Is Ahmadiyya A Branch Of Sunni Sect?

[ShaanHussayn]

Before anyone says that they are kafir or non-Muslim etc, this cannot be true because their shahada is same as any Sunni Muslim. To be a Muslim you have to agree to this shahada:

 

لَا إِلٰهَ إِلَّا الله مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ الله (lā ʾilāha ʾillā l-Lāh, Muḥammadun rasūlu l-Lāh)

There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God.

 

Only difference is that they believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a Mahdi. I believe that technically the Ahmadiyya Muslims are Sunni Muslim, it is one of the branch of Sunni sect because it inherits majority of its teaching from Sunni school. Bear in mind that technically a certain branch comes under a certain sect according to whatever its teaching is inherited from.

 

e.g.

Shia Islam = Alawi, Twelver, Zaydi etc because it inherits its teachings from Shia school

Sunni Islam = Ahmadi, Hanafi, Maliki, Wahabi, Salafi etc because it inherits its teachings from Sunni school

 

Please share your intelligence.

 

Here is the Ahmadiyya shahada which is exactly the same as any other Sunni branch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFiyt-Ijc0Y

Edited September 16, 2013 by ShaanHussayn

[Abu_Muslim]

Ahmadi shahadah is not the same as Sunni one. They don't believe that the prophet SAW is the final prophet.

[Rasul]

Shia Islam = Twelver.

[ShaanHussayn]

Ahmadi shahadah is not the same as Sunni one. They don't believe that the prophet SAW is the final prophet.

 

I don't know if that is true but I have given the video link to YouTube. Those are Ahmadi people in the video reading out their shahada.

[mutazili(wasil)]

all muslim shahadah is : la ilaha illa Allah mohamed rasool Allah , be it shia or sunnis

 

ali wali Allah is not part of the shahadah (refer to sheikh sadooq )

[realizm]

Salam

 

I didn't know that our shahada was different than this...

[Ali.20]

At least Wikipedia is credible in such matters.... 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya#Beliefs

[Fuan]

(salam)

 

I think they follow hanafi fiqh so..

[Ali Musaaa :)]

^... Whether they follow Fiqh of Hanafi School of Maliki School is irrelevant if they don't believe in the finality of the Prophet's [a] prophethood, which would make them Kufar.

No doubt they are deviants. They follow a liar who claimed he was Jesus [a] and the Mahdi [a] who failed to accomplish the task that the Mahdi [a] was commissioned to do. Which was to remove all forms of oppression and fill the world with peace and justice. Whether they are Muslim or not, Allah knows best.

[skylight2]

Ahmadiyya is a branch of the British Home Office 

[Mousa54321]

It is a sect that was promoted by the British colonial authorities.

They are not Muslims, at least according to Sunnis. This is due to them not believing the prophet is the final messenger as well many other things.

Fiqh is irrelevant, aqeedh is.

[Fuan]

^... Whether they follow Fiqh of Hanafi School of Maliki School is irrelevant if they don't believe in the finality of the Prophet's [a] prophethood, which would make them Kufar.

No doubt they are deviants. They follow a liar who claimed he was Jesus [a] and the Mahdi [a] who failed to accomplish the task that the Mahdi [a] was commissioned to do. Which was to remove all forms of oppression and fill the world with peace and justice. Whether they are Muslim or not, Allah knows best.

 

It is a sect that was promoted by the British colonial authorities.

They are not Muslims, at least according to Sunnis. This is due to them not believing the prophet is the final messenger as well many other things.

Fiqh is irrelevant, aqeedh is.

 

I do have Ahmadi friends so I know what I was talking about...

 

If you read the OP's post again, when he said "branch" he meant it as "off-shoot" - and if you use this term (or even if you don't) - Ahmadi's are definitely an off-shoot of Sunni Islam, and the fact that they still use Hanafi fiqh does show this.

 

They believe in God -> Prophet -> Qur'an -> The Mahdi as Mirza Ghulam. They don't believe in the Ahlul Bayt (as) anywhere as the successors to the Prophet's will and the guardians of the religion.

 

Sure they are no longer Muslims in the literal sense, however if you don't want to consider them as a "sunni branch" then by all means first edit this wikipedia article and all of the sub-articles, as I would say that more than half of these are not even Muslim, let alone "Shia."

 

But of course double standards only exist when it comes to Shiism.

