Adnan Rashid – Muslim Exposes Deceitful Qadiani
AI: Summary ©
AI: Transcript ©
Brother Ahmed, with regards to Zanim, you don't
have any case there.
You know why?
Because even if we accept the meaning you
are imposing on that word, because when you
go to the Tafsir literature, there are so
many different Aqwal on that very word that
you just cannot use it like Waldul Haram,
Zurriyatul Baghaya or Haram Zada, because there are
no Aqwal on those words.
Okay, it is very clear Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Qadiani meant bastard children and prostitutes.
It's very clear.
There's no debate there.
On Zanim, there is a huge debate and
any Muslim who can read Arabic go and
open any Tafsir of the Quran and you
see the Aqwal.
What you do is, what you do is
you choose one Qaul, one Qaul out of
all those maybe 50 Aqwal on the matter
and choose it and cling on it, what
we call clutching on straws.
Let's say we accept your meaning.
I like to do this.
I like to see territory to gain territory.
Let's say we accept your meaning.
Is it Allah talking?
Allah can say what he wants to who
he wants.
When Allah talks, when Allah does, that doesn't
apply to the creation because Allah is not
subject to the law of Islam.
The Prophet is.
Believers are.
So stick to the point when we talk
about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani's crimes, he was
guilty of Qasf.
You cannot apply the penalty of Qasf upon
Allah.
Allah can kill.
Allah can kill villages, towns.
Allah can turn them upside down as he
did.
We are told in the Quran.
Can we do that?
Can we commit massacres?
Can we go and start indiscriminately killing people?
Absolutely not.
Are we allowed to do mass murder because
Allah did it?
So Allah does not murder.
Allah does not kill.
Allah is the judge.
Allah is the judge, the jury, the executioner.
That's Allah.
Okay.
Allah is not subject to the law.
So if Allah calls someone Zanim, he is
Zanim.
Whatever that means.
When Allah says Zanim, period.
Full stop.
That is Zanim.
Okay.
Now the issue of using Abu Bakr's example
and the Prophet is irrelevant because they did
not use such language.
They used harsh language.
They used extreme language, no doubt.
Okay.
But it's not relevant because Mirza called women
prostitutes without providing forewitnesses.
That makes him guilty of Qasf.
And he should have been lashed 80 times.
And his testimony cannot be accepted in any
Islamic setting, let alone an Islamic court, let
alone as a Prophet.
Therefore, Mirza stands condemned.
That's why you don't want to discuss it.
That's why you keep going back to Qatam
-e-Nabuwat, Ikhtitam-e-Nabuwat, and the death
of Jesus and the life of Jesus.
You throw these things as distractions.
So stop throwing them.
Stick to the point.
Let's discuss Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Tadyani and his
Mughalizat.
Okay.
And what about he himself condemning this behavior
in Jashm-e-Masih?
In that book, 346, page 346, I showed
the scan earlier.
He himself is condemning that behavior.
Is that a Prophet who condemns one thing
and does the same thing on extreme magnitude?
And also when you use the example of
Abu Bakr and the Prophet, you pull out
one example from each of them, one throughout
the entire life.
Mirza in his books is obsessed with bastard
children.
He's producing bastard children on every single page.
He's talking to Hindus, calling them bastard children.
He's calling Christians, he's debating bastard children.
And he is even calling those who do
not believe in his message and his claim
bastard children.
So what case do you have, man?
You have no case.
So be relevant.
Don't raise these points that have already been
refuted.
I think it's time.
JazakAllah.
Thank you so much.
Thank you so much for mentioning.
I think the point is we're not avoiding
what the Promised Prophet ﷺ used.
We're simply saying to you that because we
don't believe these to be in the understanding
that you're presenting them to be.
First of all, because when the same person
has used this word at a different place,
you mentioned in a hadith, Zanim has been
used in a different sense.
So what I'm saying is come with a
criterion that it doesn't fall back on your
face.
It doesn't look nice because you're a scholar,
you're an academic.
Okay, now I'm going to address your point
because it's very important.
If Adnan Rashid Sahib had read Kitab-ul
-Bariyya of the Promised Messiah ﷺ, and I'm
going to read this out in my time,
Promised Messiah ﷺ said, We
have no honour for our Rasool.
These people are referring to our Rasoolullah ﷺ
and they're saying they're calling our mother, Aisha,
a bondwoman and you can't defend these people.
They are in the actual sense because I'm
checking my time, so don't disturb.
Bagha yabghee in the Arabic language is to
transgress and from that the secondary meaning is
taken as baghaya.
So as I said, Zuriyat-ul-Shaitaan, children
of Satan is not taken in a literal
sense.
Similarly, Zuriyat-ul-Baghaya are children of transgression.
So you can't take that meaning.
Secondly, you said Promised Messiah ﷺ used haramzada.
Farhang-e-Asfiya says haramzada in sifat is
used as someone who is sharir.
And I'm going to show this because in
the next time, sharir, who is dagabaz and
who's not upon truth.
