interests around the world?

That`s the next obvious question.


Ahmediyat has assumed the shame of an organized community. Mirza`s descendents are at advantageous position because they have become elite members of this community. They are running a dictatorship in the name of Caliphate, in the community.

This community considers Mirza Ghulam Ahmed to be true Imam Mehdi and the promissed Masih. They believe that Mirza has resolved all the outstanding internal disputes of Muslim Nation. For example, in his writings,,, Mirza has discussed internal differences of Shiaism and Ahl-e-Sunnat, of Ahl-e-Hadith and Ahl-e-Quran etc. etc. After necessary discussions, he has drawn his conclusions. For example his decision goes in favor of Ahl-e-Sunnat on the issue of status of first three Caliphs of Islam. He also considers Hazrat Ali to be legitimate fourth Caliph. etc. etc.

Essentially these are just points of views. But since his community considers him true Imam Mehdi, so status of his points of views becomes authority in their eyes. In addition, this community usually abstains from various cultural and religious customs and traditions. For example, they do not offer Qul and Chehlum etc. They don`t go to shrines of walis as well.

Anyways, Mirza could serve Islam better if he did not come up with his claims. He would have got a respectable position in the eyes of whole Muslim Ummah, instead of becoming authority for a small and insignificant size community.

Secondly his community had no advantage for British Crown. Such a small size community could do nothing for the cause of British crown. Only few moderate minded people could not change the over-all anti British sentiments. Beliefs of this community are totally opposite to Christian beliefs. This community believes Mirza to be ``Hazrat Issa``. Now try to think how Cristians and therefore British Crown could digest this belief...??? Because in this way, Mirza becomes equal in status to their own prophet. So emergence of this community had its own dynamics,, which were independent of any planning of the British government.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#423 Posted by Zeena on May 5, 2007 3:58:48 am
khuram sahib

As per zeemax....[[So why did he then invent this religion? To teach what? Or was it just to produce loyal servants of the British empire who rather than resisting, would actually work in advancing its colonial interests around the world?

That`s the next obvious question.

Regards]]

Yes, why?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#422 Posted by zeemax on May 5, 2007 12:53:05 am
#416 by khuram

Let`s forget about Queen Victoria (and her most obedient servant) for a minute. Let`s first answer my question of #396 reproduced below to which a response is awaited:

``My questions is simply that, what is Mirza`s essential teaching different from Islam other than claiming to be the second coming of Christ and expunging Jihad for his followers?``

I suspect the answer is ``Nil``.

So why did he then invent this religion? To teach what? Or was it just to produce loyal servants of the British empire who rather than resisting, would actually work in advancing its colonial interests around the world?

That`s the next obvious question.

Regards
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#421 Posted by bjkumar on May 4, 2007 10:20:37 pm

#420

And God spake thus...

``Haul that Gill guy right here

And before I whip his buttt...

Let him read the following...``


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#420 Posted by bjkumar on May 4, 2007 9:57:30 pm

#419

...And they all scratch their (graying) heads and moth-eaten beards repeatedly and ponder aloud...

``He did, He did not! He did, He did not!...``

Create the Heavens, and the Earth, of course!

And so the count goes on...

``One - run!``

``Two - true!``

``Three - whee!``

``Four - gore!``

``Five - thrive!``

``Six - licks!``

``Seven - heaven!``

``Eight - wait!``

``Nine - fine!``

Until, until, until....a loud voice rings out...

Until

``Stop, Dr. Gill!``

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#419 Posted by bjkumar on May 4, 2007 9:43:44 pm

#418 (add-on)

...while u-no-hu keeps looking in vain everywhere for something solid and hard that fell out of her nose!

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#418 Posted by bjkumar on May 4, 2007 9:39:43 pm

Pin-drop silence descends over the chowk crowds as Echoboom and Urstruly climax together to the seductive music of celestial harps while pondering the larger meanings of life!

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#417 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 9:03:16 pm
Re: # 415

There are every kind of websites. There are websites where you could find list of ex-Muslims telling why they left Islam and so have come to light. etc. etc.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#416 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 8:57:47 pm
# 406 Urstruely

Well ... if British Crown was afraid of concept of Imam Mehdi because of experience in Sudan,,, then logically Britain should have opposed or resisted any emergence of Imam Mehdi in Sub-Continent. A proven ``violent`` type movement cannot be anticipated to be ``peaceful`` and ``loyal`` just because of the type of personality who launched the movement.