Edited September 21, 2013 by Fuan

[HamzaTR]

Salam. Where do you get your knowledge on shia from? lol. Shia and Sunni shahada do not differ..

And secondly, why don't you just ask them about their beliefs? I will quote from their fav books on introducing Ahmadiyya;

 

 

[...]

 

Basically, there are two main divisions in Islam: the Sunnis and the Shias. All other sects developed from these two main streams. To give an idea of their relative proportions, about 85% of all "Muslims" living today belong to the Sunni stream of Islam while about 15% belong to the Shia stream. Some important sects of Islam and their relationship with the two main streams are shown below:

 

Sunni Stream of Islam:

Ahle Hadith (Traditionists)

Wahabis

Ahmadis

Shia Stream of Islam:

Zaydis

Twelvers

Seveners: Nizaris or Ismailis

Musta'lis or Bohras

 

[...]

 

The Ahmadis

The Ahmadiyya movement was founded in 1889 as a sect of Islam by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, India. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be the Mujaddid of the fourteenth century of Islam and the Promised Messiah and the Promised Mahdi whose advent had been foretold in the Hadith of the Holy Prophet Muhammad. The Ahmadis generally follow the Hanafi school of law.

 

WHAT IS AHMADIYYAT?

Ahmadiyyat is a sect of Islam and not a new religion. Ahmadiyyat is a movement, entirely within the fold of Islam, meant to revive its true spirit and philosophy, to cleanse Islam of all superstitious and unnecessary beliefs and customs which had crept in over the past fourteen centuries, and, finally, to preach the religion of Islam to non-Muslims with the enthusiasm and zeal of the early Muslims.

The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam was founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, India, in 1889. The followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad believe that he is the same Messiah and Mahdi whose coming was foretold by the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and was eagerly awaited by all Muslims. His followers call themselves Ahmadi Muslims, only to differentiate themselves from members of other Islamic sects, and strictly follow the orthodox religion of Islam.

As far as the fundamental beliefs or acts of worship are concerned, the Ahmadi Muslims have neither taken anything out nor added anything new to the religion of Islam. The Ahmadi Muslims make their declaration of faith by reciting the same Kalima which was recited by the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself; they say their Prayers and fast in the same manner as the Holy Prophet of Islam did; and their Qiblah, their Ka'ba, their Azan and their Quran are all exactly the same as that of the other Muslims.

DIFFERENCES WITH SUNNI MUSLIMS

There are basically three beliefs held by Ahmadi Muslims which separate them from the mainstream of Sunni Islam. These three beliefs concern:

o The finality of Muhammad's prophethood.

o Jesus Christ's ascension to heaven, and

o the identity of the Promised Messiah

These three areas of contention between Ahmadi and Sunni Muslims are briefly described below:

The Finality of Muhammad's Prophethood

In verse 41 of Surah al Ahzab, the Prophet Muhammad has been given the title of Khataman Nabiyyeen, the Seal of the Prophets. A majority of the Muslims interpret from this verse that the Holy Prophet Muhammad was chronologically the last Prophet and that no new Prophet can come after him. They also believe the phenomenon of prophetic revelation to be closed for ever.

According to the Ahmadi Muslims, the expression 'Seal of the Prophets' does not mean that the Holy Prophet is chronologically the last Prophet. A seal is a mark of distinction and, in this case, implies great perfection of prophethood. Ahmadis believe that the door to prophethood is always open. However, a new prophet after the Prophet Muhammad must be a follower of his and must be from within the fold of Islam. Ahmadi Muslims do believe that the Prophet Muhammad was the last law giving Prophet and that no new law giving prophet can come after him.

Jesus Christ's Ascension to Heaven

The Sunni Muslims believe that Jesus was not put on the cross and that his place was actually taken by someone who resembled him. Jesus, according to them, was physically raised to heaven.

Ahmadis believe that Jesus was indeed put on the cross, but only for a few hours. They believe that Jesus, after recovering from his wounds, traveled East to Kashmir where he died a natural death and remains buried in a tomb in Srinagar, in Mohallah Khanyar.

The Identity of the Promised Messiah

A majority of the Sunni Muslims believe that Jesus Christ himself will return one day as the latter day Messiah.

Ahmadi Muslims believe that since Jesus Christ has already died, it can only be someone else who can appear as the latter day Messiah. Ahmadis believe that this Promised Messiah has already come in the person of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad alaihisslam of Qadian.

