Sister please work on that article and see how can a person astray from Allah with using the name of Islam...an interesting example for you...sometimes evil comes from the right!!!(with the name of islam effecting the thoughts on ayats,misunderstandings)...
The Third Statement of Maulana Syed Abul A'la Maududi in the Court of Enquiry, Pakistan Regarding the Qadiani (Ahmadiyya) Cult
[From the Book: The Qadiani Problem, by Syed Abu A'la Maududi]
(Various stages through which the Movement launched by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad passed; various claims put forth by Mirza during these stages; and the impact of these claims on the Qadiani beliefs and conducts).
In the year 1880, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad appeared among the Muslims as a preacher and champion of Islam. Before we describe various beliefs and ideas propounded by the Mirza during the various periods of his life from 1880 to the year of his death (26 May, 1908), it is necessary to arrange these periods in chronological order, so that the beliefs and ideas relating to one period may be easily distinguished from those of the other period.
Chronological Order
- From 1880 to 1888 - In this period, the Mirza was a preacher of Islam and a champion of the Faith who defended the religion of Islam from the attacks of non-Muslims. Mirza insisted that his beliefs in regard to all matters were the same as the beliefs held by the general body of the Muslims. Although the Muslims were startled even then by various claims latent in his writings, yet the Mirza always managed to pacify the Muslim sentiment by offering various interpretations for his claims.
- In December, 1888 A.D., he published an advertisement inviting people to render allegiance to him. In 1889 A.D., he started receiving oaths of allegiance. At that time, he claimed himself to be only a 'Mujaddid-i-Waqt' (Renovator of the Age) and one 'Appointed by God'. He set up a comparison between himself and Masih (peace be upon him) on the ground that as Masih lived in poverty and humility, so was the Mirza carrying out his task in a state of destitution. In those days, the Muslims thought of the Mirza in favorable terms. However, they felt uneasy about the Mirza's claim that he was superior to all the venerable saints of Islam.
(Seerat-ul-Mehdi by Sahibzada Bashir Ahmad Part I, Pages 14, 31,8; Tabligh-i-Risalat, Volume I, Pages 11, 12, 15).
- In 1891, Mirza pronounced that Masih (peace be upon him) was dead, and he put forth his own claim to be the Promised Messiah and the Promised Mehdi. This caused great unrest among the Muslims. (Serrat-ul-Mehdi, Page 31 and 89). In the early part of this period, Mirza wrote: "For about twelve years, which is a long period of time, I remained completely unaware that God had appointed me the Promised Messiah in the Burahin (i.e. Burahin-i-Ahmadiya) with great emphasis. I had adhered to the traditional belief in the second coming of Christ (peace be upon him). After the passage of twelve years, the time came for the truth to be revealed to me. A continuous chain of revelations descended on me proclaiming that I was the Promised Messiah." (Ijaz-i-Ahmadi, Appendix to Nazul-i-Masih, Page 7). Mirza wrote in another place: "Although in the Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, God has name me 'Isa and had affirmed that He and His Apostle (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had foretold my advent, yet since a group of Muslims held steadfast to the belief which I also shared with them that Hadrat 'Isa (peace be upon him) would descend from heaven, so I did not wish to contradict the obvious meaning of the Quran and the Hadith. I gave a different interpretation to this revelation and continued to share the belief held by the general body of the Muslims and published it in Burahin-i-Ahmadiya. Subsequently, however, revelations descended on me like a torrent proclaiming that I was the Messiah whose advent had been promised"
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, Page 149).
- In 1900, some leading disciples of the Mirza started proclaiming him a prophet in unambiguous terms. They raised him to that status which according to the Holy Quran, is reserved only for the Prophets (peace be upon them). Sometimes, Mirza affirmed their statements; at other times, he would interpret these statements by calling himself an incomplete prophet, a partial prophet, or an innovator merely to win over those who showed some hesitation in reposing their faith in his claim to prophethood. During the same period, Maulvi `Abdul Karim, a leading disciple of the Mirza, delivered a sermon to the Friday congregation on 7th August, 1900. Mirza himself was present at that congregation. In the course of his sermon, Maulvi `Abdul Karim exhorted the Ahmadis: "If you do not follow the lead of the Masih Mau`ud (Promised Messiah) in all matters and if you do not affirm in him even as the companions believed in the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), then you shall stand guilty of discriminating among God's Prophets just as the non-Ahmadis do". At the conclusion of Friday Prayers, Mirza affirmed the above statement in the following words: "You have given a faithful description of my religion". (Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Sahib-zada Bashir Ahmad, Page 167). Yet, in spite of this affirmation, Mirza abstained from putting forth in clear terms his claim to prophethood. According to Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmood Ahmad, the Mirza's creed in those days was that "He was partly superior to Hadrat Masih (peace be upon him) and that he claimed to be a kind of 'Prophet in part' and his prophethood was imperfect".
