Articles Comments

Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » Are Ahmadis Non-Muslims?

Are Ahmadis Non-Muslims?

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

(Written exclusively for PakTeaHouse. Please give credit when crossposting)

The poison of ignorance and extremism that Bhutto and General Zia jointly fathered during their dictatorial regimes has fully indoctrinated even those who otherwise describe themselves as educated.

This week the Large Hadron Collider at the CERN inched closer to the discovery of Higgs Boson or the God Particle as it were. In this extraordinary story of human achievement,  Dr. Abdus Salam is a key player who put Pakistan on the map of theoretical physics. In his homeland though, a group of self-styled champions of Islam have started a posthumous campaign of scurrilous slander claiming that Dr. Salam was giving out nuclear secrets. Forget that even a confirmed bigot like General Zia  held a ceremony in our only nobel prize winner’s honour or that no one ever accused Dr. Salam of any such thing; in Pakistan to be a hero you have to actually transfer technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea.

Now consider the case of 11 year old Sitara Akbar. Every Pakistani and his mother in law are citing her as a crowning national achievement, blissfully oblivious of the fact that she is an Ahmadi. To them her religion is suddenly unimportant or irrelevant or is it? How many Sitara Akbars have been expelled from our schools for being Ahmadi? How many productive citizens of this republic have been killed and maimed for believing differently?

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s National Assembly imagined itself the Islamic equivalent of the Council of Nicea. Just as that ancient bastion of Christian orthodoxy excommunicated unitarian Christians for not believing in the trinity of the father, son and the holy ghost, the National Assembly saw it fit to – primarily at the instigation of the Prime Minister and his law minister- declare an entire sect non-Muslim. Just like the post hoc elevation of the principle of trinity at Nicea, Pakistan’s National Assembly located Islam in the principle of the finality of Prophethood.

This act of our sovereign legislature stood in sharp contrast to the view of this nation’s founding father. On 5 May, 1944, in response to demands of the orthodox vis a vis Ahmadis, Jinnah made it absolutely clear that anyone who professes to be a Muslim is a Muslim and welcome in the Muslim League and that those who were raising the issue were trying to divide the Muslims. Here I am forced to say that I am inclined to accept Jinnah’s view and reject the collective wisdom of our sovereign legislature. There are several reasons which may be cited in this regard:

  1. First and foremost Pakistan is bound by the United Nations’ charter. Therefore Pakistan is bound to ensure freedom of religion for all its citizens and freedom of religion means freedom of religion according to the definition of the subject of the said freedom.
  2. Identity is subjective not objective. The state of Pakistan or any other state cannot tell an Ahmadi that he is not a Muslim because it is intrinsic to the faith of an Ahmadi.  This is an inviolable, inalienable right as part of right to life which every state in the world is bound to protect. If Ahmadis say they are Muslims they ought to be accepted as such.
  3. Pakistan is a signatory to the ICCPR and without reservations since June 2011. Therefore every piece of legislation that discriminates against Ahmadis or forces a label upon them is ultra vires the ICCPR.
  4. The Islamic argument: According to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) anyone who utters the Kalima Shahadah is a Muslim. None of the Kalimas, including the Primary Kalima Shahadah contains any reference to the principle of the finality of Prophethood as understood by the Muslim majority today.
  5. Finally because by conduct and promise, Pakistani state is estopped from claiming otherwise. In 1947, Pakistan laid claim to Qadian as a Muslim holy place, a counter-blast to Sikh claims on Nankana Sahib and Hassan Abdal.  Similarly in 1946 elections which is the basic referendum on the question of Pakistan, Ahmadi votes were instrumental in getting Muslims Pakistan. These are undeniable facts of history.

 

Therefore- fully aware of the stigma attached to this statement- I concur with Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah, thefounding father of Pakistan that Ahmadis are Muslims, if they say they are Muslims and no one, not even the sovereign legislature, has the right to say otherwise.

 




Written by

Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: , , , ,

3,228 Responses to "Are Ahmadis Non-Muslims?"

  1. AKB Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    watch how minorities are enjoying freedom in Pak ….
    In fact they are better off than the Muslim majority.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/aug/06/karachi-wallah-pakistan-farooq-soomro-video

  2. Romain United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    Hisham Talibani United StatesGoogle ChromeWindows says:
    January 31, 2014 at 10:33 am
    This is serious hate speech- the poster is openly inciting violence. Moderators, kindly refer this to authorities.
    Regards

    Somebody please give me his email address, I will forward it to the FBI.

  3. AKB Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    @muggu

    Arabs have been barred from marrying foreign women because they have big dicks and are only okay for Caucasian cunts…or deep cunts like you.
    Intermarriages between Pak women and Arab men cannot be allowed for above reason,,,and vice versa. They are looking for mug-shaped broads who can withstand their ‘thrust’ and you seem to be the right candidate.