These are the three important areas of contention between the Ahmadi and Sunni Muslims. In all other essential Islamic beliefs, the two groups hold more or less similar views.

 

 

taken from their official site: http://www.alislam.org/books/religiousknowledge/sec4.html &  http://www.alislam.org/books/religiousknowledge/sec5.html

 

the book analyses Ahmadiyya under the branch of sunni islam, yet it states three major differences.. their say on Prophethood is that Prophet Muhammad is the seal of Prophethood not Prophets.. And, they argue that Mirza Ahmad is the Messiah.. Strange thing is they could just say they believed in reincarnation specifically for Jesus (which to me should be the case if Jesus were to come not just as in movement but both in person and ideology/movement).. But, Ahmadis say the two (Jesus and mirza Ahmad) have no relation after all, the latter is the promised one in the end times.. Interestingly because the movement does not succeed, they believe in occultation.. lol. there are more weird people in islam than myself..  :D I would love them more if they followed Jafari fiqh instead of hanafi and they all believed in imamate and they did not believe in the wrong person as the second coming of Messiah..

Edited September 21, 2013 by HamzaTR

[Mu3lam]

السلام عليكم

 

According to Allama Yaqoobi, the Ahmadiyyah are a valid Islamic sect.  As I doubt that any member of this site has studied Islam as much as him, and I highly doubt that anybody on this site has the level of knowledge that he does, I would be very careful about doing takfeer if I was you.  They claim to be Muslims and they believe in la ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadar rasul Allah therefore I refuse to judge them on it.  It's amazing how easily all of you throw around takfeer.  It's quite sad, actually.  May Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì guide us all.  Most of the members on this website are Shias; not takfeeris.  Act like it.

 

In response to the OP: I have studied the Ahmadiyya extensively and yes, they are for the most part Sunni.  They follow the Sunni view on most issues such as the status of the sahabah, khalifat, etc.  Their fiqh is not Hanafi nor is it "Sunni".  It resembles Sunni fiqh, but it is different in many respects.  For example, Ahmadi's are allowed to combine prayers if they doubt that they will not have enough time to separate them.  Shias are allowed to combine for any reason whatsoever.  Sunnis are not allowed to combine unless they are sure that they won't be able to make it.  Ahmadi's can only combine if they doubt having enough time.  It's much more unrestrictive than the Sunni fiqh but more restrictive than the Shia fiqh (on this issue at least).  There are many other examples.  One of my favourite examples is the dominant position when standing in salaat.  Most Ahmadi's fold their hands as the Sunnis do, but Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was very clear that folding hands or leaving them at the sides was valid.  Either or.  He was known to switch between the two positions regularly to emphasize this.

 

So yes, they did grow out of Sunniism but they have developed their own distinct aqeeda as well as their own distinct fiqh.

 

في أمان الله

Edited September 21, 2013 by Mu3lam

[Ali Musaaa :)]

^... Ayatollah al-Yaqoobi may be referring to the sects amongst the Ahmadiyyah who do not believe in that chap being a prophet. They are certainly out of the fold of Islam if they regard him as a Prophet.

[Gypsy]

Yes they are a branch of Sunnism. But some people have doubt about them even being Muslim since their have some doubts about the Prophet.

[Mu3lam]

السلام عليكم

^... Ayatollah al-Yaqoobi may be referring to the sects amongst the Ahmadiyyah who do not believe in that chap being a prophet. They are certainly out of the fold of Islam if they regard him as a Prophet.

You are referring to the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam.  They believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a divine reformer, similar to a Shi`a Imam, but not a Prophet.  The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, on the other hand, believes that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was indeed a Prophet.  I still find your logic to be somewhat faulty.  The belief of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is that Ahmad was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ (as).  Both Sunni and Shi`a also believe that Jesus (as) will return with the Mahdi.  Ahmadi's believe that when the ahadith say that Jesus (as) will return with the Mahdi, that they will be one in the same.  I do not see how this takes them out of the fold of Islam.  Yes, they believe that he was a Prophet.  But that does not contradict Khatam an-Nabiyyin any more than the Sunni or Shi`a beliefs do.  No Ahmadi, as far as I am aware, believes that Ahmad was a new Prophet.  They believe that he was an old Prophet; Jesus (as).  I disagree with them on this and I regard Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a liar, but I don't see how their belief in the return of Jesus (as) takes an individual Ahmadi outside the fold of Islam.  If that were the case, then every single last Shi`a and Sunni that believes that Jesus (as) will return would be outside the fold of Islam because they believe that there will be a Prophet (on Earth) after the Seal of the Prophets; Muhammad (pbuh).  Most Muslims believe that Jesus (as) will return.  Ahmadi's believe that he has already returned.