(Al-Qaul-ul-Fasl, Page 24. For a further detailed clarification please refer to Munkarin-i-Khilafat Ka Anjam by Jalal-ud-Din Shams, Page 19).
- In 1901, Mirza, openly and unreservedly claimed himself to be a prophet and a messenger. He ceased qualifying his 'prophethood' with expressions like 'incomplete prophethood', 'prophet in part', or an 'innovator prophet' etc. in most of his writings. (Seerat-ul-Mehdi, part I, Page 31). Jalal-ud-Din Shams, in his book, Munkarin-i-Khilafat Ka Anjam, explains: "In some of his writings before the year 1901, the venerable Hadrat (i.e., the Mirza) denied his prophethood and said that he was not a prophet but an innovator. But, in his writings after the year 1901, he did not call his 'prophethood in part', nor did he style himself an 'Innovator'. Instead, in his writings, he always referred to himself as a 'prophet' in positive terms" (Page 19). In this same connection, Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmood Ahmad [Mirza's son] states: "He effected a change in his creed in 1901. The year 1900 should be regarded as an interim period, which forms a boundary line like Barzakh (a barrier) between the two concepts... Hence, it is certain that the reference, which date prior to 1901, in which he denied his prophethood, stand abrogated now and it is wrong to base any arguments on those references."
(Haqiqat-ul-Nubuwwat, Page 121).
- In the year 1904, among other claims, the Mirza also claimed himself to be Krishna. (Lecture by the Mirza delivered at Sialkot, November 2, 1904).
Let us trace through the above periods different statements of the Mirza and the policy adopted by his community with regard to matters of dispute between the Ahmadis and the Muslims. These statements and viewpoints of policy are grouped below under different headings:
Khatm-i-Nubuwwat
(Finality of Prophethood)
1. Basic Concept
Initially, Mirza believed in the concept of the Finality of Prophethood exactly as the Muslims do, i.e., the line of prophethood came to an end in Muhammad(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and that no prophet shall come after him. Explaining this, in several of his works, he writes:
- "Are you not aware that the Munificent and High Lord bestowed upon our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) the name of 'Khatam-um-Nabiyyin' (the Last of the Prophets) without any exception, and our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) explained it clearly by the saying: 'No prophet will come after me', for the benefit of the skeptics. If we permit the advent of a prophet after our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) as lawful, it is tantamount to regarding as lawful the opening of the door to the office of the prophethood when once it has been closed by the Command of God. And this, as is clearly believed by every Muslim, is certainly wrong. How can a prophet succeed our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), when the chain of revelation came to an end with his death and God sealed the line of the Prophets in him (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)?"
(Hamamatul Bushara, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 34).
- The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had repeatedly observed that no prophet would come after him. The tradition, 'No prophet will follow me', was so well-established that nobody ever doubted its authenticity. The Holy Quran, in which every word is absolute and final, also affirmed in the verse. "He is the Messenger of Allah and he is the Last of the Prophets", that prophethood has ended in our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(Kitab al Barria, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 184).
- It is certain that no person can attain the office of prophethood after our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(Izala-i-Oham, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 577).
- The Holy Quran does not permit as lawful the advent of any prophet, old or new, after the Last of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
(Izala-i-Oham, Page 761).
- Hence, what a bold audacity, recklessness and insolence it is to follow evil notions and willfully ignore the stark reality presented by the Quran and to accept the idea of the coming of a new prophet after the Last of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
(Ayyam al-Sulh, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 146).
- I believe in all those precepts which form part of the Muslim creed and in which the Sunni sect believes. I accept all the tenets which are authenticated beyond doubt by the Quran and the Traditions. I regard anyone who claims to be a prophet or a messenger after our Master and the Last of the Prophets, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), as an impostor and infidel".
