Questions of an Ahmadi (4)
I said you ridiculed because you compared the wahi on bee with the kind of wahi of Hazrat Masih Maud AS and Hazrat Shah Wali Aah RA.
You don't believe in The Promised Messiah that's fine, but are you telling me that you don't believe in Mujaddids and Aulias? You can at least show respect to Hazrat Shah Wali Allah RA.
Secondly if everything has to be mentioned in Quran then what about Sunnah , as Quran doesn't give us details of day to day life account of The Holy Prophet SAW. It's by the narrations of sahaba and the hadiths we understand our Prophet SAW completely. I need an answer to that because if you are denying the hadiths and the beliefs of the walis and Mujadids then aren't you taking what you like and omitting what you don't? I don't think it's a sin to ask a person this question.
Hadith and sunnah are there to make us understand the Quran better as it's not easy to always understand the Holy Quran. It has so many hidden pearls that can be only picked by vast knowledge of Islam and also the understanding of the language. So may be that's why we Ahmadis are finding it easy to explain it to Arabs as it's their language and those Arabs who are enlightened and have open minds understand us very quickly. We also have a MTA channel in Arabic which also has a program where our scholars take live calls from the Arab world.
I, like all Ahmadis, am used to discussions. I have an open mind, not a closed one. That's why I wanted to hear your side too. I was checking our literature to send you references about the Messiah from Quran some of which, if I remember correctly, you have not mentioned in your video, but then I said to myself that there was no point (koi faida naheen) because it's just discussion for the sake of it (behus barai behus) because he is just going to say no I don't understand this ayat to be interpreted in this manner. Alislam.org have uploaded new videos about the very same issue, but the thing is you will say sorry I don't want to visit the site as I want to deal with an individual not a sect.
I have given you all the sources and if you want to do the research, our door is open. I will continue to watch your programs though because at least you don't preach hatred and there are many things on which I agree with you.
People on net are calling you and Ghamidi Sahib Qadianion kay hamdard etc (sypathisers of Ahmadis) because you don't believe in death for apostasy (murtad ki saza katal) and Hazrat Isa AS being alive, plus you don't spread hatred against us or anyone for that matter. BTW they call you kafir too because you don't believe in hadith.
It's so unfortunate that whenever there is reasonable educated person giving out a different point of view, these people become suspicious and angry. I asked my husband that why don't such scholars come on our program and talk to us and we can exchange ideas on both sides, my husband replied, the mullahs will issue fatwas against them so how can they come? Look at what happened to Mubashir Luqman after he invited Mian Ahmad, after 2 weeks the guy had to invite all three of those mullahs just to appease the public as he was receiving so many threats. As Abbas Athar said in his column that we had to invite Mujeeb Shami again to call in as Luqman was receiving so many threats and if we had not done that people would have literally carried out those threats against the host. I have also heard that Pakistan Censor Board has instructed to all channels not to invite Ahmadis and no comments in favour of Ahmadis will be allowed. Why is there so much hatred against us as there are many sects in Islam with views that are not in line with the main stream Sunnis?
May Allah have mercy on this country and show the right path to its people. Ameen.
I again apologise if I have hurt your feelings. But let me tell you that when we talk about our religious differences it is impossible to make statements that wouldn't hurt the other party at all. I remember having politely mentioned to a Christian friend that Jesus wasn't the son of God and his face turned red and he told me that he would have kicked me out of his house had I not been his guest.
If I was to respect Shah Waliullah's so-called wahy the way you want me to respect it, it would, to me, be disrespectful to prophet Muhammad's wahy because I would be equating the two as the same. It would be ridiculous on my part to do so because while I consider myself accountable to God on the basis of one, I consider the very claim of the other incorrect.
The huge difference between the so-called divine guidance which people like Shah Waliullah are claimed to have received and the one received by a genuine prophet of God is that everything the former have said about religion whether it was claimed to be based on wahy or not can be criticised by any Muslim scholar in the light of the wahy received by the prophet. On the other hand the wahy received by the prophet is to be understood and interpreted but cannot be rejected on the basis of any other source once it is established that it was wahy.
If Mirza Sahib received wahy which can be critically examined in the light of the Qur'an and Sunnah, what is the point in accepting it as wahy? And even if a scholar finds what Mirza Sahib said against the Qur'an and Sunnah but cannot criticise him, then what is the status of the wahy received by prophet Muhammad, alaihissalam?
You might say that Mirza Sahib explained what the meanings of the message of the Qur'an and Sunnah are. My submission is that if the explanation offerd by him are the only valid explanation binding on all Muslims then the words of the Qur'an carry no value and only Mirza Sahib's explanation is important. And if Mirza Sahib's interpretation can be critically examined in the light of the wahy of Qur'an then what is the contribution of Mirza Sahib's wahy? How is he any different from Mawlana Maududi, Maulana Mufti Shafi, or Mawlana Islahi?
The fact is that the Qur'an declares itself as al-Furqan: Nothing can be accepted that goes against it, even if it is mentioned in hadith because in the case of the latter it is only a claim that the prophet said such and such thing. The claim can never be hundred percent certain. If there are hidden pearls of wisdom in the Qur'an, those too have to be proved through the Qur'an that they are hidden somewhere underneath the apparent surface of it. After the last prophet, no non-Qur'anic source has the authority to say that it/he has discovered a hidden pearl of the Qur'an even though he cannot prove it from the Qur'an. And if he proves it to be from the Qur'an, then he is only interpreting, something that can be critically examined by others.
My discussion is taking place with you. How are you any different from other religious people who too say that talk to our scholars if you want to know more? And what right do you have to say that there is no point in mentioning it to me (koi faida nahin)? How do you know that you are right and I am wrong if you can't show it? And if your conviction is based on feelings and confidence in scholars, how is it any different from the feelings and confidence of other religious people who behave, speak, and write like you do?