 

To be clear, Allama Yaqoobi never said that Lahori Ahmadi's are Muslims and the others aren't.  He said that Ahmadi's are Muslims.  That was the end of his fatwa.  So until he expands on that and clarifies that he only meant a certain sect within the overall Ahmadi Movement, I don't see how you can make such an assumption.

 

Here is the exact text of his Fatwa in German and an English translation.  Perhaps Wizdom could hunt down the original Arabic fatwa إن شاء الله

 

FRAGE: Gelten die Ahmadiyya als Muslime (trotz der signifikanten Unterschiede)?

ANTWORT: Es gilt, abgesehen von den Benennungen, dass jeder, der an Allah (swt) und an die Botschaft seines Gesandten (pbuh) glaubt, ein Muslim ist. Er (dieser Muslim) hat dieselben Rechte und Pflichte.

 

QUESTION: Are the Ahmadiyya also Muslims (despite the significant differences)?

ANSWER: Any person that believes in Allah (swt) and his holy Messenger (pbuh) is a Muslim.  He (this Muslim) has the same rights and responsibilities. 

 

في أمان الله

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

السلام عليكم

 

According to Allama Yaqoobi, the Ahmadiyyah are a valid Islamic sect.  As I doubt that any member of this site has studied Islam as much as him, and I highly doubt that anybody on this site has the level of knowledge that he does, I would be very careful about doing takfeer if I was you.  They claim to be Muslims and they believe in la ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadar rasul Allah therefore I refuse to judge them on it.  It's amazing how easily all of you throw around takfeer.  It's quite sad, actually.  May Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì guide us all.  Most of the members on this website are Shias; not takfeeris.  Act like it.

 

In response to the OP: I have studied the Ahmadiyya extensively and yes, they are for the most part Sunni.  They follow the Sunni view on most issues such as the status of the sahabah, khalifat, etc.  Their fiqh is not Hanafi nor is it "Sunni".  It resembles Sunni fiqh, but it is different in many respects.  For example, Ahmadi's are allowed to combine prayers if they doubt that they will not have enough time to separate them.  Shias are allowed to combine for any reason whatsoever.  Sunnis are not allowed to combine unless they are sure that they won't be able to make it.  Ahmadi's can only combine if they doubt having enough time.  It's much more unrestrictive than the Sunni fiqh but more restrictive than the Shia fiqh (on this issue at least).  There are many other examples.  One of my favourite examples is the dominant position when standing in salaat.  Most Ahmadi's fold their hands as the Sunnis do, but Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was very clear that folding hands or leaving them at the sides was valid.  Either or.  He was known to switch between the two positions regularly to emphasize this.

 

So yes, they did grow out of Sunniism but they have developed their own distinct aqeeda as well as their own distinct fiqh.

 

في أمان الله

 

(wasalam)

Saying that Ahmadi is a valid sect and branch of Sunni Islam is like saying Bahai is a valid sect and branch of Shia Islam. 

[Mu3lam]

السلام عليكم

 

(wasalam)

Saying that Ahmadi is a valid sect and branch of Sunni Islam is like saying Bahai is a valid sect and branch of Shia Islam. 

There is a difference.  Baha'i's do not claim to be Muslims.  They do not believe that the Qur'an is the universal message for mankind.  They do not believe that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the last and final messenger.  The Baha'i Faith may have grown out of Shi`a Islam, but it is not a sect within Shi`a Islam, or Islam at all for that matter.  Ahmadi's, on the other hand, believe in the Sahahdah and they call themselves Muslims.  For me, this is sufficient.  I will leave the judging to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.  But for Baha'i's, they don't even call themselves Muslims.  A better comparison would be to say that Ismailism is a valid sect and branch of Shi`a Islam -- which I agree with.