And yes,,, Mirza was getting good name in the circle of Indian Muslim ulemas before his claims of being Imam Mehdi and like things. He not only debated with Christians, but he debated with Hindus as well. It was the time when Arya Smaj movement was at its peak in India. Mirza`s one of the first books was intended against Arya smaj. And the same book had made him popular among the circle of ulema.



# 384 Zeemax

With reference to the copy of page of letter which Mirza wrote to Queen Victoria, you presented.

As far I remember, Mirza actually had invited Queen Victoria to embrase Islam as well as join his Jamaat Ahmedia. You have presented only one page of that letter. Use of such faithful words could be a part of diplomacy as well. When a common person writes letter to the ruler of country,,, obviously he has to show his aajzi and inkisaari. And then gradually have to come to real point.

@ Sattar

Please try to confirm my point. Try to arrange this letter and read in full. Please tell did Mirza really invite Queen Victoria to embrase Islam and join Ahmediyat or not ... with proof.

Regards!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#415 Posted by echoboom on May 4, 2007 3:54:27 pm


WHY THEY LEFT THE JAMAAT
    Its all here!

  • WHY THEY LEFT THE JAMAAT

    * Saudah Bagum of Birgingham UK leaves the Jamaat
    * Life after the Cult by Shahid
    * My Journey - From Kufr to Islam
    * Another Ahmadi from London Jamaat Quits
    * Qadiani Lady Embraces Islam in Germany
    * Another Qadiani leader, THE NOTORIOUS TOMBMASTER, from US leaves the Jamaat and embraces Bahaism
    * Statement of THE TOMBMASTER
    * Statement of Muzaffar Ahmad denouncing Ahmadiyyat
    * Ahmadi Poet Denounced Ahmadiyyat
    * Ahmadi leader in Italy embraces Islam
    * My Journey - From Illusion to Reality
    * Ahmadi Family in Karachi embraces Islam
    * Shaikh Raheel Ahmad
    o Letter of Shaikh Raheel Ahmad to Mirza Masroor, Head of Jamaat Ahmadiyya
    o Qadiani Leader in Germany embraces Islam Report from Daily Ummat
    o Shaikh Raheal`s Message to Qadianis
    o Shaikh Raheal`s Interview
    o Shaikh Raheal`s Message to Khatme Nabuwwat Conference
    o Interview of Press Secretary of Jamaat Ahmadiyya
    o Open Letter of Shaikh Raheal Ahmad to Mirza Masroor
    o Another Open Letter of Sh Raheel Ahmad to Mirza Masroor (Urdu)
    o Breaking News about Shaikh Raheel Ahmad
    o
    * ``I Realise Mirza was no Eisa-look-alike`` by Brig. Ahmad Nawaz Khan
    * National General Secretary of Jamaat Ahmadiyya Hungary left the Jamaat
    * Why I left the Jamaat - by Prof. Munawwer Malik
    * Albanian brother leaves Ahmadiyya Belgium by Rinol
    * Why did I denounce Mirzaiyat? - by Lal Hussein Akhter
    * 714 Qadianis Embrace Islam In Germany
    * Escape From Rabwa by Usman Barry
    * The Bane of Ahmadiyyatby Al-Hafiz B. A. Masri
    * First Companion of Mirza Ghulam leaves the Jamaat
    * Thus I left Mirzaiyat


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#414 Posted by sattar2 on May 4, 2007 3:20:51 pm

Urstruly (#410)

“Lacking background” is different from ”contradicting historical facts”.

Khuram’s post neither affirms nor denies the “background” you provided. Your “background” is a mere opinion, which aims to (mis?)characterize the backdrop of issue. It is either irrelevent or incorrect ... and therefore meaningless.

You tried to make a big splash by citing historical contradictions, but have failed to say much beyond that.

Dude, you come across more as a drama-queen (kinda like zeena - grin).

Moving on

In post #377, I gave reasons for my view that Issa and Imam Mahdi are the same person (under the heading Issa and Imam Mahdi). Mere insistence from you does not cut it.

You agree that prior to his claims, Mirza Sahib was considered a respected man by all.

Note that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) too was a much respected man in Mecca … prior to his claims of prophethood. However, he was much abused and reviled once he claimed to be a prophet of Allah. Same is the case with Mirza Sahib.