    Pak people are NOT Arabs….neither are they Saudi’s.
    They are the same people who live in India….raised from the same ferment. You are only jealous of Indians and Paki’s..damn you!

    why don’t you point out when any person other than a Christian, Mirjai or Hindu gets killed in Pakistan?? Don’t you know at least a dozen Sunni;s get killed in Karachi only every day?? You are a bloody hate monger,,an idiot…I don’t know what you are ,,,male, female or transgender??

    You are simply a nut who has caught the sun!!!

  4. AKB Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    MAGGU KO ARAB LE GAYAY
    HO JAMALO HO JAMALO
    MAGGU KO DANDA DE GAYE
    HO JAMALO HO JAMALO
    MAGGU BEHOSH HUA YA HUEE
    HO JAMALO HO HO JAMALO!!

    WANT MORE POESY???

  5. tajender United Arab Emirates Internet Explorer Windows says:

    maggu akb mohan romain and kamath,

    why isis and al qaeda never attacked isreal,

    http://www.activistpost.com/2014/08/why-arent-isis-and-al-qaeda-attacking.html

  6. MAGGU United States Chrome for iOS iPad says:

    ROMAIN:: Just point them to his post … They will do the finding, and the carrying. Pakis have no problem if Americans pick up their people for direct flights to the sunny beaches of Guantanemo

  7. tajender United Arab Emirates Internet Explorer Windows says:

    sunny beaches of Guantanemo

    jail mein paploo chaloo kar deinge.

  8. AKB Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    @MAGGU, ROMAIN

    gO AND lick your master’s ass …that’s the best you were born for, traitors and beasts!

  9. AKB Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    @ news for Maggu,,,et al

    The challenge to the Muslim world’s stability presented by the Islamic State has become quite serious over the past few days. I.A. Rehman for Dawn: “…The people of Pakistan should be concerned that the slogan of caliphate has spread to India. NewAgeIslam, a well-known online forum for debate on Muslim affairs, has disclosed a charter of demands presented by a leading Muslim scholar, Maulana Salman Husain Nadvi, urging Saudi Arabia to establish a caliphate. Maulana Nadvi is reported to have pleaded for a world Islamic army and argued against branding the religious militants as terrorists. Instead, these ‘sincere Muslim youth fighting for a noble cause’ should be united in a confederation of jihadi organisations for worldwide action under the guidance of the ulema.

  10. Parliament certified Muslim United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @AKB

    ZAB doesn’t have to be blamed…he did not declare mirjai’s as kafirs

    AKB ! You are a buffoon. You don’t understand simple statements. Of course, ZAB is not to be blamed. He is to honored. Hazrat Bhutto was the great hero of Islam. What are you talking about? Hazrat Bhutto steered the Parliament towards defining the term “Islam”. He defined the term “Muslim”. He defined the term “Non-Muslim”. Imagine how bad things would have been if the term “Muslim” had not been determined and institutionalized in 1974. All these ages “Islam” tugged along without being defined. For 14 centuries, nobody could define what the term “Islam” meant as evidenced by Munir Commission of 1953. Then finally, in 1974, by enacting the historic Second Amendment, Hazrat Bhutto blessed “Islam” with a definition.

  11. Waseem Pakistan Mozilla Firefox Windows says:

    are ahamadis muslim? Chawwal insan they are MURTAD’S ….not muslim!
    Muanfiqs like you should be dragged into the street to death before anybody else. When it is clear they are contradicting QURAN O HADEES who the hell are you to still debate either they are muslim or not?

  12. Parliament certified Muslim United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Waseem

    are ahamadis muslim? Chawwal insan they are MURTAD’S ….not muslim!
    Muanfiqs like you should be dragged into the street to death before anybody else. When it is clear they are contradicting QURAN O HADEES who the hell are you to still debate either they are muslim or not?

    My dear Muslim brother! You are partially correct. To prevent any further confusion in future, let everybody here at Pak Tea House, note for ever and ever, that only the Parliament-certified Muslims, certified according to the historic 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, are “Muslims”. No one else. This is final and this has been decreed by the Sacred Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, which is “forever” inviolable. Brother! you have unnecessarily brought in the “QURAN O HADEES”. Please don’t get into this chakkar. Otherwise, the Qadianis will start quoting from the Quran and the Hadees. Anyway, the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan came after the Quran and Hadees. This is the latest holy document. The 1973 Constitution supersedes and over-rides all previous holy scriptures. Also note that the Quran and Hadees don’t define the crucial terms “Islam”, “Muslim” and “Non-Muslim”. The 1973 Holy Constitution does. So which is a more complete guidance?
    .
    The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is an Islamic Republic and it has a State Religion, which is Islam. Which Islam? Please note that the most correct interpretation of Islam is that of Mumlikat al Arabia al Saudia al Wahabia al Salafia. May the religious and monetary blessings of Saudi Arabia continue to flow into our country, till eternity, Ameen.
    .
    All Certified Muslims, who have been duly certified according to the Second Amendment of the Sacred 1973 Constitution are Class I citizens of this country. Christians, Hindus, Parsis, and Sikhs are Class II citizens, while Qadianis/Ahmadis are Class III citizens.