 

في أمان الله

Edited September 21, 2013 by Mu3lam

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

السلام عليكم

 

There is a difference.  Baha'i's do not claim to be Muslims.  They do not believe that the Qur'an is the universal message for mankind.  They do not believe that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the last and final messenger.  The Baha'i Faith may have grown out of Shi`a Islam, but it is not a sect within Shi`a Islam, or Islam at all for that matter.  Ahmadi's, on the other hand, believe in the Sahahdah and they call themselves Muslims.  For me, this is sufficient.  I will leave the judging to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì.  But for Baha'i's, they don't even call themselves Muslims.  A better comparison would be to say that Ismailism is a valid sect and branch of Shi`a Islam -- which I agree with.

 

في أمان الله

(wasalam)

They claim to follow Islam. Both Ahmadi and Bahai have their own Prophet. 

 

Believing in Prophets after the last of the Prophets, Muhammad (saw), takes one out of the fold of Islam even if the person claims to be Muslim. 

Edited September 21, 2013 by Abul Hussain Hassani

[Mu3lam]

السلام عليكم

 

 

(wasalam)

They claim to follow Islam. Both Ahmadi and Bahai have their own Prophet. 

 

Just claiming to be Muslim doesn't make one Muslim. 

 

No they don't.  They claim to follow the Baha'i Faith.  Baha'i's don't even refer to Baha'u'llah has a Prophet.  They refer to him as a "manifestation of God".  And again, they don't claim to be Muslims.

 

I never said that everybody that claims to be a Muslim is one.  I simply said that it is wrong for us to judge a person if they claim to be a Muslim.  You are elevating yourself to the status of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì which is the greatest sin a man can do.  Here are the requirements for takfir, according to the Sunni school of thought (Maliki).

 

1. Declaring apostasy cannot be based on probability, meaning if there is a chance that a person may not be a kafir. Imam Malik said, “If I have 99 reasons to believe a person is a kafirand one to believe he is not, I’ll prefer the latter.”
2. Takfir is made regarding things that are known by default, like God being one and the finality of prophethood. The Malikis listed 33 issues that fall under the heading, malum min al-din bi al-Dururrah.
3. Takfir cannot be based on following an opinion (ijtihad) of a scholar in fiqh (legal verdict). There is not a kafir in fiqhbecause fiqh implies knowledge of things beyond the average person’s scope. For that reason a person is not declared a kafir who makes tawassul (praying to Allah through an intermediary). Imam Ahmed said, “We do not declare such people as kuffar.”
4. Takfir cannot be based on a sincere attempt to interpret or understand a text. Allah subhanahu wa ta`la (Exalted is He) mentions the followers of Christ saying, “Can God send a table from the heavens?” This is a statement of kufur but they were excused because it was a sincere question and an effort to understand.
5. Takfir cannot be based on actions that are due to ignorance. In the Qur’an we find the followers of Musa alayhi assalam saying, “Make for us idols to worship like they (the people of Egypt) had.” Musa’s response was, “You are an ignorant people.” He did not say that you are a kuffar. This verse servers as the foundation for the axiom “Al-’Uthru bi Jahl” (Ignorance is excused).
6. Takfir can only be made on an act of pure worship coupled with an intention that is clear kufur. Al-Dhahabi said, “If I saw a Muslim making sujud to a grave, I would not declare takfir until I talked to him.”
7. Takfir cannot be made upon an action that was done under the threat of harm. Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì says, “Except for the one who was forced (to say kufur) and his heart was full of faith.”
8. Takfir cannot be made upon an act that was an emotional burst. The Prophet  ﷺ (peace be upon him) said that the man who lost his camel in the desert and later found it, said, “God! You are my servant and I am your Lord.” The Prophet ﷺ did not say this man was a kafir even though the statement is kufur. Ibn Hajar notes that this man was overcome with joy, so his statement was an abbreviation.
9. Just because someone’s group is not from Ahl-Sunna does not mean they are kafir. For that reason the companions prayed janazah (funeral prayer) for the khawarij. They did not collect the spoils of war from them, but gave it to the deceased’s family according to the Islamic rules on inheritance. Ibn Taymiyya says that this proves the companions considered them Muslims.
10. Making takfir of others without knowledge is a major sin.
11. There is no takfir for major sins (only in certain situations).
12. Takfir is to be made, in most cases, by a Qadi and not a lay person or even a mufti as noted by Khalil. The reason for this is because, in the classical age, this implied a loss of rights. Secondly, a lay person accusing another of kufur falls under qathf, a major sin.

