Before going into discussion on the contents of your column published into ‘Daily Ummat Karachi’ issue of September 29, 2009, under title ‘A research — Why Qadianis are non-Muslim’, I would like to get some clarification from you.
First of all I would say on the onset that I hold beliefs of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, briefly they are:
1) There is no God but Allah (SWT) and Muhammad (SAWS) is His (Last and Greatest) messenger (and NO new or old messenger can come after him).
2) EVERY reciter of Kalima-Shahada is a MUSLIM.
3) Mujjaddids (revivalists or reformers) are mamur-min-Allah (appointed by Allah SWT). Through out the 14 plus Hijra centuries Mujjaddids have come, and many times more than one in a particular time in different regions of Muslim world. And this continuation of Mujjaddids will continue until Yaum-e-Akhrat (end of the world).
4) Prophet-hood ended with Muhammad Rasul Allah SAWS. No new or old messenger can come after him.
5) Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib was NOT a messenger of Allah SWT. He was just a Mujjaddid of his era i.e. 14th Hijra Century. He was just a Mujjaddid like Shah Wali Ullah, Mujjaddid Alif Sani, Umar Bin Abdul Aziz etc.
6) It is NOT must for any Muslim to accept him as Mujjaddid.
Question 1:
Definition of a Muslim is based on Holy Quran and Sunna of Muhammad Rasul Allah (SAWS). How come definition of Kaffir is NOT based on Holy Quran and Sunna???
Home come definition of Kaffir is based on political Majority in Pakistan Parliament in 1974???
Question 2:
How come when ever a case against Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM) is tried in an impartial court in front of an impartial judge LAM is declared a Muslim???
Question 3:
According to 1973 constitution only those Muslims qualify to become its members who were not involved in Un-Islamic practices. How come parliament members who authored 1973 constitution THEMSELVES WERE PRACTICING UN-ISLAMIC PRACTICES??? Where they even qualified to become members of Pakistan Parliament and then enact constitutional amendment to declare LAM a non-Muslim???
Question 4:
The “constitutional” definition of Muslim that you provided in your article is NOT the one under which President and Prime Minister of Pakistan take oaths of their respective offices???
For your information:
Oath of office of The President:
President
[Article 42]
(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)
I, ____________, do solemnly swear that I am a Muslim and believe in the Unity and Oneness of Almighty Allah, the Books of Allah, the Holy Quran being the last of them, the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the last of the Prophets and that there can be no Prophet after him, the Day of Judgment, and all the requirements and teachings of the Holy Quran and Sunnah:
Ref: http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/schedules/schedule3.html#president
Oath of office of The Prime Minister:
Prime Minister
[Article 91( 4)]
(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)
I, ____________, do swear solemnly that l am a Muslim and believe in the Unity and Oneness of Almighty Allah, the Books of Allah, the Holy Quran being the last of them, the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the last of the Prophets and that there can be no Prophet after him, the Day of Judgment, and all the requirements and teachings of the Holy Quran and Sunnah:
Ref: http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/schedules/schedule3.html#president
It is clear from the above quotes of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan that laws of the country must be formulated using Holy Quran and Sunnah as source and guidance, and Muslim are defined who hold the beliefs included in the statement of Oath of Office of President and Prime Minister of Pakistan. Contrary to this the classification of Lahori Ahmadis as a non-Muslim citizen of Pakistan is not only violation of source and guidance of our legislation, but also an ultra vires act.
Kashif Saddiqui sahib, I would like to read your reply. Thanks.
Kashifiat's Blog 
Dear Mr. Kashif Saddiqui:
Before going into discussion on the contents of your column published into ‘Daily Ummat Karachi’ issue of September 29, 2009, under title ‘A research — Why Qadianis are non-Muslim’, I would like to get some clarification from you.
First of all I would say on the onset that I hold beliefs of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, briefly they are:
1) There is no God but Allah (SWT) and Muhammad (SAWS) is His (Last and Greatest) messenger (and NO new or old messenger can come after him).
2) EVERY reciter of Kalima-Shahada is a MUSLIM.
3) Mujjaddids (revivalists or reformers) are mamur-min-Allah (appointed by Allah SWT). Through out the 14 plus Hijra centuries Mujjaddids have come, and many times more than one in a particular time in different regions of Muslim world. And this continuation of Mujjaddids will continue until Yaum-e-Akhrat (end of the world).
4) Prophet-hood ended with Muhammad Rasul Allah SAWS. No new or old messenger can come after him.
5) Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib was NOT a messenger of Allah SWT. He was just a Mujjaddid of his era i.e. 14th Hijra Century. He was just a Mujjaddid like Shah Wali Ullah, Mujjaddid Alif Sani, Umar Bin Abdul Aziz etc.
6) It is NOT must for any Muslim to accept him as Mujjaddid.
Question 1:
Definition of a Muslim is based on Holy Quran and Sunna of Muhammad Rasul Allah (SAWS). How come definition of Kaffir is NOT based on Holy Quran and Sunna???
Home come definition of Kaffir is based on political Majority in Pakistan Parliament in 1974???
Question 2:
How come when ever a case against Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM) is tried in an impartial court in front of an impartial judge LAM is declared a Muslim???
Question 3:
According to 1973 constitution only those Muslims qualify to become its members who were not involved in Un-Islamic practices. How come parliament members who authored 1973 constitution THEMSELVES WERE PRACTICING UN-ISLAMIC PRACTICES??? Where they even qualified to become members of Pakistan Parliament and then enact constitutional amendment to declare LAM a non-Muslim???
Question 4:
The “constitutional” definition of Muslim that you provided in your article is NOT the one under which President and Prime Minister of Pakistan take oaths of their respective offices???
For your information:
Oath of office of The President:
President
[Article 42]
(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)
I, ____________, do solemnly swear that I am a Muslim and believe in the Unity and Oneness of Almighty Allah, the Books of Allah, the Holy Quran being the last of them, the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the last of the Prophets and that there can be no Prophet after him, the Day of Judgment, and all the requirements and teachings of the Holy Quran and Sunnah:
Ref: http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/schedules/schedule3.html#president
Oath of office of The Prime Minister:
Prime Minister
[Article 91( 4)]
(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)
I, ____________, do swear solemnly that l am a Muslim and believe in the Unity and Oneness of Almighty Allah, the Books of Allah, the Holy Quran being the last of them, the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the last of the Prophets and that there can be no Prophet after him, the Day of Judgment, and all the requirements and teachings of the Holy Quran and Sunnah:
Ref: http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/schedules/schedule3.html#president
It is clear from the above quotes of 1973 Constitution of Pakistan that laws of the country must be formulated using Holy Quran and Sunnah as source and guidance, and Muslim are defined who hold the beliefs included in the statement of Oath of Office of President and Prime Minister of Pakistan. Contrary to this the classification of Lahori Ahmadis as a non-Muslim citizen of Pakistan is not only violation of source and guidance of our legislation, but also an ultra vires act.
Kashif Saddiqui sahib, I would like to read your reply. Thanks.