  13. Naseer Ahmad United States Google Chrome  GT-I9500 Build/KOT49H) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.141 Mobile Safari/537.36 says:

    @Waseem.
    Call Ahmadies what you like but please dont degrade the Holy Quran and the Hadith by declaring the words of a Parliment superior to them. This very Parliament was declared the most corrupt and incompetent Parliament by Gen Zia.

  14. [...] is even willing to accept that there is any such problem, let alone to solve it. Don’t Miss: Are Ahmadis Non-Muslims? Minorities in Pakistan are a lost case. Asking for prosecution of culprits is itself a joke to [...]

  15. Syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @Parliament certified Muslim
    .
    Respectfully, let me correct you. The correct term is Ahmadis, not Qadianis. A Qadiani is anyone belonging to Qadian, a small town, situated in the Gurdaspur district of Indian Punjab. Qadianis or the dwellers of Qadian could be, in terms of their religious beliefs, Muslims or Hindus or Sikhs or Christians or whatever they choose to be. “Ahmadis”, on the other hand, are Muslims who recite the Kalima Laa ilaaha illallaah Muhammad ur rasoolullah, offer prayers 5 times a day as prescribed in Islam, observe the fasts of Ramadan, pay their Zakat, and go to Hajj. I should add here, that Ahmadis in Pakistan, have however, been deprived of their right to go to Hajj by the state. Ahmadis believe in Allah, His angels, His revealed books, His messengers and in the Hereafter. Ahmadi Muslims believe that the prophecy of the advent of Imam Mahdi, made by the Holy Prophet Muhammad, has been fulfilled in the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908). Ahmadis consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a devoted disciple and servant of the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

  16. Parliament certified Muslim United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed did a great service to Islam by selecting Hazrat Abu Taliban Jarnail Zia Shaheed as the Army Chief. Hazrat Abu Taliban Jarnail Zia Shaheed happens to be the only “Shaheed Jarnail” in the entire Subcontinent, other than Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale Shaheed.

    The period – from 20 December 1971, when Hazrat Bhutto became the President of Pakistan to 17 August 1988, when Hazrat Zia died – was the golden age in Pakistan’s history. For 17 years Pakistan remained under 2 consecutive rightly-guided leaders, both of whom were disciples of Hazrat Shah Faisal Shaheed. Later on, some minor interpretational differences arose between Hazrat Zia Shaheed and Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed, which led to Hazrat Zia Shaheed respectfully escorting his mentor Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed to the gallows. But these differences should be ignored. What counts, is that both were shaheeds and both were awliya. Neither do shaheeds die, nor do awliya, which means that both these buzurgs are very much alive. It’s a shame that their mazars are so far apart. Both shaheeds also share the unique privilege of beating the hell out of the Ahmadis. While Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed got the Ahmadis to be declared “Non-Muslims” constitutionally in 1974, Hazrat Gen. Zia Shaheed was able to promulgate the Ordinance No. 20 in 1984, legally barring the Ahmadis from calling themselves “Muslims”, callings their temples “mosques”, and also from calling the “Azan”.

