This entire entry was taken from the islam_Ahmadiyya reddit forum. Cutting hands and stoning is also discussed in the ROR of Sep-1937.

It is common practice within Ahmadiyya to interpret and reinterpret verses until it fits with common sense and what appeals to us. Of course “this was what it meant all along” /s. However, in the following video, the 4th Caliph of Ahmadiyya seem to disagree with this practice.

The video explains why the Quran should be taken as is, and the cutting of limbs should not be defended or reinterpreted to mean something else. The full transcript is available at the bottom of this post.

To me, the 2 most important take-aways are:

  1. “Why did this (alternative) meaning not strike him ( the Holy Prophet)”;

  2. “So 1 should not defend Allah where Allah does not want to be defended. Whatever the holy Quran is, it should be taken as such”

From this we have to ask: how does one know what Allah wants defended? Even one of the most outrageous teachings of Islam, the cutting of one’s hands should one steal, is not to be defended. So what does Allah want people to defend?

And if a meaning did not strike the Holy Prophet when it could have, should it always be discarded? Should every interpretation of Ahmadiyya be subject to this filter?

When half of the things in the quran are said to be metaphorical, those are among the most important questions that should be asked.

Interpretation should be justified. And something simply being untrue is not reason enough to reinterpret it. Its possible that the untrue thing is simply that. A mistake in the Quran.

The Transcript of the 1min :19s video on called “Could the Quranic injunction of severing a thief’s hand be interepreted metaphorically?” is as follows:

“””Some of these Muslim scholars have taken that attitude, particularly [some name] saheb, have translated the Quran as such that “put them out of circulation.” some say it also means imprisonment. Some say “Leave them incapable of stealing again.” How? That is not suggested.

But they are all just defensive means. The fact is that this verse was better understood by Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa saw, and he never understood it to be carrying the meaning of putting somebody out of circulation or imprisoning or whatever they say. So why did this meaning not strike him? That is the most striking thing about it.

So 1 should not defend Allah where Allah does not want to be defended. Whatever the holy Quran is, it should be taken as such. And if it does not appeal to anybody, let Allah deal with them. Why should we try to defend Allah beyond our own limitations. We have our limitations and we should not transgress those limitations.”””

The longer video clip is:

Links and Related Essay’s


#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim  #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism