|
بِسمِ
اللهِ
الرَّحْمَنِ
الرَّحِيمِ Allah,
in the name of, the Most Affectionate, the Eternally Merciful |
||
|
Your
Questions & Comments Don't suppress questions!
Questions are good for your intellectual health!!! |
آپ کے
سوالات و
تاثرات سوالات
کو دبائیے نہیں!
سوالات
ذہنی صحت کی
ضمانت ہیں!!! |
|
اردو
اور عربی
تحریروں کو بہتر
دیکھنے کے
لئے نسخ اور
نستعلیق
فانٹ یہاں سے
ڈاؤن لوڈ
کیجیے
|
||
|
Massacre of Ahmedis Don't hesitate to
share your questions and comments. They will be highly appreciated. I'll
reply ASAP if I know the answer. Send at mubashirnazir100@gmail.com . |
||
|
Question: Asalam O Alykum, I don't
know if you were reading the news or not; yesterday some very disturbing news
came from Pakistan where some gunmen killed around 80 persons in Ahmadis mosques. Sir is
this not another kind of terrorism? the root cause of such incidents is our
own government who has declared Qadyanis as
Kaffirs....off-course when a state declare some sect or group as Kaffir then
the people who are feed up with hate against kaffirs by Mullas
will gather and kill/ burn every hunt they found. If this
the duty of Govt of Pakistan to give declarations
on who is Muslim and who is Kaffir? if so then it
should also complete its list by mentioning in the constitution that
Christians/ Buddhists/ are Kaffirs and what about Shia and Bohri? at the end constitution
of Pakistan would look like some fiqah book. What is
your say? Regards, Zeeshan Zia, Muscat, Oman May 2010 |
||
|
Dear
Brother Wa alaikum us salaam wa
Rahmatullah e wa Barakatuhu I'm also
very disturbed with the incident on human grounds. Killing people on the
grounds that they keep a different point of view is a heinous crime which has
no roots in Islam. Al-Hamdulillah, all the Muslims
now agree on this and even Majlis Tahaffuz e Khatme Nubuwat has also condemned this spree killing. Declaring
Qadyanis as Non-Muslims was a different matter.
Definitely, in a religious state, it is required to include the definition of
people who follow one religion or other to determine the scope of implementation
of law. For example, during Mideaval States,
Islamic Law of Salah, Zakat, Jehad, Marriage,
Divorce and Hudood were implemented on the Muslims
only. For Non-Muslims, their own law was implemented by the state. Therefore,
a definition was required to segregate Muslims and Non-Muslims to implement
the law. Since Ahmedis do not agree on the basic
principle on the "End of Prophethood",
therefore, the government had declared them as Non-Muslims. Before doing so,
a full chance was given to them to present their point of view. "End of Prophethood" is a very significant issue in Islam.
If some considers that a new prophet came arrive now, then he also agrees
that such new prophet can make any amendment to Islam. That's the reason that
such point of view is considered a serious heresy in Islam. The
matter of sects within Muslims is different. All of them agree on certain
basic directives of Islam e.g. salah, zakat etc.
Such directives should be implemented on all and their sectarian differences
should be ignored by the state. The word
"Kaafir" is a very serious word. It is
used in the Quran for those people to whom the message of a Prophet of Allah
was presented and they rejected in knowingly. This word was used for the
pagans of Makkah at the last stage of the Dawah of the Prophet صلی
اللہ علیہ
وسلم. We also
have some double standards about Qadyanis. Most of
our ancient Sufis had claims (of direct communication with Allah) similar to Mirza Ghulam Ahmed. For
example, see the Fasus ul
Hikam of Ibn Arabi. All of our Sufism-based sects consider Ibn Arabi as a great saint and
are proud to be his followers but they criticize Mirza
Ghulam Ahmed for his views. We cannot call this
anything except double standards. If Mirza Ghulam Ahmed is condemned due to his claim of direct communication
with God, why should one consider another person a saint on similar grounds? I think
the reason behind this dual approach is the language and style of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed sb. Just
read his books. He himself was an extremist and used obscene language for
those who do not follow him. It resulted in a general outrage against him and
his followers. This hatred continued for about a century. This is the
historical background of such dispute. Although
we can disagree with the views of Mirza sb. but
killing people on the ground that they follow him, is a heinous crime and
such vicious people have to be responsible in front of Allah. Instead
of spreading hatred, we should convey our message of the "End of Prophethood" to all people in a decent and positive
way. By hatred, we are doing nothing except to making them more convicted to
their point of view. Only love can conquer hearts. We should clarify the
mistakes in claim of Mirza saheb
is nice a decent way to Ahmedis and try to convince
them with love and logic that the prophethood has
ended on Prophet Muhammad صلی اللہ
علیہ وسلم. Now, any
claim about prophethood is not true. All this
should be done with respect and love. wassalaam Mubashir |
||
|
مصنف
کی دیگر تحریریں قرآنی
عربی
پروگرام / سفرنامہ
ترکی
/ مسلم
دنیا اور
ذہنی، فکری
اور نفسیاتی غلامی / اسلام
میں جسمانی و
ذہنی غلامی
کے انسداد کی
تاریخ / تعمیر
شخصیت
پروگرام /
قرآن اور
بائبل
کے دیس میں / علوم
الحدیث: ایک
تعارف / کتاب
الرسالہ:
امام شافعی
کی اصول فقہ
پر پہلی کتاب
کا اردو
ترجمہ و
تلخیص
/ اسلام
اور دور حاضر
کی تبدیلیاں / ایڈورٹائزنگ
کا اخلاقی
پہلو سے
جائزہ / الحاد
جدید کے
مغربی اور
مسلم
معاشروں پر
اثرات / اسلام
اور نسلی و
قومی امتیاز / اپنی
شخصیت اور
کردار کی
تعمیر کیسے
کی جائے؟ / مایوسی
کا علاج کیوں
کر ممکن ہے؟ / دور
جدید میں
دعوت دین کا
طریق کار / اسلام
کا خطرہ: محض
ایک وہم یا
حقیقت / Quranic Concept
of Human Life Cycle
/ Empirical Evidence of God’s Accountability
|
||