(Proclamation issued by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, dated October 2, 1891 [the print in the book says 1861, but I think this is a typo], and reproduced in Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. II, Page 2).
- Before this congregation of the Muslims present in this House of God (Jami' Masjid, Delhi), I declare without any reservation that I am a believer in the Finality of the Prophet hood of the Last of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and I regard anyone who refutes the Finality of Muhammad's Prophethood as a pagan and outside the pale of Islam.
(Written statement of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad which was read out in Jami' Masjid, Delhi, on October 23, 1891., reproduced in Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. II, Page 44).
2. Explanation of Earlier Claims
In order to set at rest the suspicions which some of his writings had aroused in the minds of Muslims that he claimed to be a prophet or he was about to lay claim to prophethood, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad offered the following explanations:
- "We also condemn the claimant to the prophethood with curses and we believe in the creed 'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.' We believe in the Finality of the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). We do not profess to be the recipient of Prophetic revelations. We only acknowledge to receive revelations on behalf of and under the protection of the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the revelation which is transmitted to the friends of God who are faithful followers of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). I do not lay claim to the status of Prophethood. I only claim friendship with God and profess to be a Renovator".
(Proclamation of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Reproduced in Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. VI, Page 302).
- "This humble individual is neither a Prophet nor a Messenger, but only an inferior servant and follower of the innocent Prophet Muhammad Mustafa (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(An observation of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Reproduced in Qamar al-Mehdi, by Qamar-ud-Din Jhelumi, Page 58).
- "It is true that in the Inspiration revealed to this person from God, this person has been frequently addressed as Prophet, Messenger, and Envoy. But, these words have not been used in their real sense. It is our conviction and belief that in the real sense of the word 'Prophet', no new or old Prophet will come after the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). But, it lies in the power of God to address an inspired person as a Prophet or a Messenger in the metaphorical sense".
(Siraj-i-Munir, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib, Page 302).
- "For twenty years, this humble person has constantly received inspirations from God in which often the word 'Prophet' or 'Messenger' has been used for him. But, the man who infers that this prophethood or ministry is real would be guilty of a grievous error... These words which have been used with regard to my person in a metaphorical sense only create a schism in Islam and entail evil consequences. Hence, the community should avoid the use of these words in common parlance."
(Letter addressed by the Mirza to Akhbar al-Hukm, Qadian, dated August 17, 1899. Reproduced in Mashih Mau'ud and Hatm-i-Nubuwwat by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., Page 4).
- I am not a prophet, but I am the bearer of a divine message from God (Innovator) and I am the One with whom God holds communion (Interlocutor)".
(A'ina Kamalat-i-Islam, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 383).
- "I have certainly laid no claim to prophethood nor have I said that I am a Prophet. But, these people showed haste and erred in comprehending my saying... I have conveyed to people nothing except what I have written in my books and that is that I am an Innovator (a bearer of a message) and God holds communion with me in the same manner as He does with Innovators".
(Hamamatul Bushra, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 96).
- "I am an Innovator, who among the Messengers is both the follower of a Prophet and an imperfect prophet himself".
(Azala-i-Auham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 569).
- "In one sense, an Innovator (Muhaddith) is also a Prophet. Though not a perfect prophet, he is, nevertheless, a prophet in part as he enjoys the privilege of holding direct communion with God. Things that are hidden from ordinary people are revealed to him, and just as the revelations transmitted to the Prophets are exempt from interference by the Devil, so are the inspirations revealed to him".
(Tozih-i-Maram, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 18).
- "This humble individual has never at any time claimed to be a Prophet or a Messenger in the real sense of the word. It is no heresy to use a word in its metaphoric sense or to use it in speech in its lexicographic connotation. But, I disapprove even of this lest it should cause misunderstanding among the general body of Muslims".
(Anjam-i-Atham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 27).
- "So, this is only a question of semantics. In other words, what you call a 'dialogue' or an 'address', by the command of the Almighty, I call the same phenomenon, when it occurs frequently, as prophethood. Everybody has his own terminology to use".
(Tamta Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 68).