  17. Syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    After the 1970 Elections, it became clear to Bhutto that the only major political rival he had, that is if Pakistan was allowed to remain intact, was Mujib. The only way to get rid of this rival forever was to let go of East Pakistan. Bhutto convinced Yahya not to let Mujib form the government in the Center, on any account. Why did Yahya listen to Bhutto? Because, politically, Yahya was in the most precarious position and badly needed political support in the country, which he thought he would be able to get from Bhutto, once the dust settled. So, Yahya took 2 steps:
    (1) he did not invite Mujib, who had won the national election, to form the government in the Center, and
    (2) he ordered the Army to surrender in East Pakistan. He thus, let go of East Pakistan politically as well as militarily.
    East Pakistan became Bangladesh. West Pakistan became Pakistan because that was all that remained of it. Yahya became history. Now, Bhutto had the political monopoly in the whole of Pakistan, what was left of it, and a shining unchallenged life-long career ahead. What more could an aspiring politician wish for? His former arch-rival Mujib was no longer a threat. The only other potential rival left, was the Mullah (JI, JUI, JUP and other rightists). Another factor which surfaced at that point in time, was that King Faisal’s name was being projected those days as a prospective candidate for Pan-Islamic politico/religious leadership, an idea that His Majesty did not exactly disapprove of. Faisal was soon on the hunt for wooing in Muslim countries by offering them money, and he had ample of it. The post-war bruised and amputated Pakistan was desperately in need of money. Of course, the newly-born and even more bruised Bangladesh was understandably more desperate. King Faisal offered money to both Pakistan and Bangladesh. This was obviously not going to be charity. What he wanted in return was that both the respective governments sponsor the Wahhabi/Salafi political agenda in their respective countries, which also involved banning the Ahmadiyya Jamaat in all Muslim countries of the world. Mujib turned down the offer on the grounds that Bangladesh would never compromise its secular constitution. Bhutto, in contrast, fell for the bait, and then of course, kept on falling. At this point, Bhutto was aiming for two birds in a shot:
    (1) Saudi money and lots if it, and
    (2) politically appeasing and pacifying the agitated Mullah. He came up with an “Islamic” constitution, giving Pakistan a State Religion, in 1973. The same year, he hosted the Islamic Summit Conference in Lahore, with King Faisal on the center-stage. Early next year, he got the Azad Kashmir Assembly to declare the Ahmadis non-Muslims, and finally in September 1974 he had the Ahmadis declared non-Muslims in Pakistan by the Parliament.

  18. PMA United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed: You may like to read this article.
    .
    Former Minister of Religious Affairs in the Z.A. Bhutto government (1971-77), Kausar Niazi, has been mistreated by history.

    Many local historians have charged him for influencing some of the Bhutto government’s many controversial policies, especially the one that supposedly ‘resolved the long standing Ahmadiyya question’.

    Though a number of former members of Bhutto’s PPP have squarely blamed Niazi of influencing Bhutto regarding the thorny matter, the truth is quite the opposite.
    .
    In the 1950s and the 1960s Kausar Niazi was a prominent member of one of Pakistan’s leading religious parties, the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI). In 1953 he was arrested and jailed by the government for taking part in the violent anti-Ahamdiyya riots in Lahore. Niazi was also highly vocal in his support for JI’s criticism of the Ayub Khan dictatorship (1958-69). The JI had accused Ayub of undermining the role of Islamic scholars in Pakistan.

    However, after Ayub Khan eased out his young foreign minister, Z.A. Bhutto in 1966, Niazi supported Bhutto’s stand against his former boss (over the 1965 ceasefire against India).
    .
    When Bhutto formed his own party in 1967 (the PPP), the JI denounced Bhutto and the PPP of being a party of communists who were being backed by the Soviet Union to ‘destroy faith in Pakistan’.

    After disagreeing with JI’s line of attack against Bhutto, Niazi broke away from the party. He was consequently invited by Bhutto to join the PPP. Bhutto was searching for a religious scholar to join his party, someone who could (theologically) retaliate against JI’s diatribes against the PPP. Niazi’s entry into the PPP was not welcomed by the party’s leftist ideologues. But Bhutto overruled their concerns, suggesting that Niazi fully backed the party’s socialist programme.
    .
    Niazi was given the party ticket to contest the 1970 election from a constituency in Sialkot (even though he was originally from Mianwali). Interestingly, the constituency in Sialkot from where Niazi was contesting had a large Ahamdiyya population.

    But Niazi, now positioning himself as a ‘progressive Muslim scholar’ and a firm advocate of the PPP’s socialist manifesto, decided to hold a series of meetings with the leaders of the Ahamdiyya community.

    He convinced them that the PPP would never allow the religious parties to outlaw the Ahmadiyya from the fold of Islam and that the PPP was the community’s only hope against excommunication.
    .
    According to the recently published memoirs of late Barrister Azizullah Shiekh — a famous lawyer and former member of the leftwing National Awami Party (NAP) — the Ahmadiyya community, before getting Niazi’s assurances, had already struck a deal with the leaders of NAP. The NAP too had promised the community that it would keep the right-wing / religious parties from reviving the anti-Ahmadiyya campaign.

    However, Kausar succeeded in making the Ahmadiyya community choose the PPP over NAP and vote for the PPP across Pakistan. This also helped Naizi to win the election from his Sialkot constituency where he received over 90,000 votes. In December 1971, after the departure of East Pakistan (that became Bangladesh), Bhutto was invited to form the new government because the PPP had won the most seats from West Pakistan.
    .
    Niazi became an advisor in the Bhutto cabinet and in 1974 was made a federal minister (minister of religious affairs).