I'm going to show you the actual scan
here.
So the point I'm trying to make here
is we have no issue of defending.
Your time is not over.
Yeah, I think Ahmed, your time's over now.
So, you know, we want to keep it
short and to the point.
No, but two minutes.
I don't think two minutes are over.
I appreciate it if you not use Urdu
because this is an English channel.
Basically, to summarize Ahmed's point, Ahmed was saying
that these people deserved to be called children
of prostitutes because they were insulting the Prophet
and they were very bad people.
They were using very ugly, evil language against
the Prophet ﷺ.
So Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, out of his
love for the Prophet, he used these harsh
words, calling them bastard children and Duriyat-ul
-Baghaya or children of prostitutes.
Okay.
So I agree with Ahmed when it comes
to calling them criminals.
I agree with Ahmed that they were very,
very evil people for doing what they did.
Okay.
Insulting the Prophet of Islam ﷺ in the
most heinous of words.
I agree with you.
I agree with the sentiment.
But Islam draws lines, my brother.
Islam draws lines that we cannot cross.
Now, if these individuals, if they were *
women, let's say Muslim women, can Muslims retaliate
by * their women?
Absolutely not.
If they were killing children, Muslim children, these
badris, right?
Can, because, you know, insulting the Prophet ﷺ
is possibly worse than killing, definitely worse than
killing Muslim children.
Okay.
Insulting the Prophet of Islam.
Okay.
It's very, very bad.
It's evil.
Right?
So if they started to kill Muslim children,
can Muslims in retaliation kill their children?
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not.
So your excuses don't save you because we
have lines that we cannot cross.
We are subject to a law.
We cannot accuse their mothers of being prostitutes.
Okay.
This is why Islam is superior.
Islam is morally superior because we hold on
to our morals.
We are supposed to holding on to our
morals, which Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani in his
passion, in his hatred, in his love, call
it what you like, put them aside.
And he himself did not practice what he
preached.
So this defense doesn't work.
So your defense using the Prophet Abu Bakr
and the Quran doesn't stand because they are
not relevant examples.
Okay.
Your defense in trying to make us emotional
in hatred of those people who criticize the
Prophet who used evil.
We hate them.
We hate those people.
They are the worst creatures.
Absolutely.
I agree with you.
I agree with your sentiment, but we have
lines that we cannot cross my brother.
That's why as a Prophet, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed
Qadiani, and it's not only Zuriyatul Baghai, you
keep repeating.
You have to do Adl here.
You have to do Adl Hashim, please.
He's giving me a minute and a half
and he's giving me three minutes.
Okay, give me three minutes and give me
a minute and a half.
Listen, you know, this is not a debate
between Adnan Rashid and Ahmed.
There are lots of other Ahmedis waiting in
the back chat.
So Ahmed, how long do you need to
finish your point?
Okay, let's look at it.
Let's Ahmed, let's let Ahmed speak for two,
three minutes and we finish it here.
Ahmed can go back in the queue and
come back with more questions.
I think we've dealt with this point.
Is that okay with you, Ahmed?
Okay, JazakAllah.
Thank you so much.
Go ahead.
You have two minutes.
Okay.
So first of all, the main point is
the Promised Messiah we are saying from the
last time I spoke to you has not
used his words in their literal meaning.
He hasn't used Zuriyatul Baghaia as children of
adulterer or of Izzami Jawaab.
Okay, now that when I mention an example
from Zanim and all of these things, I'm
not justifying that he has used his words
in the literal sense.
He hasn't because he translates in Malfoozat as
Zuriyatul Baghaia as a Sharir Insan for Saadullah
Ludhianavi.
So why are you missing this?
And Waladul Haram in the Urdu language, in
the Urdu dictionary, open it up.
It means a mischievous man.
So these words also used in that sense.
So you can't say that they aren't.
You can open it up.
I know you're shaking your head, but you
can open it.
You said Haramzada.
I dare you to open Farhang-e-Asafiya,
the one you referenced.
I dare you.
Open it.
Haramzada.
Okay.
Haramzada.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Open it.
Open it.
And read the first three meanings.
The first three meanings.
One second.
One second.
Okay.
Go ahead.
Farhang-e-Asafiya.
Open it.
I like your hat.
Okay.
Thank you so much.
You want one?
I'll get you one.
I have a collection of those.
Okay.
So Bismillah.
So you said that Haramzada only means.
No, no, no.
Put the screen.
Put that particular article on Haramzada.
Zoom in.
Let us see.
And let me read.
Let me read.
I'll read it for you.
I'll read it for you.
Relax.
Okay.
Wait, wait.
Read the first entry, the second entry, and
the third entry.
Read it.
But don't stop me.
Haramzada.
What does it mean?
Don't stop.
Don't stop.
Okay.
Haramzada in its literal meaning is Waladus Zina.
Okay.
Wait.
Stop there.
Stop there.
Stop there.
Stop there.
One second.
Let me complete.
It means number one entry Waladus Zina, which
means son of adultery, child from adultery.
Agreed?
