In my previous blog, I have outlined why and how Ahmadis believe that we Muslims are Kuffar for rejecting Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
In this entry, I will show you how it was none other than Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who caused this confusion. In his claim to prophethood, he made sure he was deceitful and two faced, but in his Takfeer, he clearly contradicted himself, and made it the case that we Muslims are kuffar to him. The two concepts link in together nicely, if we were to suppose MGA a prophet, then we must call whoever rejects him a disbeliever like Ahmadis do today. But nonetheless, this entry will highlight the contradiction, and then how Mahmud Ahmad lied in court. So pick up your calculator and note pad, that’s one more contradiction and one more lie.
Picking up from last week, Mahmud Ahmad carries on talking about Takfeer in the book ‘Truth about the split’. But now, he brings evidence from MGA to prove it
“After this, the article proceeded to quote passages from the writings of the Promised Messiahas to show that he regarded his deniers as kuffar. Some of the passages, quoted in the article, are reproduced here in brief: To the apostate Abdul Hakim of Patiala, he wrote: “At any rate, when the great God has revealed to me that every body whom my Call has reached and who has failed to accept my claim, is not a Muslim, and is liable to account before God, how can I at the instance of one individual, whose heart is steeped in a thousand darknesses, ignore the command of God. It is easier to cut off such a one from my Community. Accordingly from this date I hereby exclude you from the Community of my followers.” Following this, I proceeded to explain the purport of the above passage in the following words. “The above words apply not merely to those who take an active part in denouncing the Promised Messiahas; but every person who fails to accept him is not a Muslim.” P.147-8
So clearly, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad made Takfeer against Abdul Hakim and said ‘when the great God has revealed to me that every body whom my call has reached and who has failed to accept my claim, is not a Muslim’. Nice and clear. Ahmadis cannot run away from the fact that they’re the only Muslims left on earth.
Generally, out of naivety, Ahmadis would say MGA regarded Muslims as Muslims as long as they said the shahada as they quote this from his writings
‘From the very beginning it has been my faith that the rejection of my claim does not render anyone a kafir or dajjal… I do not call anyone kafir who pronounces the Kalima… If I am a Muslim in the Eyes of God, then those who call me kafir only render themselves kafir in accordance with the Holy Prophet’s edict in the matter… My faith in reality is that I do not regard any Muslim as kafir.’ (Tiryaqul Qulub, pp.258-260)
So here we see another contradiction. What do you do about this one?
Ahmadis questioned their master MGA regarding the Takfeer of Abdul Hakeem, and he gave them a wise answer
“Question: Huzoor-e-aali (Respected Mirza Ghulam) has mentioned in thousands of places that it is not at all right to call Kafir a Kalima-go (someone who recites the Kalima) and an Ahle-Qibla. It is quite obvious that except those Momineen who become Kafir by calling you (Mirza Ghulam) a Kafir, no one becomes a Kafir by merely not accepting you. However, you have now written to Abdul Hakeem Khan that anyone who has received my message and has not accepted me is no longer a Muslim. There is contradiction between this statement and your statements in previous books. Earlier in Tiriaq-ul-Quloob etc you had mentioned that no one becomes Kafir by not accepting you; now you are writing that by rejecting me he becomes a Kafir?!
Answer: This is strange that you consider the person who rejects me and the person who calls me Kafir as two different persons, whereas in the eyes of God he is the same type; because he who does not accept me is because he considers me a fabricator… apart from this, he who does not accept me, he does not believe in God and His Prophet as well, because there is God’s and his Prophet’s prophecy regarding me.” [Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 22, P. 167)
Just look at his futile logic. ‘Everyone who doesn’t accept me thinks I’m a fabricator’ . What if I thought he was mentally ill, what happens then? What if I thought he went crazy, what happens then? In all cases, he affirms the belief that those who call him kafir and those who reject him are the same.