More you denounce Mirza Sahib, more your behavior matches that of kuffar of Mecca. Quran attests to such behavior pattern of disbelievers against Allah’s prophets.

If Mirza Sahib has claimed to be a Mahdi only, you’d insist on seeing Issa. But where would this Issa come from? From the skies? I don’t think so. You’d then insist on seeing a one-eyed monster riding a giant, fire-breathing donkey. There is no end to this insanity and your expectations.

In short, problem lies not with claims of Mirza Sahib, but with your incorrect expectations.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#413 Posted by Folio on May 4, 2007 2:42:11 pm
#412 by Folio on May 4, 2007 2:26pm PT
Punjab was not the hodbed of resistence to British rule, then why they needed a stooge in the form of Mirza Ghulan Ahmed? If at all they needed, they`d have needed one in UP and Delhi. Mirza didnt preach in UP.

Even the Pak movement was spearheaded by UP (Aligarhites) Muslims. When did Muslim Paunjabis become politically aware and active (collectively)? Political resistence is alien to them. Wasnt it? For an evidence we shud see the post-47 history of Pakistan. They are very good stooges to powers-that-be. Eg. leaders working for Musharraf.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#412 Posted by Folio on May 4, 2007 2:26:12 pm
Punjab was not the hodbed of resistence to British rule, then why they needed a stooge in the form of Mirza Ghulan Ahmed? If at all they needed, they`d have needed one in UP and Delhi. Mirza didnt preach in UP.

Even the Pak movement was spearheaded by UP (Aligarhites) Muslims. When did Muslim Paunjabis became politically aware and active (collectively)? Political resistence is alien to them. Wasnt it? For an evidence we shud see the post-47 history of Pakistan. They are very good stooges to powers-that-be. Eg. leaders working for Musharraf.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#411 Posted by echoboom on May 4, 2007 12:37:40 pm
Urstruly:
Those were the wages of the sins of our forefathers. And we suffer them to this day with out realizing that longer we have those shackles and chains of mental slavery around our necks the more miserable we would become.


Well said



MiTTee kee muhabbat meiN, hUm aashuftaa saroaN neiN
voh Qarz chuukaa-eN haiN, jo vaajib bhee naheeN thhay


tr:
In our love for the earthly-dust, we the crazy headstrong ones
have been paying off the debts, which were not even legit.

iftikhar arif


Beware of the Raushan-khayals & moderates...the westoxicated scum.

Oh How the Munafiquoon Musharraf has turned Raushan-khayal into a four-letter word.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#410 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 12:28:39 pm
Re: # 406

Khurram`s comment lacked the basic background of the ``emergence` of Mirza Sahib as the Mahdi, Issa, and miscelleneous. The missing fact is that that at that time british Empire was facing a formidable challenge in Africa at the hands of Mohammad Ahmad Mahdi Sudani, who organized a global Jihad against British Empire in Sudan. He proclaimed himself as the promised Mahdi and organized an army of Jihadists that decimated British in Sudan. Unfortunately, Sudani died (a natural death) soon after he had established Mumlikat-e-Islamia. After his death british re-occupied Sudan with the help of enlightened moderate Egyptians. But the Empire learned a lesson in ideological strength of Islam and especially the concept of promised Massiah in it. In order to close this ``Messiah`` chapter forever, British promoted Mirza sahib who was very well versed in not only Islam but also Christianity as well. British needed a pacifist ``Messiah`` who would not challenge their authority anywhere and yet keep the general Muslim population under control. Mirza Sahib had all those qualities. Don`t forget that before he proclaimed his ``Prophethood` (and other innanities) he was the rising star in the religious circles of India because of his aggressive style with which he used to counter Christian Missionaries in the debates (munazras). But when he switched sides he became even more aggressive to prove his loyalty to his new masters. Not only did he proclaimed to be the Mahdi but Jesus Reincarnate (Masih Mo`ood) as well. He should have chosen to be one of them, criminy! because according to the Prophecies Mahdi and Masih are two different personalities.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#409 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 11:47:01 am
Re: # 393

Yes of course Punjabis might have ``accepted`` British as a lesser of two evils. But the point is that they ``accepted``.

Your rest of analysis relates to later periods. I agree to it however.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#408 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 11:36:59 am
Re: # 404


Yes because Mutazillah ideology was philosophical type and was bit difficult for general public to comprehend and adopt. Actually Sir Syed had written some letters which are the proofs that he was trying to collect necessary information about the basic points of Mutazzillah faith. In one of the letters, he writes that only Mutazillah`s points were worthy of merit for his task.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#407 Posted by dost_mittar on May 4, 2007 11:18:18 am
Urstruly#402:

Yes, it is the same song. No wonder it was popular in Lyallpur during my childhood.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#406 Posted by sattar2 on May 4, 2007 11:17:53 am

khuram (#392),

This is correct from what I also know. This is also in accord with the hadith that Issa will break the cross … meaning that he will convincingly refute the fundamental Christian doctrine (just wanted to rub this in onto our ullema here – grin).

+++

Urstruly (#401),

I remain unclear regarding your claim that … ”khuram’s argument is good but it contradicts historical facts”.

In #392 khuram discussed debates between Mirza Sahib and Christians. How does your post #401 negate it?

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#405 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 10:50:59 am
#401 by Urstruly,

Excellent post. Thanks.

Those were the wages of the sins of our forefathers. And we suffer them to this day with out realizing that longer we have those shackles and chains of mental slavery around our necks the more miserable we would become.

Indeed. So we must not compound the sins of our forefathers. Enough has been enough I guess .. and the caravan moves on ... :)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#404 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 10:45:59 am
#397 by khuram.

Khuram, you have brought out an interesting correlation of Syed Ahmed with the Mutazillah faith which didn`t survive long. But have you taken into account why?

It was because Mutazillah was an elitist faith, limited to the ruling class of the time, professing that Qura`an had descended but was not eternal. And they sought to attach interpretations to it. That was its downfall alongwith the entire Abbasid dynasty.

Does anyone think anything has changed now?

Regards.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#403 Posted by sattar2 on May 4, 2007 10:23:04 am

khuram (#385, 391),

Good write up. It is easy to quote something without the context. And in most cases, context makes all the difference … for example, whether Quran is asking to kill disbelievers or to kill disbelievers who are actively engaged in violent hostilities against Muslim community (from Surah-e-Taubah, I think)

From what I also know, pre-British Sikh rule in places in Punjab was quite brutal towards Muslims. In some places Muslims were not even allowed to give azaan.

When the British took over, Muslims gained freedom to freely practice Islam. This struck out the need for fighting jihad against the British. Addressing social, economic grievances against the British was a different issue, which did not require fighting jihad.

It seems several Muslim leaders were content with British government’s stance on religious issues, alhough some ullema wanted to wage fighting jihad. There were perhaps on-going discussions along these lines with not much consensus.

Yes, Mirza Sahib did participate in open discussions against Christian clergy. He also wrote books and pamphlets in order to highlight superiority and completeness of Islam. He was indeed considered a champion of Islam by Muslims (perhaps non-Muslims too). It was his claims of prophethood that turned ullema against him.

Heck, once even Urstruly agreed on Mirza Sahib’s services to cause of Islam!!


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#402 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 9:51:58 am
Re: # 398 Dost

To the best of my knowledge based mostly on childhood stories told to me by my grandmother, jagga was a Muslim, but I cannot say for sure. My grandmother was from Lyallpur Jhang area, which was the traditional Jagga terrotory. In those stories Jagga used to kill oppressive angraiz and his toutes and helped poor and helpless. The name Jagga has now gained notoriety because of its association with extrotion and racketeering which is usually referred to as Jagga tax. A variant ``Jaggi`` is a popular nickname in rural areas of Punjab.

Here is a modern version of a tribute to Jagga. May God bless his soul regardless of whether he was a Muslim or not:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha6AwUYEwtE
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#401 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 9:36:52 am
Khuram and Zeemax

Re: # 392

Khurram`s argument is good but it contradicts the historical facts. The truth of the matter is that about 50 years before the war of independence in 1857 there was a sort of invasion of Christian evangelist missionaries in the subcontinent. They did have some success in southern coastal parts of India which were essentially Portuguese and French occupations and hence mostly Catholic conversions. The British started from Bengal (a Muslim dominant region and had control of most of Northern India (mostly Hindu dominated). They were not successful in conversions as compared to their Portuguese & French counterparts. But close to about 15 years near 1857 they became very aggressive as British had gained decisive control over Delhi and the Emperor.

At this stage they started challenging Muslims to the debates (Munazras) with a cheering crowd of Hindus. As the tradition continues to this day those debates were usually just insults hurled at Islam and Holy prophet (pbuh). A missionary wrote sometime in early 19th century with utter disappointment that 200 years of their presence in Hindustan and they could not convert more than 500 Muslims.

But British missionaries - even though the East India Company, was enjoying complete cooperation of Hindu business class who had complete control over Muslim nobility finance and accounting - did not spare Hindus either. A Hindu living under Muslim rule for 1000 years never suffered such aggressive invasion on his religion before. This created resentment in both Hindus and Muslims alike and erupted into the First War of Independence in 1857. Syed Ahmad Khan in his Asbaab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind has pointed out to the core reason of ``mutiny`` to the fact that missionaries were attacking local religions. East India Company, as a business concern raised the issue with British government and later passed a parliamentary act in 1869, based on the recommendations of people like Sir Syed and local British, and abolished the state sponsorship of propagation of Christianity.

But between 1857 and 1869, the era was really bad for Muslims. When British took over, they nationalized all schools, colleges and universities. These institutions throughout the history of Muslims were funded by private donations and income from trusted properties. They were never owned by any government. British not only nationalized them but confiscated their trusted property as well. Tens of thousands of institutions across the land withered and closed and only those survived which were the nationalized ones.

At that time Christian missionaries became very aggressive against Muslims and most of their Munazras were now held in the public school grounds where they insulted Islam and Prophet with no holds barred. The Muslim ulemma first try to engage them in those debates but then soon realized that the purpose of those debates was not an exchange of dialogue but it was one sided attack on Muslim faith with pot shots just like it happens today. So Ulemma advised Muslims to keep their kids away from those schools. It was a double edged sword from Muslims - damned if you do and damned if you don`t. In those 10 years a whole generation of Muslims fell victim to the merciless military, political, and ideological aggression of British imperialism.

So if we give Sir Syed the benefit of doubt, the Muslims really did not have a choice. Had Sir Syed not done it, some other Muslim would have. Those were the wages of the sins of our forefathers. And we suffer them to this day with out realizing that longer we have those shackles and chains of mental slavery around our necks the more miserable we would become. Iqbal has captured those debates of Mehdi, Issa (pbuh), and resurrection in these immortal words:

Quomon ki hayat unkay takhayyul pay hai moqoof
Yeh zouq Sikhata hai adab murgh-e-cahman ko

Majzoob-e-Farangi nay ba-andaaz-e- farangi
Mehdi kay takhayyul say kiya zinda watan ko

Ay tu kai jo Mehdi kay takhayyul say hai bey zaar
Nomeed na kar ahu-e-mushkeen say khatan ko

Ho zinda kufan posh to murda ussay samjhein
ya chak karein mardak-e-nadaan kay kufan ko
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#400 Posted by sattar2 on May 4, 2007 9:31:43 am

khuram (#382),

Excellent post! Your point about various dimensions of Quranic teachings is right on. Different circumstances require different traits. These may include compassion, firmness, violence, and so on. Abolishing any one trait can lead to a crisis when it is direly needed.

Despite what ullema say about Ahmadis … truth is that Ahamdi-Muslims are not against fighting jihad. Our position has always been that Quran outlines conditions required for fighting jihad. If these conditions are not met, fighting jihad is not called for.

You may want to recommend “Philosophy of teachings of Islam” to Urstruly and zeemax. They won’t accept it from me, but you stand a better chance …

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#399 Posted by sattar2 on May 4, 2007 9:20:45 am

teshah (#380),

If I am not mistaken, mainstream Muslim view is that both nabi (prophet) and rasool (messenger) are recipients of divine revelation, with divine missions to reform people. And that rasool necessarily brings new shairah, but nabi does not. This suggests that every rasool is a nabi, but not every nabi is a rasool.

Ahmadi-Muslim view is that rasool and nabi are somewhat interchangeable terms. These two terms emphasize two different aspects of the same position: one aspect relates to receiving divine message (“risalaat” meaning message, suggesting reception of message) and the other to convey divine messages to people (“nubuwah” meaning conveying of a message).

Perhaps it is for this reason that when Quran uses both terms together for a divine reformer, it lists the term rasool first, followed by the term nabi. That is, this reformer first receives divine message and then conveys it to others.

As for claimants of risalat, I guess they can claim to be Muslims! More power to them. But now that you have mentioned it, Urstruly may start losing sleep over the issue … I guess he can never be satisfied … !!!