    This was also the year when the religious parties had revived their campaign to oust the Ahmadiyya community from the fold of mainstream Islam.
    .
    Rioting in the Punjab saw Bhutto advising the parties in the parliament to debate the matter. After the rioting failed to subside and some of Bhutto’s ministers suggested that the party was losing support in the Punjab over the issue, Bhutto decided to allow the religious parties to table a bill for the constitutional excommunication of the Ahmadiyya.
    .
    Rafi Nasim, one of Bhutto’s main constitutional advisors, wrote in his book (The Political Discourse of Z.A. Bhutto) that Bhutto asked the PPP legislators to vote (for or against the bill) according to their own conscience.
    .
    Most PPP MNAs along with the religious parties and Pakistan Muslim League factions voted to declare the Ahamadiyya as a non-Muslim minority. The NAP abstained from voting.
    .
    Barrister Azizullah Shiekh mentions in his memoirs that NAP’s leader, Wali Khan, was still simmering from the way the Ahmadiyya leaders had broken their deal with NAP and had instead favoured the PPP. Azizullah writes that when he asked Wali Khan why NAP had remained quiet on the issue, he was told (by Wali): ‘Let them (the Ahmadiyya) go to the ones they voted for …’What was Niazi’s stand on the issue, a man who in the 1950s had agitated against the Ahamdiyya? Ironically, Husain Haqani — former Pakistan ambassador to the US (2008-2012), and a PPP member — mentions in his book, Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, that Niazi actually advised Bhutto not to turn the bill into law.
    .
    Niazi’s opposition in this regard is explained in a bit more detail by the respected columnist and intellectual, late Khalid Hassan, in a letter that he wrote to one of his readers many years later. He writes: “If there was one man in the Bhutto cabinet in 1974 who was opposed to declaring the Ahmadiyya a minority, it was Maulana Kausar Niazi. He told me this himself. He recalled Niazi telling Bhutto, ‘Please do not pursue this 80 years old problem. As far as clerics are concerned, one cleric can’t bear to stand behind another to say his ritual prayers. Let them decide on their own; the government should stay away from this matter.’”
    .
    Niazi lost his place in the PPP when Bhutto was toppled in a military coup in 1977. Niazi was accused by Bhutto’s widow, Nusrat Bhutto, of ‘being the establishment’s man’. In 1978 Niazi formed his own faction of the PPP, the Progressive Peoples Party. The party did not last and Niazi retired from politics. He returned in 1990 as a member of National People’s Party (a party formed by his former PPP colleague, Mustafa Jatoi). He was finally welcomed back into the PPP in 1993 by Benazir Bhutto, but passed away in 1994.

  19. PMA United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed: Looks like the Ahmadia community supported Muslim League in 1947 and was betrayed by it in 1953. The community was with the military regime of Ayub Khan in the sixties. At one point he had to clarify that he was not an Ahmadi. In 1970 elections the community supported Bhutto only to be betrayed by his political party PPP in 1974. It is forty years since then. Today no political party of Pakistan openly wants to associate with or take up the Ahmadia cause. In the present which political party does your community support now? What is the political future of your community in Pakistan? Regards.

  20. sta Pakistan Safari iPhone says:

    @ Syed (November 22, 2014 at 9:24 pm)

    After the 1970 Elections, it became clear to Bhutto that the only major political rival he had, that is if Pakistan was allowed to remain intact, was Mujib. The only way to get rid of this rival forever was to let go of East Pakistan. Bhutto convinced Yahya not to let Mujib form the government in the Center, on any account. Why did Yahya listen to Bhutto? Because, politically, Yahya was in the most precarious position and badly needed political support in the country, which he thought he would be able to get from Bhutto, once the dust settled. So, Yahya took 2 steps:
    (1) he did not invite Mujib, who had won the national election, to form the government in the Center, and
    (2) he ordered the Army to surrender in East Pakistan.
    He thus, let go of East Pakistan politically as well as militarily. East Pakistan became Bangladesh. West Pakistan became Pakistan because that was all that remained of it. Yahya became history. Now, Bhutto had the political monopoly in the whole of Pakistan, what was left of it, and a shining unchallenged life-long career ahead. What more could an aspiring politician wish for? His former arch-rival Mujib was no longer a threat. The only other potential rival left, was the Mullah (JI, JUI, JUP and other rightists). Another factor which surfaced at that point in time, was that King Faisal’s name was being projected those days as a prospective candidate for Pan-Islamic politico/religious leadership, an idea that His Majesty did not exactly disapprove of. Faisal was soon on the hunt for wooing in Muslim countries by offering them money, and he had ample of it. The post-war bruised and amputated Pakistan was desperately in need of money. Of course, the newly-born and even more bruised Bangladesh was understandably more desperate. King Faisal offered money to both Pakistan and Bangladesh. This was obviously not going to be charity. What he wanted in return was that both the respective governments sponsor the Wahhabi/Salafi political agenda in their respective countries, which also involved banning the Ahmadiyya Jamaat in all Muslim countries of the world. Mujib turned down the offer on the grounds that Bangladesh would never compromise its secular constitution. Bhutto, in contrast, fell for the bait, and then of course, kept on falling. At this point, Bhutto was aiming for two birds in a shot:
    (1) Saudi money and lots if it, and
    (2) politically appeasing and pacifying the agitated Mullah.
    He came up with an “Islamic” constitution, giving Pakistan a State Religion, in 1973. The same year, he hosted the Islamic Summit Conference in Lahore, with King Faisal on the center-stage. Early next year, he got the Azad Kashmir Assembly to declare the Ahmadis non-Muslims, and finally in September 1974 he had the Ahmadis declared non-Muslims in Pakistan by the Parliament.