Agreed?
Yes.
Who's denying that?
I haven't denied it.
I haven't denied it.
Okay.
Second entry.
I have not denied that, that, that Zuriyat
-ul-Baghah in its literal sense means that.
I haven't denied it.
Did I ever say that?
I cannot believe this.
I, you see, you quote, you just quote
it.
What's the second entry guys?
Let's get to the point.
Ahmed, we want people to know what's going
on.
Ahmed made a claim using the name of
this dictionary, Farhang-e-Hasafiyah, which I'm aware
of.
Alhamdulillah.
Haramzada means mischievous people.
Okay.
Sharir.
What he did, what Ahmed did here, he
skipped the first three entries.
He skipped the first three entries that I
have read myself.
Okay.
Each and every single one of them says
a child from adultery.
Waladus Zina.
Okay.
I've not denied that.
Zina Zada, which means the child of adultery.
What is the third entry?
What is the third entry?
Third entry is, it says Sifat.
No, no, no.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So let, so let me complete.
Okay.
So Jo Shaks Bay Nikah Pehda Hua.
That's the third entry.
Jo Shaks Bay Nikah Pehda Hua.
In other words, a person born out of
wedlock, a pastor child.
So what the * are you talking about?
Why do you play these games?
Is it finished?
It's not finished yet.
Relax, relax, relax.
Yes, it's not finished.
Of course.
Keep reading.
He's the second.
I'll read the second one.
The same word is used in terms of
an attribute of a person.
Okay.
Which says Sharir.
What does Sharir translate to, Adan?
Mischievous person.
Mischievous.
Badzat.
What's badzat?
Badzat means a person of bad character.
Bad character.
Immoral character.
Yes.
Okay.
Fitna Pardaz.
What does that mean?
Mischievous.
Mischievous.
Yes.
So what we're saying is that a word
has many meanings.
Why did you not mention the first three
entries?
Let me finish.
Let me finish.
Why did you not mention the first three
entries?
Tell me why you didn't mention the first
three entries.
Because you mentioned them already.
Why didn't you mention the second entry?
Who are you playing with?
Who's being mischievous?
Why did you, when you mentioned that haramzat,
the only means you have, I didn't have
a dictionary.
I'll tell you why.
Because your own Qadiani translations, your own Qadiani
translations translate that very term in that very
quote, listen carefully now, listen carefully, in that
very quote in question, wait, wait, wait, where
I claim that is condemning his opponents as
children of prostitutes in that quote, Qadiani translation
writes it as literally prostitutes in the Urdu
language and your other translation on in volume
six, same term is translated as which in
the last debate you admitted means prostitutes.
So what games are you playing?
There's no game.
Stop that.
You, okay.
Okay.
Listen, you, you, you mentioned four different references
and you choose the meaning of your choice,
right?
And you have accepted that you mentioned Islam,
but use the reference for a transition from
Islam.
Last thing, last thing, has the Promised Messiah
used this, this, this meaning in the sense
of your false prophet, Ahmed, use it as,
as, as an insult.
Now you're being derogatory.
Are you being derogatory now?
And he said, you're going to be just,
you're going to be respectful.
You said you're going to be respectful.
Go ahead.
Imam Abu Hanifa said that those people who
refer to our mother Aisha and say this
is Imam Abu Hanifa stating that whoever stays,
stay on the line.
No, no.
You're going to produce you, you, you, you're
claiming something now about Imam Abu Hanifa.
I'm going to prove it right now.
I'm not going anywhere.
Ahmed, listen to me first.
I'm going to show you on the screen.
Don't worry.
Listen to me first and you can prove
it.
You know, when the Qadianis or the Shia
or the Christians, when they bring a quote
from an Imam to us, we just don't
say, Oh no, we don't do that.
We tell them, prove it.
It is an attribution.
It may be in our books.
It may be in our books, but if
it doesn't have a chain going back to
Imam Abu Hanifa, it is not true.
We don't accept it.
So prove it by providing a chain, going
back to Imam Abu Hanifa.
Mullah Ali Qari is the biggest Hanafi Alim,
my brother.
Mullah Ali Qari is the biggest Hanafi Alim.
If Mullah Ali Qari is mentioned in his
book, you're denying it?
That's not a chain.
Mullah Ali Qari lived in the 10th century
Hijri.
Yes, are you denying it?
So I know who Mullah Ali Qari is.
But he lived before you.
Chain means you need to give me a
chain of information.
You're attributing something so extreme to Imam Abu
Hanifa.
Okay, guys, guys, it's not getting anywhere.
Ahmed, come back with your evidence later.
We'll let you in, Inshallah.
But there are lots of people waiting in
the back chat.
And it's only fair.
Can I say one last thing?
Okay, Ahmed, Jazakallah khair for your contribution.
Inshallah, we'll let you in again.
Can I say one last thing?
You can come back, Ahmed.
The last thing was already the last time.
Why don't you come back?
We have other Ahmadis as well.
Take care, Ahmed.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you for your time, Ahmed.