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#398 Posted by dost_mittar on May 4, 2007 9:01:24 am
echoboom@395:

That was hilarious. But even I , a thet Punjabi, could not understand their inglish.

urstruly#389:

Jugga is an unusual name for a Muslim. I always presumed he was a Sikh. A popular song during our childhood was:

Jugga jamya te milan vadhaayian
vada ho kay daake maarda
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#397 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 8:40:16 am
Re: # 387 Zeemax

I consider Syed Ahmed Khan no better than Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.

Your point re context of time is taken. How would you evaluate Iqbal in the context of his time?



Sir Syed was a part of Nobel class of Indian Muslims. He was concerned that Muslim Nobel class would not be able to compete with more educated Hindus in getting of superior government jobs under the British rule. The only solution was to launch a dedicated education spreading movement among Indian Muslims. But Indian Muslims despised western education because of religious beliefs. So first of all Sir Syed had to make-up Muslim mind for the adoptation of western education. That was the time of complete darkness of illeteracy and ignorance. Muslims were unaware of basic teachings of Islam as well and had been trapped into ignorant type superstitious beliefs like ancient prophets were many thousand feet tall etc. etc. Sir Syed had realized the poor and backward state of Muslim beliefs. Western thought of that time was dominated by Rationalism. Sir Syed realized the need of interpreting Islamic beliefs on rational footings. In the glorious period of early Muslim rule (i.e. early period of Abbasid Caliphate), a well known early Muslim sect ``Al-Mutazillah`` already had attempted to perform the task of interpreting Islamic beliefs on rational footings. The importance of that early sect can be realized by the fact that the first ever Rational Muslim Philosopher i.e. Yaqoob Alkindi belonged to Mutazillah faith. Later giant Muslim Philosophers like Al-Farabi and Ibn-e-Sina just had extended the views of Alkindi into further depths. That sect however could not survive for long and their works were also destroyed by the later dominent sects.

Sir Syed had got inspirations from that early sect. Some fragments of scattered work of that early sect could be made available. So Sir Syed undertook the heavy task of interpreting Islamic beliefs on strong rational footings in this way. Another early Shia sect ``Batania`` also influenced the thought of Sir Syed . Perhaps Sir Syed learned allegorical type interpretations of Islamic beliefs from ``Batania`` sect. Basic idea of Sir Syed was that Quran is the Word of God and functioning of Physical world is the Act of God. According to him, there could be no contradiction between Word of God and Act of God. In this way, Sir Syed gave `allegorical` meanings to all those things of Islamic belief system which could not be seen in the Physical world. For example, he allegorically interpreted the existence of angels, paradize and hell. On similar lines, he also denied the physical meanings of miracles of Prophets as well as denied the physical meanings of Hazrat Issa (RA) being alive in heavens. He took allegorical meanings of all these things. In this way, he tried to rationalize Islamic belief system. He could not complete this task. Secondly his work did not affect the orthodox momentum of Islamic beliefs.

About Allama Iqbal:

Allama Iqbal was concerned with the over-all backwardness of Muslim Nation as compared with Western Nations. Allama Iqbal`s time context was different from Mirza Qadiani and Sir Syed. Some Muslim Scholars like Syed Ameer Ali and Maulana Shibli Naumani etc. already had adopted some psychological ``escape`` strategies. Instead of facing the challenges of real world, they started finding charms in the false pride of past glory of Muslims. Allama Iqbal used same strategy with a positive mission i.e. with the view to give some confidence to Muslim Nation. Through his beutiful poetry, Allama Iqbal projected the past glory of Muslims and tried to invoke new spirit (Zinda Tamanna) in a dead nation. Allama Iqbal made the nation more ``emotional`` rather than making ``rational``.

Allama Iqbal also was deeply influenced by the popular Western Philosophies of his time like he was inspired by such Philosophers as Rausseau, Bergson, Fitche, Loyed Magon, Prof. Alexander and Nietzsche etc. etc. Allama Iqbal`s philosophical views are dominated by these philosophies. His ``Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam`` is an attempt to show that either above type of philosophies were already a part of Islamic ideology or that Islamic beliefs could be modernized on these lines.

Regards!
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#396 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 7:57:18 am
#392 by khuram,

This post is quite confusing. You say:

In those days missioneries used to argue ... Jesus was superior to Prophet of Islam. ... it was Mirza alone who fought this argument of missioneries. ... Mirza had various ``manazras`` with Christien Bishops ... and he e... broke the basic argument of Christian missioneries.