- "This humble individual wishes to bring to the notice of all Muslims that all the expressions used in my Risala Fateh al-Islam, Tauzeeh al-Maram and Azala-i-Auham, such as 'In one sense an Innovator is a Prophet' or 'To be an Innovator is to be a Prophet in part' or 'Muhadithiat' (Innovation) is a sort of imperfect Prophethood are not used in their real sense. These have been used in their literal sense for the sake of simplicity. Otherwise, in no way, do I lay claim to real Prophethood... Therefore, I wish to make it clear to all Muslim brethren that if they are incensed over these words and if those words are shocking to their hearts, they should consider all the above expressions as amended and regard me only as an Innovator, because I would not in any cause schismatic strife among the Muslims. At every point, in place of the word 'Prophet', please substitute the word 'Innovator' and consider the word 'Prophet' as deleted".
(Written statement read out at a Public Meeting, dated February 3, 1892. Reproduced in Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. II, Page 95).
3. Various Claims to Prophethood
Then, the Mirza laid claim to being a Prophet and this claim was not presented in a single form, but in many different forms on various occasions:
- An 'Ummati' Prophet: "Later, the revelations from God descended on me like a torrent. This occurrence dislodged me from the present creed and the title of a Prophet was definitely conferred on me in such a way that on the one hand I was a Prophet and on the other a faithful follower of the Prophet, "
(Haqiqatul Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 149).
- A Prophet Without a Mandate: "All prophethoods save that which is authenticated by Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are abolished. No Prophet bearing a mandate will come. And none can become a Prophet without carrying a mandate, save the one who is already a faithful follower of the Prophet (Ummati). Hence, on this basis, I am a faithful follower as well as a Prophet".
(Tajalliyat-i-Ilahia, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 24).
- A Prophet Bearing the Canonic Law: "Try to understand the real nature of 'Shariat' (The Canonic Law). He, who is inspired by divine revelation, sets up a code of injunctions and prohibitions and gives a law to his followers, becomes a mandate-bearing Prophet... My mandate contains both injunctions and prohibitions...and if you think that a mandate invariably contains original commandments, this is a fallacy. God affirms: ..., i.e., The teachings of the Quran are also contained in the Torah".
(Arba'in, No. 4, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Pages 7-83).
- A Shadow Prophet or Incarnation of Prophet: "Even as Real and Permanent Prophethoods are types of Prophethood, so the shadow or incarnate Prophethood represents another type. The Promised Messiah's status as a Shadow Prophet does not dispossess him of his status as a Prophet; it represents merely a type of Prophethood... The Shadow Prophet enjoys the same privileges as are bestowed upon real and permanent Prophets, for the substance of Prophethood is one and the same".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 118).
- Incarnation of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "On the authority of the Quranic verse...I am the incarnation of the same Last Prophet. Twenty years ago, God addressed me in Burahin-i-Ahmadiya as Muhammad and Ahmad and created me an Incarnation of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
('Ek Ghalti Ka Izala--Clearing a Misunderstanding by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad).
- A Composite Prophet Embracing All Prophets: "No Prophet came into this world whose name was not given to me. In Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, God has affirmed me as Adam, Noah, Ibrahim, Ishaque, Ya'qub, Isma'il, Moses, Dawud, 'Isa, son of Mary, and Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). I am the incarnation of all these Prophets".
(Tatimmah Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 84).
- Prophethood Ends in the Mirza: "In this Ummat, the distinction of being called a Prophet was bestowed upon me alone and all others are undeserving of this appellation."
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 391).
"In no case can more than one Prophet be appointed from among the followers of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Hence, the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) foretold the advent of one Prophet of God from among his followers and that Prophet is the Promised Messiah. None save the Promised Messiah has been addressed as the prophet of God or the Messenger of God, nor did the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) prophesy the coming of anyone else. On the other hand, he refuted the others by saying, 'No Prophet will follow me', and explained it clearly that 'no Prophet and no messenger will come after me save the Promised Messiah'.
(Tashhiz-ul-Azhan, Vol. 9, No. 3, Pages 30-32).
Different Interpretations of the Finality of Prophethood
In order to provide grounds for their various claims, Mirza and his community gave numerous interpretations to their idea of the finality of Prophethood on different occasions, which are reproduced below:
First Interpretation
- "If a follower, who receives divine messages and revelations and attains to the status of a Prophet on the basis of his faith in and obedience to the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), is honored with the title of a Prophet, the seal of prophethood is not thereby violated, for this man is a follower. However, the advent of a Prophet who is not a follower is a violation of the Finality of Prophethood".
