|
|
|
|
|
|
.. |
Qadiani
Beliefs Refuted
Section
> Articles
> Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad Contradicts
His Own Published Statements on 'Deniers of Hazrat
Mirza Sahib are Kafirs', When He Appears In the
Court of Law, in 1953!!! Mirza
Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad Contradicts His Own Published
Statements on 'Deniers of Hazrat Mirza Sahib are Kafirs',
When He Appears In the Court of Law, in
1953!!!: Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad on page 35 of his book Aaina-i-Sadaqat admits that his beliefs are: "That I have spread the idea about Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood that he is, in fact, a prophet. ………………. Thirdly that all Muslims who have not entered the baiyat of Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood, although they have not heard even his name, are kafirs and outside the pale of Islam." Again during the Annual Jalsa of December 1913, Mian Sahib called his party of Ansaarullah. Other people also attended this meeting. In this meeting he stated: "If someone places a sword on one side of my neck and asks me not to call non-Ahmadis as kafirs, even then I shall reply that they are kafirs and I shall certainly call them kafir." (Paigham-i-Sulh, 21st September 1947, page 5). Now contrast this verbosity with his subsequent docility. Not to talk of the threat of a sword, he was not even pierced with a thorn but the stand taken in front of the Munir Inquiry Committee was entirely opposed to the beliefs stated above. The following statement is given on page 199 of "The Report of the Court of Inquiry to Inquire into the Punjab Disturbances of 1953": "On the question whether the Ahmadis (Note by the Webmaster: the Qadiani Ahmadis implied here; the Lahori Ahmadis have never, God Forbid, proclaimed non-Ahmadis to be outside the pale of Islam) consider the other Muslmans to be kafirs in the sense of their being outside the pale of Islam, the position taken before us is that such persons are not kafirs and that the word ‘kafir’, when used in the literature of the Ahmadis in respect of such persons, is used in the sense of minor heresy and that it was never intended to convey that such persons were outside the pale of Islam. We have seen the previous pronouncements of Ahmadis on this subject, which are numerous, and to us they do not seem to be capable of any other interpretation than this that people who did not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad were outside the pale of Islam." Will the Musleh-i-Mauood be a man of such FIRM RESOLVE?
|
|||
|
|