But to what purpose? Christian missionaries were not converting Muslims. All they were doing was converting harijans. Why go to all this trouble of Manazaras and all?

My questions is simply that, what is Mirza`s essential teaching different from Islam other than claiming to be the second coming of Christ and expunging Jihad for his followers?

Syed Ahmed did the same thing, but he thought better not to invent a new religion to do that but found a noble means of education to achieve his ends which was not easy to reject.

However, it was precisely that Syed Ahmed whose designs resulted in the Urdu Medium/ English Medium divide, and exclusion of the vastly major bulk of the population from integrating into a single mainstream identity, with catastrophic results which you see now.

There are two Pakistans, not one. One Pakistan is which the English educated think they own because its they who get all jobs and opportunities; while the other is which obviously many on this site know nothing about. That is the Urdu-medium and Madrassa educated Pakistan.

Regards
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#395 Posted by echoboom on May 4, 2007 7:52:21 am
Paindoo-Productions kee fakhria paishkush:

Basheera-in-traable

first Panjabi film in english language.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#394 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 7:33:04 am
#389 by Urstruly,

There was one Siddiq `Bam Baz` too in androon Lahore. Though I can`t find any references on him on the net.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#393 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 6:56:45 am

Re: # 391

I think I do not agree with you on the use of the word ``welcome``, since Punjab in general and Punjabi religious leadership in particular had a very strong anti-British sentiment since the time of Jihad of Syed Ahmad Shaheed and Shah Ismail Shaheed against sikhs and their efforts to unite Muslims against the impending evil of both sikhs and British. We can say that Muslim Punjab accepted British as a lesser of two evils.

However, the British occupation had a profound effect on the lower strata of society since British established the very first time in the history of Punjab the Feudal Lord system aka Jagirdari Nizam as compared to the tribal or clan system that existed for centuries. These Jagirdars were responsible for collecting taxes and revenue and to provide horses and men to their British masters. Too often these Jagirdars used food as a tool for controlling masses. Punjab, the food basket of sub-continent, suffered twice from femine during two world wars. These famines were man made to force Punjabi men to serve in British army to fight the wars for british empire. Those femines and wars devestated the psyche of Punjab when general populace wanted to see British defeated and humiliated on one hand but on the other hand they had concern for the safety of their men at the warfront. That is the reason most of the punjabi folk poetry of near past is all about the `beloved`, `dhola`, and `mahiya` who is away from home and his lover yearns for his return. This has turned Punjabi psyche into a schizophrenic one even in present times when people do want to see rule of law, democracy, and good governance in the country but they do not want to see their military defeated and humilitated either. The fuaji dictatorship knows this very well and exploits it to the fullest.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#392 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 6:50:12 am
Re: # 388

We are not any mature nation because we are just unable to see things in clear black and white.

Mirzai`s basic beliefs clearly go against basic beliefs of Gora Sahib. Gora sahib has the belief that Jesus died on cross, then became alive on third day and then went to heavens. In those days missioneries used to argue that since Jesus was alive in heavens and Prophet of Islam was burried in grave ... so Jesus was superior to Prophet of Islam. In such crucial time, it was Mirza alone who fought this argument of missioneries. He came up with a different reply that Jesus also died and is burried in a grave. Mirza had various ``manazras`` with Christien Bishops as well ... and he effectively broke the basic argument of Christian missioneries.

Mirza did have a solid role in his time. He had somewhat contribution of saving Islam from the hands of christian missioneries. Yes he was loyal to British government. But many other Punjabi ulemas were also loyal to British government.

Regards!

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#391 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 6:28:54 am
Re: # 389

Yes I used wrong word ``all``. Obviously my statement could not come up to ``falsification principle``. As a matter of fact, generally and on the whole, British government proved to be a blessing for Punjabi Muslims. Punjabi Muslims had no freedom of religious practices under the rule of Sikhs. Many mosques had been converted to stables in that period. British government was a blessing for Punjabi Muslims in religious sense also because British government gave full religious freedom to people. In fact, with the emergence of printing and publishing facilities in those times,,, ulemas of this region had found great oppertunity of spreading their religious views among people. These facilities were missing in Sikh Raj.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#390 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 6:07:12 am