But generally, this example really highlights where the essential flaws of Ahmadiyyat are. Like with everything else, they egoistically change something in the deen, but little do they know that they will eventually stumble upon a contradiction in the future. Muslims take the hadith of the Takfeer metaphorically, and modernists and progressives as much as Ahamdis want to be are very happy of this hadith because it warns people of the severity of Takfeer. If the hadith is literal as MGA took it, then we’ll all be playing a game of whether someone is Kafir or not, and the cycle goes on, it would just be ridiculous to assume the hadith is literal, but MGA took it that way to annoy the Muslims.
Anyway, now that we have outlined the contradiction, let’s move onto how Ahamdis changed their views on this matter. Mahmud was called to court in 1954 following riots against Ahmadis. Now, it’s important to understand that everyone knew by this time the stance of Ahmadis on Non-Ahmadi Muslims, and the judge wanted to make sure that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad would leave court with humiliation. He wanted to make sure that everyone bares testimony to the fraud of the Ahmadiyya community.
Here are the extracts I got from an Ahmadi website. Be prepared, it’s about to get ugly
Does not the denial of a true Prophet amount to kufr?
Yes, it does amount to kufr. But kufr is of two kinds: one which throws a man out of the Millat ; the second which does not entail exclusion from the Millat. Denial of the Muslim Kalima is kufr of the first kind; while kufr of the second kind results from other minor denials, or wrong beliefs.
Do you hold Mirza Sahib to be among the Mamurin, faith in whom is essential for qualifying a man to be called a Muslim?
I have already answered this question before, a man who does not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he cannot be held to have gone out of the pale of Islam.
Do you still hold the belief what you had written in the first chapter of A’ina-i-Sadaqat, page 35, that all those Muslims who did not yield a pledge of bai’atto Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, even if they had never heard of him, they are kafirs, and outside the pale of Islam?
“All such Muslims who did not swear allegiance to the promised Masih (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian), even though they did not hear the name of the Promised Masih, are Kafir and debarred from the fold of Islam.(A’ina-i-Sadaqat p.35)”
It is evident from this statement itself that the people here I have in mind I take as Muslims. Therefore, when I use the word kafir, I have in my mind kafirs of the second kind which I have defined already, i.e., they are not driven or thrown out of the Millat. When I say they are outside the pale of Islam I have in my mind the view, by Mufradat-i-Raghib on page 240, where Islam has been shown to be of two kinds: one lower than the stage of Iman ; the other above the stage of Iman.
Oh my God, oh dear oh dear oh dear
I can’t believe what I just read
He first says he doesn’t believe that non-Ahmadi Muslims are outside of the fold of Islam. Then when Faruqi pressures him and quotes him saying ‘outside of the pale of Islam’ (and well done Ahmadis for replacing it with millat; it still has the same meaning), he gives a different interpretation to what is to be outside the pale of Islam. It’s interesting how he starts with ‘I have in mind’ indicating that prior to this event, he’d never mentioned any of this stuff. After he made explicit Takfeer, it took him over 50 years to explain what he meant by Non-Ahmadi Muslims not being Muslim.
With all this mayhem, Ahmadis were forced to take his first position on the matter as a result of the pressure from Hani Tahir. And like I said, Mahmud Ahmad clearly lied in court to run away from his Takfeer. Yet to this day, they are torn apart, neither can they say we are Muslim, nor can they say we are Non-Muslims. Such is the example of the lost.
And just wait, I got this off a Lahori website. Look at the lie here
Question: You have now stated in your testimony that the person who sincerely does not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib still remains a Muslim. Have you held this view from the beginning?
Subhanallah, so now he considers non-Ahmadi Muslims to be Muslims!
I’ll just drop this here quick
“It is our duty that we must not consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims, and we must not pray following them, because we believe that they are denying a prophet of Almighty God.” (Anwar-i Khilafat p. 90)
So Ahmadis, how does it feel to aspire to a desperate liar?