    .
    Well said. I think, that’s about as close as it gets to facts.

  21. PMA United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed/sta: Are you sure it was Shah Faisal that wanted Ahmadia community declared as non-Muslims in Pakistan. There was no Shah Faisal in 1953. The Ahmadia question in Pakistan is as old as the community itself, which goes back more than one hundred years.

  22. Syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @PMA (November 22, 2014 at 1:55 pm)

    Today no political party of Pakistan openly wants to associate with or take up the Ahmadia cause. In the present which political party does your community support now? What is the political future of your community in Pakistan?

    Ahmadis do not expect any political party to take up their cause. Trust me. Pakistani Ahmadis, do however, hope that the political forces in Pakistan will realize that the cost that Pakistan has had to pay on account of mixing religion with politics is quite high. Just after Quaid-e-Azam’s death, the Government gave in to the Mullah-pressure and the Objectives Resolution was adopted. In 1953, the Judicial Commission of Justices Munir and Kiyani concluded that Jamaat-i-Islami and Majlis Ahrar were anti-state and had sought to destabilize the newly-born Pakistan, by their anti-Ahmadi campaign. The commission’s report was however, successfully shelved. In 1971, the JI miltants, in the name of Pakistan, dishonoured innumerable East Pakistani women, making sure that the hatred for the Pakistan Army, in the hearts of East Pakistanis became irreversible. It did. JI succeeded and Pakistan was halved. In 1974, Faisal purchased Bhutto as well the ’73 Constitution. In the 80s, Zia further persecuted the Ahmadis and also further sold off Pakistan to the Saudis. Pakistan had, by then become a slave, rather bondmaid of the Mullah. Taliban, Madrassas, Kalshnikovs and Narcotics became the order of the day. After Zia, the alternatingly appearing spineless governments of PPP and PML, thought it wise not to displease the Mullah. Pakistan kept on decaying. Finally, by 2014, huge chunks of Pakistani territory had been taken over by the Mullah, and nothing short of a full-scale military operation, had to be undertaken to win those territories back. So, it’s not about the Ahmadi cause, my friend. It’s about Pakistan’s cause.

  23. Syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @PMA (November 23, 2014 at 1:28 am)

    Are you sure it was Shah Faisal that wanted Ahmadia community declared as non-Muslims in Pakistan. There was no Shah Faisal in 1953. The Ahmadia question in Pakistan is as old as the community itself, which goes back more than one hundred years.

    No doubt, it was the Mullahs who wanted that, and you’re right, they wanted that from Day 1. They wanted the Ahmadis declared non-Muslims in 1953 too. That is correct. But what needs to be noted, here, is that they could not have things their way until 1974. So yes, you’re right in asserting that there was no Shah Faisal in 1953, but you do need to realize that by 1974, it was all Faisal, and the 2nd Amendment came in 1974. Moreover, it was not simply Faisal’s political influence that led to the 2nd Amendment being enacted – it was Faisal’s money. Faisal’s money was the missing link. In 1974, Bhutto was not won over by the Saudis – he was bought over by the Saudis, along with the Pakistan Constitution.
    .
    For your interest, let me add here, that the same Faisal, while he was still a prince, had been invited by the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, on the occasion of the inauguration of the Fazl Mosque, in London, in 1926. At first, His Highness accepted the invitation, but later on, upon arriving in London sent his regrets. However, nine years later, Prince Faisal did somehow muster the courage to visit the Fazl Mosque. It is also interesting that, in 1958 Sir Zafrulla Khan, a devout Ahmadi Muslim, performed Umra and was the royal guest of King Saud. Then in 1967, when King Faisal was the monarch, Zafrullah Khan again visited Saudi Arabia, this time too, as His Majesty’s royal guest, and performed Hajj. The leading Saudi ulama, on this occasion, tried their best to convince King Faisal not to permit Zafrullah Khan to perform Hajj. Faisal’s well-known reply to the ulama was, “The Kaaba is Allah’s House, not my father’s”. From 1967 to 1974, however, the King had indeed grown in wisdom, and the Kaaba too, had evolved from being Allah’s House to becoming the king’s father’s house.

