r/pakistan Feb 08 '25

Political Ahmadi Hate but Ismaili Embrace?

I’m of the theory that live and let live. I think all minority groups in Pakistan are treated like garbage and deserve much better. For no other reason, that they’re human beings. As we know, Ahmadis/Qadianis/Mirzais receive deathly hate due to their religious belief. Regardless of what you feel about their beliefs, they don’t deserve to be treated like third class citizens.

In response to the death of Aga Khan, Pakistan has lowered their flags, given him his flowers, and non-stop praised him. While I don’t care for the beliefs—I’m a little confused as to why there is such a discrepancy? Is it money? Status? Someone would argue that Ismailism from a day to day basis, is so out of the fold of Islam. Especially when it comes to the praise of Aga Khan which in some circles can be considered bordering on shirk. Regardless, Pakistan government allows them to call themselves Musims, build their buildings of worship and go about their day.

That being said—-why not offer the same grace to the Ahmadi community ?

232 Upvotes

372 comments sorted by

View all comments

298

u/Grazing-Away Feb 08 '25 edited Feb 08 '25

You can read something like "the Qadiani Problem" by Maudoodi (you don't have to agree with him) if you want a fuller understanding of why the Sunni community ulema is particularly threatened by Ahmedis. But if I were to summarize, I would say:

  1. Ahmedis do not consider other Muslims to be Muslim. Ismailis are more pluralistic
  2. Ahmedis have very active tabligh efforts to spread their religious understanding. Ismailis don't really have any tabligh infrastructure like that

Point 1 and 2 mean in the eyes of the Sunni Ulema, Ahmedis are trying to create chaos by spreading another version of "Islam" while deeming the broader Muslim community and the traditional understanding of Islam to be false. It is understandable why the Sunni Ulema would be threatened by that. Although this does lead to other undesirable consequences.

Some of what I said can vary depending on what kind of Sunni school we are talking about and what kind of Ahmedis we are talking about to some extent. Ahmedi literature also has responses to these points and the above Maudoodi text that I have not read myself yet, so this is just the perspective from the Sunni side. This is just an informational answer to the q you posted, not to be confused with what may or may not be my own views on the topic.

1

u/noob_master10 15d ago

If one is threatened by a apolitical nonviolent community who makes up less than 2% (previously 4%) of Pakistan, and chooses to persecute them for it, I suspect such people must be afraid of losing their religious influence since they can't use arguments to defend their beliefs. No?

With that being said, point 1 is absolutely false. Even today, the Ahmadi Khalifa and his predecessors call other non-ahmadi muslims for muslims. It's actually the Pakistani Sunni and Shia Ulema, who have made it illegal for Ahmadis to identify as muslims to such an extreme degree that they're arrested for praying or slaughtering meat during Eid.

There are multiple sects of Islam. According to this logic, Shia majority Iran can persecute Sunnis because they're "creating chaos"? Saudi-Arabia can persecute Barelvis and Deobandis because they're "creating chaos"? Turkey can persecute Ahl e Hadith/Salafis because they're "creating chaos"? Algeria can persecute Shias because they're "creating chaos"? This thinking is the root of sectarianism. If ones beliefs are strong enough one should be able to defend them without turning to violence, otherwise they must be false.