Even if you were to ignore all of this, here is a hadith from RasulAllah (pbuh) that might be of interest to you.  "He who says to his brother 'O disbeliever', then it returns upon one of them." (Bukhari, Muslim, Malik, at-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud)

 

So even if all of the proper conditions were fulfilled to make takfir, and you do so, if the person happens to be a Muslim, even barely, you would automatically become a Kafir.

 

I would be very careful if I were you.  You are getting dangerously close to being outside the fold of Islam yourself.

Believing in Prophets after the last of the Prophets, Muhammad (saw), takes one out of the fold of Islam even if the person claims to be Muslim. 

If that were the case, you would be a kafir because you believe that Jesus (as) will return and Jesus (as) is a Prophet that will be on Earth after the Seal of the Prophets (pbuh). 

 

You are completely disregarding everything I have written.  I have already refuted your argument.  Please read my posts before replying again.  I will not reply to you if you show that you have not even bothered to read what I have written.

 

في أمان الله

Edited September 21, 2013 by Mu3lam

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

السلام عليكم

 

 

 

No they don't.  They claim to follow the Baha'i Faith.  Baha'i's don't even refer to Baha'u'llah has a Prophet.  They refer to him as a "manifestation of God".  And again, they don't claim to be Muslims.

 

I never said that everybody that claims to be a Muslim is one.  I simply said that it is wrong for us to judge a person if they claim to be a Muslim.  You are elevating yourself to the status of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì which is the greatest sin a man can do.  Here are the requirements for takfir, according to the Sunni school of thought (Maliki).

 

1. Declaring apostasy cannot be based on probability, meaning if there is a chance that a person may not be a kafir. Imam Malik said, “If I have 99 reasons to believe a person is a kafirand one to believe he is not, I’ll prefer the latter.”
2. Takfir is made regarding things that are known by default, like God being one and the finality of prophethood. The Malikis listed 33 issues that fall under the heading, malum min al-din bi al-Dururrah.
3. Takfir cannot be based on following an opinion (ijtihad) of a scholar in fiqh (legal verdict). There is not a kafir in fiqhbecause fiqh implies knowledge of things beyond the average person’s scope. For that reason a person is not declared a kafir who makes tawassul (praying to Allah through an intermediary). Imam Ahmed said, “We do not declare such people as kuffar.”
4. Takfir cannot be based on a sincere attempt to interpret or understand a text. Allah subhanahu wa ta`la (Exalted is He) mentions the followers of Christ saying, “Can God send a table from the heavens?” This is a statement of kufur but they were excused because it was a sincere question and an effort to understand.
5. Takfir cannot be based on actions that are due to ignorance. In the Qur’an we find the followers of Musa alayhi assalam saying, “Make for us idols to worship like they (the people of Egypt) had.” Musa’s response was, “You are an ignorant people.” He did not say that you are a kuffar. This verse servers as the foundation for the axiom “Al-’Uthru bi Jahl” (Ignorance is excused).
6. Takfir can only be made on an act of pure worship coupled with an intention that is clear kufur. Al-Dhahabi said, “If I saw a Muslim making sujud to a grave, I would not declare takfir until I talked to him.”
7. Takfir cannot be made upon an action that was done under the threat of harm. Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì says, “Except for the one who was forced (to say kufur) and his heart was full of faith.”
8. Takfir cannot be made upon an act that was an emotional burst. The Prophet  ﷺ (peace be upon him) said that the man who lost his camel in the desert and later found it, said, “God! You are my servant and I am your Lord.” The Prophet ﷺ did not say this man was a kafir even though the statement is kufur. Ibn Hajar notes that this man was overcome with joy, so his statement was an abbreviation.
9. Just because someone’s group is not from Ahl-Sunna does not mean they are kafir. For that reason the companions prayed janazah (funeral prayer) for the khawarij. They did not collect the spoils of war from them, but gave it to the deceased’s family according to the Islamic rules on inheritance. Ibn Taymiyya says that this proves the companions considered them Muslims.
10. Making takfir of others without knowledge is a major sin.
11. There is no takfir for major sins (only in certain situations).
12. Takfir is to be made, in most cases, by a Qadi and not a lay person or even a mufti as noted by Khalil. The reason for this is because, in the classical age, this implied a loss of rights. Secondly, a lay person accusing another of kufur falls under qathf, a major sin.