I should have phrased my post a little better. The people listed in my post were fighting their own separate wars with British. So there were more than one armed ressitances.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#389 Posted by Urstruly on May 4, 2007 6:01:49 am
Re: # 385
``All the Punjabi Muslims had welcomed British Raj in the province.``
This is not true. Speaking of Punjabi Muslims alone, there was armed ressistance from such freedom fighters as Roy Ahmad Khan Kharl, Barkat Majaithia, Nizam Lohaar, and couple others who started a gorrila warfare against British after the collapse of Sikha Shahi. There are some others who were called ``decoits`` and ``thugs`` by British such as Jugga Daakoo, who was in fact the Punjabi Robin Hood and has become a part of our folklore.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#388 Posted by Zeena on May 4, 2007 5:34:27 am
#384 zeemax
Oh, now I got it....so this whole drama or saga of mirzaism was based on to please gora sahib to get to cash his religious card and to divide and rule among Muslims.........

This is scary......or my be this whole mirzaism was a conspiracy of goras against Muslims .......
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#387 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 3:10:36 am
#385 by khuram,

I consider Syed Ahmed Khan no better than Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.

Your point re context of time is taken. How would you evaluate Iqbal in the context of his time?

Regards
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#386 Posted by zeemax on May 4, 2007 3:06:12 am
#385 by khuram,

I consider Syed Ahmed Khan no better than Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.

Your point re context of time is taken. How would you evaluate Iqbal in the context of his time?

Regards
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#385 Posted by khuram on May 4, 2007 1:47:35 am
Zeemax

We are prone to commit a common mistake while studying or evaluating history. We mistakenly tend to evaluate historical events in the light of our present day political and cultural environment.

Have you read Sir Syed Ahmed Khan`s ``Risala Asbab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind...???

I have read it. If you will read it, you will get very bad impression of Sir Syed because you will find him a perfect slave of British government who considers British people and western culture as superior to local people and culture. You know k Sir Syed ne British Sarkar ki apni jaan per khail ker Khidmet ki thi...??? He personally had saved lives of many British people during 1857 revolt by putting his own life in dangers.

Do you know that about all the Muslim Ulema from Punjab Province were generally very happy with the British government...???

If you do not know, then I tell you its reason. Before British Raj, Punjab province was under the control of Sikh rulers. Punjabi Muslims were suffering in the hands of Sikh rulers. Punjab was overtaken by Britishers in 1849. All the Punjabi Muslims had welcomed British Raj in the province. Because they had got freedom from the cruelties of Sikhs.

Hum log aaj 2007 main British k khilaf barrkein mar saktein hain. Do you know k 1857 k baad even founders of Deoband Madrasah had stopped talking about Jihad...??? Even though they had participated in 1857 war...!!! Deoband k baani ulema barre shageir main iss liye reh rahe thay kiyunke they had availed the ``aam maafi`` of British government.

Do you know k 1906 main Muslim League ki establishment ka purpose kia tha...??? Do you not know k purpose tha k Muslims ko British government ka faithful show kia jaye aur political benefits liye jayein.

Zeemax,, do you know k not only Muslims of Sub-Continent but actually almost all the Asian Nations had fallen so badly in the Colonial era that they had accepted White Man as something superior being to Asian People...???

Asian people could manage to come out of the trance of such deep inferiority complex first time in 1906 when Japanese Army defeated Russian Army. It was for the first time when Asian people got somewhat confidence. Asian people had got REAL confidence in second world war when at a stage Japan was defeating the alliance armies and Japan had liberated many Asian countries from British rule.

Even before this time,,, people of India could not think of trying to get freedom from British. Before second world war, Indian people (including Hindus and Muslims) were satisfied with living under British supervision and with somewhat limited autonomy. Before second world war, the issue was just how much seats for Hindus and how much for Muslims in the legislative assembelies.

But it was during second world war when Indian people got as much confidence to launch such movements as ``Quit India`` ... and Muslims came up with Pakistan Resolution.

Anyways, try to be able to see things in their original context. Pay thanks to the courage of Japanese people who gave you necessary confidence and you came out of a very deep rooted inferiority complex.

Mirza was a person of that time. Evaluate him in the context of that time.

If you evaluate Muhammad Ali Jinnah in the context of 1916, you will consider him right in his struggles for Hindu Muslim Unity.

If you evaluate him in the context of 1940, you will consider him right in his struggle for Hindu Muslim separation.

Learn to evaluate history in its original context. If you were the part of post 1857 context,,, you would be more rational if you accepted the superiority of British people. Sir Syed was a rationalist. Do you know...???

Regards!
reply to this interact write a new interact