(Chashma-i-Masihi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 41).
- "The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the "Seal of the Prophets" in the sense that in the first place, all the accomplishments of prophethood have been concentrated in him and, secondly, no Messenger bearing a new mandate will come after him nor will follow any Prophet who is not a follower of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(Chashma-i-Ma'arifat, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Appendix, Page 9).
Second Interpretation
- The Magnificent Lord appointed the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) as the Seal of the Prophets. In other words, the Lord bestowed upon him the Seal which was denied to the other Prophets in order to raise him to the highest order of excellence. It is for this reason that the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is called 'the Seal of the Prophets'. Adherence to him blesses one with the excellence of Prophethood and his spiritual guidance does not carve out a Prophet.
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 96).
- "In respect of 'the Seal of the Prophets', Hadrat Masih Mau'ud (the Promised Messiah) observed, The Seal of the Prophets' means that no Prophethood can be authenticated without his seal. When the seal is affixed, the paper becomes authentic and is considered valid. Similarly, the Prophethood which is not authenticated and confirmed by the Seal of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is not genuine".
(Malfuzat-i-Ahmadiya, by Muhammad Manzur Elahi, Part V, Page 290).
Third Interpretation
- "Through His Wisdom and Bounty God so willed that for thirteen centuries after the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), Prophethood became extinct among his followers, so that the dignity of his Prophethood may be established (in other words, his Prophethood may not be sullied by the advent of successor Prophets just after him). But, then in order to maintain the glory of Islam, certain persons were required who could be addressed as 'Prophets of God' after the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and further God willed to complete resemblance with the series of the Prophets of yore (from the series of Moses). So, God enjoined upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) towards the close of his life to utter the term 'Prophet of God' in reference to the Promised Messiah".
(Statement of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Published in Akhbar-ul-Hukm, Qadian, dated 7th April, 1903. Also produced in the pamphlet entitled 'Khatm-i-Nubuwwat by Fakhr-ud-Din Multani, Page 10).
Fourth Interpretation
- "I am the shadow of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Hence, the Seal of Prophethood does not stand violated. Muhammad's Prophethood is contained in Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him); in other words, none other than Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the Prophet. As I am the incarnation of the Prophet and all excellent traits of Muhammad, including his Prophethood, have been reflected in the image of my shadow; how could I be regarded as a separate person claiming prophethood distinct from Prophethood of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(Ek Ghlti Ka Azala, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad).
Revelation
As in the case of 'Khatm-i-Nubawwat' ('Finality of Prophethood'), Mirza's position with regard to 'Revelation' and 'the visitations of the Archangel Gabriel' has been constantly shifting through various stages. A survey of Mirza's changing outlook is given below:
Initial Position
- "To believe in the advent of a new Prophet after our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is tantamount to believing in the doctrine that the door to the office of prophethood will open after having been closed; but this is certainly false, as is known to all Muslims. How can a Prophet come after our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) when the chain of Revelations was completed at his death?"
(Hamama-tul-Bushra, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 34).
- "Even if it be supposed for once that the transmission of divine revelation is open and that Gabriel will convey but a single sentence from God to man, it would clearly negate the idea of the Finality of Prophethood. If the Seal of Finality is broken and the transmission of divine messages opens, it makes no difference whether it is a single sentence or more thus transmitted... After the demise of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), Gabriel has been forbidden to convey Prophetic Revelations for all time to come."
(Azala-i-Auham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 577).
- "The Holy Quran does not admit the advent of any Prophet, old or new, after the last of the Prophets. A Prophet receives his knowledge of Divine Law through the agency of Gabriel, but the office of Gabriel is now defunct as far as the transmission of divine revelations is concerned. And the advent of a prophet in the absence of divine revelations is impossible".
(Azala-iAuham, Page 761)
- "To be the recipient of Divine Law through revelations transmitted by Gabriel is a necessary attribute of the Messenger. And it is now established that the series of Prophetic revelations has been closed till Doomsday."
(Azala-i-Auham, Page 614).