Even if you were to ignore all of this, here is a hadith from RasulAllah (pbuh) that might be of interest to you.  "He who says to his brother 'O disbeliever', then it returns upon one of them." (Bukhari, Muslim, Malik, at-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud)

 

So even if all of the proper conditions were fulfilled to make takfir, and you do so, if the person happens to be a Muslim, even barely, you would automatically become a Kafir.

 

I would be very careful if I were you.  You are getting dangerously close to being outside the fold of Islam yourself.

If that were the case, you would be a kafir because you believe that Jesus (as) will return and Jesus (as) is a Prophet that will be on Earth after the Seal of the Prophets (pbuh). 

 

You are completely disregarding everything I have written.  I have already refuted your argument.  Please read my posts before replying again.  I will not reply to you if you show that you have not even bothered to read what I have written.

 

في أمان الله

 

(wasalam)

Check condition No.2 It mentions Finality of Prophethood. 

[Mu3lam]

(wasalam)

Check condition No.2 It mentions Finality of Prophethood. 

I already addressed this.  As I said before, I will not bother replying to you if you show that you did not even bother to read my posts. 

[Ibn Hashmi]

What is there actual shahada i cant say exactly, i have heard there shahada is ahmad ur Rasool,'astaqfirullah', but one of the old qadiyani man i once met he told me that Mahdi and Isa both died, idiot people are waiting now, when they camed people denied, know only world will destroy by wars and nukes, he is one unani doctor near by home, when me and my friend heard this i was confused and my friend got angry and slapped him, we returned back our homes, that old man complained to police with silly lies, may Allah guide these idiots

[Rohani]

Mulana Rizvi seems yo believe they were made up sects

[TheIslamHistory]

(wasalam)

Saying that Ahmadi is a valid sect and branch of Sunni Islam is like saying Bahai is a valid sect and branch of Shia Islam. 

 

Please do not make false Claims.

Bahai is not a Valid Branch of Shia Islam. 

it is not Islam At All in fact.

(salam)

[ShaanHussayn]

I do have Ahmadi friends so I know what I was talking about...

 

If you read the OP's post again, when he said "branch" he meant it as "off-shoot" - and if you use this term (or even if you don't) - Ahmadi's are definitely an off-shoot of Sunni Islam, and the fact that they still use Hanafi fiqh does show this.

 

They believe in God -> Prophet -> Qur'an -> The Mahdi as Mirza Ghulam. They don't believe in the Ahlul Bayt (as) anywhere as the successors to the Prophet's will and the guardians of the religion.

 

Sure they are no longer Muslims in the literal sense, however if you don't want to consider them as a "sunni branch" then by all means first edit this wikipedia article and all of the sub-articles, as I would say that more than half of these are not even Muslim, let alone "Shia."

 

But of course double standards only exist when it comes to Shiism.

You are right. An Ahmadi girl told me that they consider themselves as Sunnis and they follow Hanfia sect and I seriously don't even know what Hanfia sect is. Never heard of it. Maybe she meant to say Hanafi sect? Doubt it 

Edited September 23, 2013 by ShaanHussayn

[haideriam]

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

bahai, wahabbia and ahmediyya are the bidahs of islam brokered by the british at approximately the same time period.

 

(wasalam)

[Dimethyltryptamine]

“Why are you crying if this event happens all the time?”

            “Because you are the first that saw things you couldn’t have ever seen, you were straight line with your eyes closed and yet witnessed one of the nurse’s trip over your wife’s foot, and then you were correct about the brunette nurse that took your wife away, and thirdly you saw the bald spot on the top of the Chinese doctor’s head. You could not have seen this unless you had left your body.”

[Ali Noman]

I already addressed this.  As I said before, I will not bother replying to you if you show that you did not even bother to read my posts.

Sir

I guess that people here come with the least required knowledge for a common man like me.

They look for short answers so lets give them logics and not refrences.

 

Lets not play on both sides and be clear.

I don't know if a true shia (under surveillance of Holy Qaim Imam a.s) can't determine who is right or wrong then who can?

Who will help them to get them on right path?

Why would a visionary shia call any one Kafir if he is not i cant understand..

lets not confuse the truth with thefalse,

Any level one believer can easily have answer about it by asking this question to itrself not more then three times.

