I need to know more

Ahmadiyyah is simply a non-Muslim organisation that believes that another Prophet (Ghulam Ahmad) came after the last Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu alayhi wasalam).

Rashduct4luv:
Ahmadiyyah is simply a non-Muslim organisation that believes that another Prophet (Ghulam Ahmad) came after the last Prophet Muhammad (Salallahu alayhi wasalam).

Whoever believe even apparently in "La ilaha illah Allah, Muhammad Rasulullah" is a Muslim.

# Degree of his belief in Allah and Muhammad Rasulullah is another thing entirely.

To say Ahmadiyah is non-Muslim is an heresy on its own. Even a munafiq (who is a kafir internally) is recognised as Muslim.

AlBaqir:

[s]
Whoever believe even apparently in "La ilaha illah Allah, Muhammad Rasulullah" is a Muslim.

# Degree of his belief in Allah and Muhammad Rasulullah is another thing entirely.

To say Ahmadiyah is non-Muslim is an heresy on its own. Even a munafiq (who is a kafir internally) is recognised as Muslim.[/s]

Hogwash!!!

AlBaqir:


Whoever believe even apparently in "La ilaha illah Allah, Muhammad Rasulullah" is a Muslim.

# Degree of his belief in Allah and Muhammad Rasulullah is another thing entirely.

To say Ahmadiyah is non-Muslim is an heresy on its own. Even a munafiq (who is a kafir internally) is recognised as Muslim.

Well, what will a Shiite say about Ahmadiyyah?

Iru iro niborun!


#Whoever believes there is another Prophet after Muhammad salallahu alayhi wasalam, that came with revelations, etc just as the Ahmadiyyah organisation believes is suffering from a compound Kufr!

Rashduct4luv:


#Whoever believes there is another Prophet after Muhammad salallahu alayhi wasalam, that came with revelations, etc just as the Ahmadiyyah organisation believes is suffering from a compound Kufr!

Is that the fatwa of Ibn baz or Albani? Obviously that's never from Rasulullah.

Again, munafiqun were considered Muslims despite the fact that they were even double edged kuffar.

Second, to clear your compound ignorance, Ahmadiyah are of two factions :

1. One Believe Ghulam Ahmad was Imam Mahdi, and not Prophet

2. The other believe Ghulam Ahmad was a Prophet after Muhammad Rasulullah.

Bottom line, both believe and declare apparently the shahadatain and that is enough to make them Muslim.

Surah Al-Hujraat, Verse 14:

The dwellers of the desert say: We believe. Say: You do not believe but say, We submit; and faith has not yet entered into your hearts; and if you obey Allah and His Apostle, He will not diminish aught of your deeds; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

I found these. I prayed behind them few times before at their Central masjid in Ijebu-ode. Average muslims could not tell the difference back then.

Point is, we should not call individual Ahmadi a kafir because he or she might not know details of his aqeeda. Mirza Gulam Ahmad himself was wrong, and it is very silly for his followers after seeing clear text of Quran saying Jesus the son of Mary, some of them belief the contrary that Jesus already returned in person of Mirza Gulam Ahmad the son of Punjabi woman. This is why they called him "prophecized Mahdi".

Reason for this is, if a mainstream muslim and Ahmadiya debate Christians, everything will be fine until you reach the death or Ascension of Jesus.

Mainstream muslim narrates the story as detailed in the Qur'an but Ahmadiya will tell you that when Jesus was on the cross or after he woke up the third night, and his whereabout could not be found, he was actually in India and spent rest of his life there. This is what a brother was telling Christian when me and him were debating Christian guy over a decade ago.

I didn't say anything to disrespect him before the Christian. I emailed him separately to enquire about his unfounded theory.

Years later, a friend of mine from Trinidad who is pro Hindu, Islam and Christianity told me the same thing, that Jesus went to kashimir

So I'm afraid that the believe stemmed from Hinduism because that's what the guy told me. He said (laughingly) that Christians hate when Hindus say Jesus went to kashimir after he rose from dead.

So in my opinion, instead of calling them kufar, it is better to tell them to make tawbah because, calling them kufar will just distance them. So it seems they have different aqeeda system within their ranks.

Empiree:

So in my opinion, instead of calling them kufar, it is better to tell them to make tawbah because, calling them kufar will just distance them. So it seems they have different aqeeda system within their ranks.