  24. PMA United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed: The animosity between Ja’mat-e-Islami and the Ahmadia Ja’mat is well understood. In Pakistan both Ja’mats fish in the same pool. One more convert to the Ahmadia faith is one less customer for the Wahhabis. There is a clash of interest. I also understand you wanting to put forward the best position of your religious group. Pak Tea House is a ‘liberal-secularist’ site yet it provides an ample space for your religious group in the best light. I personally have no problem with the editorial policies of PTH in this regard. But I do think that your criticism of Ja’mat-e-Islami is motivated by your self-interest only. Sectarianism is a clear danger to the safety and stability of Pakistan. In that regard all religious sects operating in Pakistan are to be blamed. And if Ahmadi faith is a sect of Islam as you claim then it too is guilty of promoting sectarianism in Pakistan.
    .
    The 1970 communal clashes in the then East Pakistan have more to do with the Bengali vs. non-Bengali interests than with the Ja’mat-e-Islami even if the Ja’mat was very active in it. Ahmadi faith related conflict is more of a Punjabi phenomenon as those adhering to this faith, like Sikhs, are mostly Punjabis. Similarly there is no proof to your allegations that “In 1974, Faisal purchased Bhutto as well the ’73 Constitution.” 1973 constitution was a national consciences and not an international conspiracy. You are hanging on to a straw man.
    .
    You say: “Ahmadis do not expect any political party to take up their cause.” That is not true. Historically Ahmadi group has been politically active and had supported the political parties perceived to help create environments in which Ahmadia religion could flourish. Secularism is good for the minority religions. Religious minorities are most comfortable and safe to operate and flourish in a secular society. That is the reason why a religious group such as Ahmadia supports secularism in Pakistan.
    .
    You also say: “Pakistani Ahmadis, do however, hope that the political forces in Pakistan will realize the cost that Pakistan had to pay on account of mixing religion with politics is quite high.” Again you are not being honest here. Ahmadia Ja’mat up until 1974 has participated in every election in Pakistan even the ones before independence. The members of the Ahmadia Ja’mat receive directives on how to vote or not to vote in all elections held in Pakistan. That my friend is mixing religion and politics.

  25. Syed United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    @PMA (November 24, 2014 at 8:43 pm)
    .
    Thank you indeed, for responding in such a civil and polite manner. You Sir, I am afraid, are part of the “minority” – those very few who can express their difference of opinion with perfect decency. Now, let me respond to some of your observations:

    The animosity between Ja’mat-e-Islami and the Ahmadia Ja’mat is well understood. In Pakistan both Ja’mats fish in the same pool. One more convert to the Ahmadia faith is one less customer for the Wahhabis. There is a clash of interest.

    All religious groups who preach their message and invite the world to their message, whether they happen to be Muslims, Christians, or Hindus, “fish”, if you insist on putting it that way, from the same “pool” – the pool of Humanity. If there are more than one invitations, I would not call that a “clash of interests”. It’s only that there are multiple choices made available. Eventually, it’s for the invitee to accept any invitation or not to.
    .

    And if Ahmadi faith is a sect of Islam as you claim then it too is guilty of promoting sectarianism in Pakistan

    The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, as the name suggests, and also as its members profess, is a community within the fold of Islam. We do not believe in hating other sects, or for that matter any human being at all. We do not believe in violence. We do not have political ambitions. We do not believe in declaring non-Ahmadi Muslims “non-Muslims”. We firmly believe that anyone who calls himself a Muslim is a Muslim.
    .

    The 1970 communal clashes in the then East Pakistan have more to do with the Bengali vs. non-Bengali interests than with the Ja’mat-e-Islami even if the Ja’mat was very active in it.

    The communal tensions in East Pakistan rose when the winning party the Awami League was not invited to form the government in the Center. Jamaat-i-Islami’s role catalyzed the communal tensions, thus, further distancing the Bengali Pakistanis from the non-Bengali Pakistanis. I would not call this contribution “patriotic” in any way.
    .

    Religious minorities are most comfortable and safe to operate and flourish in a secular society. That is the reason why a religious group such as Ahmadia supports secularism in Pakistan.

    All religious denominations, whether in majority or minority, will find comfort in a system that provides Social Justice. More than a “secular society”, as you have stated, it is a “secular state”, that is conducive to social justice. Individuals or groups of individuals can follow whatever religious beliefs they choose for themselves, as long as they do not resort to violence.
    .

    The members of the Ahmadia Ja’mat receive directives on how to vote or not to vote in all elections held in Pakistan. That my friend is mixing religion and politics.

    Members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat are found today, in about 200 countries. Nowhere do they receive directives, from anyone, on whom to vote and whom not to. The reason why Ahmadis largely voted for the AIML in the 1946 elections was that Jinnah’s stand was a principled one, demanding rights for a disadvantaged minority. In the 1970 elections, most Ahmadis voted for the PPP, because it was the only party that openly voiced Pakistani nationalism, was not ethnic or provincial in its outlook, was politically secular, at least then, and at least to the extent of its potential, did seem to have the ability to keep Pakistan together. In both these elections, the Ahmadis were not seeking political power for themselves. Mixing of religion and politics, in my opinion, has more to do with the State having a State Religion or with religious parties seeking political power for themselves.
    .
    I would also request you to visit the following link:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dLNa2n0GxA
    .
    Thank you.

  26. PMA United States Internet Explorer Windows says:

    Syed: I am not in minority. I find most people to be decent in their normal discourse. Only few are abusive and thus get to be noticed. I have no problem with you or members of your community proselytizing and promoting your faith. Your prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born in Punjab, British India. It is there where your religion first started and now indeed your missionary programs exist in all parts of the world. Your group is very active among Muslim communities all over the world and has done a wonderful job presenting itself as Muslims. However it is only in Pakistan where your faith is known in reality and thus is constitutionally declared as not-Islam. The problem between Ahmadia and non-Ahmadia is not the Ahmadia religion itself. It is the use of the Islamic terminology such as Muslim, Islam, Masjid etc. etc. by the Ahmadia Ja’mat and its members and insistence upon to be considered Muslims that is a source of conflict and friction. Muslim identity is the issue. Most Muslims are not bothered by it and go on with their normal lives unhindered. However religious groups such as the Ja’mat-e-Islami do fight with Ahmadis over this issue. Your activism on behalf of your group is the other half of the fight. The results of this ongoing religious fight are uglier and dangerous for Pakistan. The State of Pakistan in 1974 tried to end the fight be constitutionally declaring Ahmadia religion as not-Islam. But the issue does not appear to be going away anytime soon; both sides are adamant about that. Bye for now.

  27. Parliament certified Muslim United States Google Chrome Windows says:

    PMA :
    .
    I was almost about to bestow on you, the “Certificate of Islam”, but have decided to reconsider on account of some of your dubious statements. Don’t panic. I will continue to scan your true intentions and also keep observing your deepest thoughts. If you pass the scrutiny of the Parliament-certified Ulama, you will rest easy. At the moment, some of your statements make me a bit uneasy.
    .
    You said: “Are you sure it was Shah Faisal that wanted Ahmadia community declared as non-Muslims in Pakistan?”
    It appears as if you are trying to raise doubts about the puritanical role of Hazrat Shah Faisal Shaheed in the Ahmadi issue. You can raise doubts about Allah, His Messenger, His Book – no problem – but please, not a word about Hazrat Shah Faisal. Although Hazrat Bhutto Shaheed was himself, a very pious and practicing Muslim, and even a Parliament-certified one, but he could not have compelled the Parliament to declare the Ahmadis “non-Muslims” single-handedly, by the force of his own piety alone. This measure required a lot of money too, which eventually had to be shared among all the pious Muslim lawmakers. Once, Hazrat Shah Faisal Shaheed had taken care of the bills, passing the 2nd Amendment was no more a challenge.
    .
    You said: “The 1970 communal clashes in the then East Pakistan have more to do with the Bengali vs. non-Bengali interests than with the Ja’mat-e-Islami even if the Ja’mat was very active in it.”
    Please don’t belittle the role of the Jamaat-i-Islami in the East Pakistan affair. The awe of the Ulama was gradually fading away in East Pakistan, and it had to be restored, at any cost. Words such as “rape” and “murder” are not nice words to be used in relation to the holy Ulama. You can alternatively, say that Jamaat-i-Islami was only applying psychological pressure on the potentially Murtad Bengalis, so that they would learn to respect the Ulama.
    .
    You said: The State of Pakistan in 1974 tried to end the fight be constitutionally declaring Ahmadia religion as not-Islam
    With the spiritual and financial blessings of Saudi Arabia, both in the shape of dollars, the Parliament of Pakistan in 1974, did not try to end the fight, but to start it. In fact, a long sacred struggle started in 1974. Even now, our holy men are fighting the Pakistan Army. It was good that the Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims, but that was just not good enough. This cause must not stop until the following Amendment is made in the 1973 Constitution:
    .
    “Only those who belong to the Wahhabi/Salafi/Deobandi group are True Muslims. All others who call themselves Muslims, are NOT Muslims, for the purposes of constitution, law, and prospective financial benefits from a certain neighboring Islamic kingdom.”

Leave a Reply

*


5 × six =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>