Are Ahmadis muslim?X3

there are many material ways to find out too.

If they are the most evolved Ummat, what are they doing?

Is there any circumstantial evidence that justifies the real time claims made by mr. Mirza?

I don't want to use terms but to cut short, i guess most of visitors know the inductive approach.

 

Well, if mr Mirza was not right and found flip flopping many times in his writings and sayings and then Ahmadees them selves making stories and making themselves adaptive in islam somehow then why should we not find a clear answer for it and one word?

Lets not flip flop with truth.

We are smart enough to use latest technology so why pose nieve for religon...?

 

Correct me by reasoning please i don't know books.

[rafidhi1986]

Ahmadiyyahs will say they are Sunni,

But some Sunni will say no they arent

[Abdullah2000]

On 21/09/2013 at 8:36 PM, Mu3lam said:

I already addressed this.  As I said before, I will not bother replying to you if you show that you did not even bother to read my posts. 

Isa AS ascending to the heavens as a prophet before Muhammad SAW, is not a contradiction in him returning later. He is still a Prophet from before. The Ahmadiyya

[Abdullah2000]

Let us be clear, Isa AS Ascending to the heavens before Muhammad SAw, and returning after him is not a contradiction, as he is the same Prophet from before and not a new Prophet.

Allamah Sa'id Akhtar Rizvi was very clear on this matter.

Q51: Why is Islam and Ahmadiyyas not same in their beliefs?
A. Here also there are many differences; but the basic differences are as follows :-
1. Muslims (without exception) believe that Hadhrat Muhammad (S.A.W.W.) is the Last
Prophet. No prophet is ever to come after him.
The Ahmadiyyas (commonly known as Qadianis) believe that Mirza Ghu-lam Ahmad of
Qadian (died in 1908 A. D.) was prophet.
2. The Muslims believe that Imam Mahdi will re-appear before Qiyamat and that Hadhrat
Isa (A.S.) will come as one of his followers to help him.
The Qadianis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was Imam Mahdi and Nabi
Isa — all in one, like the "3-in-1" god of the Christians.
3. The Qadiani's belief about angels and Satan appears to be quite different from the
belief of the Muslims.
There are other differences which it is not possible to explain in a short letter.
Q52: I am really confused about my attitude towards the Ahmadiyya Sect.
What should my standpoint be? Is it merely a dissident group which differs in
its opinions as to the interpretation of certain Islamic beliefs or do its
contentions differ fundamentally with the basic Islamic tenets? And if so how
should we (Muslims) regard them?
A. Ahmadias (commonly known as Qadianis) differ with the Muslims in many of the basic
tenets, the most important one being the finality of Prophethood.
Also they do not believe in 'Malaika,' and resurrection of the dead. There are many items in
religion which are called "Dharuriyaat-e-Deen", i.e., such Basic Tenets which are known
to every Muslim as part of religion. Take for example, the 5 times prayers, Fast of Ramadhan,
Hajj of Kaaba, etc.
If any person rejects even one of Dharuriyaat-e-Deen, he according to the unanimous belief of
the Muslims, becomes Kafir, though he may be reciting "La llaha Illallah Muhammadun
Rasulullah".
The belief that our Holy Prophet was the last Prophet and no other prophet is to come after
him, is one of the Dharuriyaat-e-Deen. Anybody or any sect rejecting this belief is Kafir.
(For details, see "Muhammad Is The Last Prophet" published by this Mission.)

 

[Abdullah2000]

On 21/09/2013 at 8:36 PM, Mu3lam said:

I already addressed this.  As I said before, I will not bother replying to you if you show that you did not even bother to read my posts. 

 

On 23/09/2013 at 4:50 PM, ShaanHussayn said:

You are right. An Ahmadi girl told me that they consider themselves as Sunnis and they follow Hanfia sect and I seriously don't even know what Hanfia sect is. Never heard of it. Maybe she meant to say Hanafi sect? Doubt it 

I've spoken to Ahmadi "Imams" on this, she doesn't know what she is talking about. They have there own interpretation of the word sect and borrow elements from Salafi and Hanafi fiqh where it suits there wish washy logic. In other cases they literally invent new interpretation such as having to fast once a person reaches 18 years of age only. There are many many differences and multiple reasons that take them out of the fold of Islam. This is a consensus amongst Shia and Sunni scholars, and errant opinions from any scholar should be ignored.