Intro
This is an essay by Damon Stengel, a famous ex-Ahmadi. See in the below. He writes about how the Ahmadiyya Movement lies about their beliefs in public, and simultaneously believes the opposite in private. Damon Stengel specifically covers the points in the “True Islam campaign”.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________When I converted to the Ahmadiyya branch of Islam in late 2016, one of the things that appealed to me about the Jammat was the 11-points of the “True Islam”. One of the points of the True Islam flyer was “Separation of mosque and state”. It made me believe for a couple years that Shariah was no longer applicable in this era and that everything the Quran mentioned in regards to shariah of the past was applicable to the past for the same reasons jihad is no longer applicable.
Do note, I am aware, this was my own misunderstanding and I was not as informed on Ahmadiyya literature as I was later on. Still, the fifth point of “separation of mosque and state” misled me into this belief. I thought, since this was the “True Islam”, therefore separation of mosque and state is actually a thing in Islam, especially for modern times.
When I read an article by Murabbi Rizwan Khan Sahib in his book, Ask A Murabbi, a book written for members of the Majlis Khuddamul-Ahmadiyya (MKA) USA who had questions and doubts about Islam, called “Does the fact that we seek to establish shari‘ah go against loyalty to our country”, that’s when I realized I was wrong in what the True Islam USA flyer taught me.
Let me cite some passages from the article.
We have never hidden the fact that we wish to establish an Islamic government in the world. Rather, we openly say that we will establish an Islamic government over the world insha’Allah. What we deny is that we will establish an Islamic government through the sword and disorder. Rather, we will establish an Islamic government by winning people’s hearts. If I had the power to make all the people of England into Muslims, bring all of their ministers into Islam, make their members of parliament into Muslims and establish an Islamic government there, can anyone imagine that I would refuse to use this power? I would not delay even one minute, rather, I would strive to immediately make them Muslims and establish an Islamic government in England. However, since this is not in my power, so I cannot do it.
(Khutbat-e-Mahmud, 1936, p. 128–129).
These verses of the Holy Quran and revelation of the Promised Messiah are quite clear that his mission is to eradicate the prevailing western civilization, and to establish in its place the Islamic philosophy of life, the Islamic shari‘ah, the Islamic civilization, the Islamic economic structure, and the Islamic moral and social values. (Real Revolution, p. 146).
These are taken from Ask A Murabbi. Now I am going to cite some passages from the Quran and their short commentary of Malik Ghulam Farid that clearly advocate for Shariah being established:
Commenting on Quran, Surah al-Fatiha 1:4:
Din means, recompense or requital; judgment or reckoning; dominion or government; obedience; religion, etc. (Lane).
Since din can be also used for dominion, judgement, government, and obedience, such does not go against the following verses:
Quran 24:56 (Maulavi Sher Ali translation):
Allah has promised to those among you who believe and do good works that He will, surely, make them Successors in the earth, as He made Successors from among those who were before them; and that He will, surely, establish for them their religion (din-i.e. government, obedience, dominion, judgement) which He has chosen for them; and that He will, surely, give them in exchange security and peace after their fear; They will worship Me, and they will not associate anything with Me. Then whoso disbelieves after that, they will be the rebellious.
Quran 2:194 (Maulavi Sher Ali translation):
And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion (din, i.e. obedience, government, dominion [in the land]) is professed only for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors.
Quran 9:12 (Maulavi Sher Ali translation):
And if they break their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion (din-i.e. government, dominion, etc.), then fight these leaders of disbelief—surely, they have no regard for their oaths—that they may desist.
Interestingly enough, Mirza Tahir Ahmad offers an alternative translation where it says:
And if they break their oaths after their covenant, and revile your religion, then fight these leaders of disbelief—surely, they have no regard for their oaths—that they may desist.
Where did he get “revile” from? Because it’s translated from Ta’ana.
In the Short Commentary, Malik Ghulam Farid states:
Ta‘ana literally meaning “to pierce with a spear.”
Now, Malik Ghulam Farid says this to make the verse sound literal, but as Mirza Tahir Ahmad would show in all of his footnotes post-1997 edition of Maulavi Sher Ali’s translation, it actually refers to verbal taunts.
Consider another verse where the word Ta’ana is also used:
Quran 4:47 (Maulavi Sher Ali translation):
There are some among the Jews who pervert words from their proper places. And they say, ‘We hear and we disobey,’ and ‘hear thou without being heard,’ and ‘Ra‘ina,’ screening with their tongues what is in their minds and seeking to injure (Ta’ana) the Faith. And if they had said, ‘We hear and we obey,’ and ‘hear thou,’ and ‘Unzurna,’ it would have been better for them and more upright. But Allah has cursed them for their disbelief; so they believe but little.
How exactly does Ta’ana refer to anything literal here? It sounds to me that it refers to sarcasm and the Greek root of this word also means “to pierce” (idiom). And how was Ta’ana used here?
Because as the verse states:
“‘Ra‘ina,’ screening with their tongues what is in their minds and seeking to injure (Ta’ana) the Faith.”
Mirza Tahir Ahmad was merely pointing out the fact that anyone that tries to sarcastically taunt the faith (or even the government and kingdom), are to be fought (Faqaatiloo) against. Especially given the fact that this was after the declaration of termination of all treaties with the Meccans and pagan tribes (with the exceptions mentioned in 9:4), and the fact the following verse literally states:
Quran 9:13 (Maulavi Sher Ali Translation):
“Will you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger, and they were the first to commence hostilities against you? Do you fear them? Nay, Allah is most worthy that you should fear Him, if you are believers.”
With that, I rest my case. Ahmadiyya Shariah is a thing advocated by the Jammat and the True Islam USA campaign team is lying to its western audience in order to get converts and make it look like Ahmadiyya is a secular branch of Islam.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
An In-depth look at ‘Truth 9’ from the ‘True Islam’ Campaign – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
An In-depth look at ‘Truth 9’ from the ‘True Islam’ Campaign
Damon Stengel’s interview with #Ahmadiyyafactcheckblog – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
Does the fact that we seek to establish shari‘ah go against loyalty to our country?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism
Leave a Reply