# Their case is small compare to a sect that believes Allah created man in His own image LITERALLY, have five fingers, legs, face etc and occupy a space at a particular point in time LITERALLY. That's biggest kufr.

# Muslim sects aqeedah differences is always center around interpretations and each want to maintain the correctness of its view.

Whatever believe they may have about Jesus Christ based on their interpretation is secondary compare to their primary belief in Tawheed and Nubuwat.

# To say Ahmadiyahs are non-Muslim is the height of craziness. Anyway, when you talk about the wahabi-salafi ideology, no one is Muslim except themselves. Unfortunately, they are even doing takfir among themselves. So their crazy declaration is of no value.

^^^

But I believe that section of Ahmadiya that believes there is prophet AFTER nabi(saw) needs strong condemnation.

So far, in my opinion, I have identified three different aqeeda amongst Ahmadiya:


*** those who believe Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was manifestation of return of Jesus.



*** those who believe Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was Imam Mahdi (as)



**** those who believe he was the prophet after Nabi Muhammad (saw)


First and second points are not major detrimental to religion because many crazy people have claimed to be Mahdi anyways.

But the last point is out of it. They need to be rebuked

Empiree:
^


First and second points are not major detrimental to religion because many crazy people have claimed to be Mahdi anyways.

But the last point is out of it. They need to be rebuked

# Yeah I agree with you. Although their filthy excuses that he was not a law-bringer prophet doesn't count. However, that does not nullify their muslim identity as kufr caller wanted the gullible to believe.

AlBaqir:


# Yeah I agree with you. Although their filthy excuses that he was not a law-bringer prophet doesn't count. However, that does not nullify their muslim identity as kufr caller wanted the gullible to believe.

yes, one of them told me @bold a while back on this platform. What do they mean by that?. If he was not Law bringer who else was?.

I'm not in position to make kufr declaration of them. But their belief that another prophet came after him(saw) was too heavy. Could lead to trash talk like king Adeyeye Enitan. He could say it was obatala that came after nabi(saw)

AlBaqir:


Is that the fatwa of Ibn baz or Albani? Obviously that's never from Rasulullah.

Again, munafiqun were considered Muslims despite the fact that they were even double edged kuffar.

Second, to clear your compound ignorance, Ahmadiyah are of two factions :

1. One Believe Ghulam Ahmad was Imam Mahdi, and not Prophet

2. The other believe Ghulam Ahmad was a Prophet after Muhammad Rasulullah.

Bottom line, both believe and declare apparently the shahadatain and that is enough to make them Muslim.

I disagree entirely Ahlu Sh'ia, the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be a prophet or a messenger and to receive revelation are clearly a rejection of proven and essential elements of Islam, which unequivocally states that Prophethood ended with Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and that no revelation will come to anyone after him. This claim made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad makes him and anyone who agrees with him an apostate who is beyond the pale of Islam. As for the Lahoriyyah, they are like the Qadianiyyah: the same ruling of apostasy applies to them despite the fact that they described Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a shadow and manifestation of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

E O D.

Rashduct4luv:


I disagree entirely Ahlu Sh'ia, the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be a prophet or a messenger and to receive revelation are clearly a rejection of proven and essential elements of Islam, which unequivocally states that Prophethood ended with Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and that no revelation will come to anyone after him. This claim made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad makes him and anyone who agrees with him an apostate who is beyond the pale of Islam. As for the Lahoriyyah, they are like the Qadianiyyah: the same ruling of apostasy applies to them despite the fact that they described Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a shadow and manifestation of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

E O D.

# I have nothing to do with your opinion. I have given you a clear Dalil from the Quranic perspective:

* Munafiqun are kuffar (kufr in Allah and His prophet) yet they are considered Muslims simply for their apparent declaration of shahadatain.

That alone is enough to bury your fatwa that Ahmadiyah are non-Muslim because they believe Ghulam Ahmad was either Mahdi or Prophet after seal of the Prophets.

Bring one ayah or riwayat from Rasulullah where it is said that whoever did not believe that Muhammad was the last Prophet is non-Muslim.


# Even the fake and distorted hadith of "my Ummah will be divided into 73 sects..." recognize 73 sects as from Ummah of Muhammad. So what's the salafist opinion of removing this and that from the Ummah if not rubbish opinion!