- "Hence how audacious, bold and insolent it is to pursue evil notions and willfully neglect the clear injunctions of the Quran and to admit the advent of a new Prophet after the last of the Prophets and to open the series of Prophetic revelations when God has closed it, for he who holds the dignity of a Prophet is also the recipient of Prophetic Revelation".
(Ayyam-us-Sulh, Ghulam Ahmad, Page 146).
Second Position
- "We also condemn the claimant to Prophethood with causes and believe in the creed, 'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah'. We believe in the Finality of Muhammad's Prophethood (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and we are convinced that one who is a follower of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) may, under the shadow the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) receive 'Revelation by inheritance' rather that 'Prophetic revelation'".
(Proclamation published by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, vide Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. 6, Page 302).
- "Is it necessary that one who claims to receive divine messages should also lay claim to Prophethood?"
(Jang-i-Muqqadas, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 67).
- "I am not a Prophet, but God has appointed me an Innovator and an Interlocutor".
(Aina Kamalat-i-Islam, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 383).
Third Position
- What an absurd and erroneous fallacy it is to believe that the series of divine revelations has been closed forever after the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and there is no possibility that the chain of revelations will be resumed until Doomsday. Shall we worship mere legends? Is such a religion worth the name in which direct communion with God is extinct?"
(Appendix to Burahin-i-Ahmadiy, Part V, Page 183. It must be pointed out that part V of Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, came out in the year 1908).
- Persian Verses: [Translation]
"Whatever Wahi (revelation) I receive from God
I swear I will know it to be free from mistakes;
Just as I do with Quran, I will hold dear my Wahi
It is my belief to know it is pure from errors;
I swear by God this Word is great
From the mouth of a Pure and Knowledgeable God."
- "Just as I believe in the verses of the Holy Quran, in the same measure, without an iota of difference, I believe in the truth of the divine message which has been revealed to me in a constant chain of signs. I can swear in the House of God (Baitullah) that the sacred revelations received by me have been transmitted by the same God who conveyed His Divine Word to Hadrat Moses, Hadrat 'Isa (peace be upon them) and hadrat Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)".
(Ek Ghalti Ka Azala, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad).
- "I believe in the truth of the divine Messages revealed to me in the same measure as I believe in the Torah, the Bible and the Holy Quran".
(Arba'in, No. 4 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 25).
- Persian Sentences: [Translation]
"Gabriel(AS) came to me and chose me by pointing to me with his finger; and said that God will protect you from your enemies."
Christ (peace be upon him) and the Question of His Reappearance
In respect of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) and his reappearance and Mirza's own claim to be the promised Messiah, the viewpoint of Mirza has been changing through different stages. An outline of his varying positions is given below:
First Position
- "This humble person's claim to be an incarnation of the Promised Messiah, which some dimwitted people have misunderstood as 'the Promised Messiah' is not a novelty which people have heard from me only at the present time... I have certainly not claimed to be Christ, son of Mary (peace be upon him). The person who alleges that I have made such a claim is a disruptionist and a liar. On the other hand, over a period of seven or eight years it has been constantly published in my behalf that I am an Incarnation of Christ".
(Azala-i-Auham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 190)
- "It is possible, quite possible, that in some future age a Masih should appear who would appear true to all the apparent meanings of certain words contained in the Traditions".
(Azala-i-Auham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 199)
- "It has been revealed to this humble person that this insignificant creature by virtue of his poverty, humility, reliance upon God, self-denial and signs and lights represents an image of Christ's earlier existence on this earth. The nature of this humble person is akin to the nature of Christ (peace be upon him)".
(Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 499).
- "It has been revealed to the author that he is the Renovator of the Age and his spiritual excellence matches the spiritual excellence of Christ, son of Mary (peace be upon him)".
(Proclamation by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, vide Tabligh-i-Risalat, Volume I, Page 15).
- "If an objection is raised that an Incarnation of Christ must be a Prophet, for Christ (peace be upon him) was a Prophet of God, the answer, in the first place, is that our master and prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not set Prophethood as a necessary attribute of the Promised Messiah. It is clearly recorded that the promised Messiah would be a Muslim and would follow the Shariat (the Canonic Law) like the other Muslims, and he will offer nothing more".
(Tauzih al-Maram, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 19).
Second Position
- "And this is 'Isa whose advent was awaited. In the revealed texts, the names Mary and Christ have been used in reference to me. It was said of me, "We will make him the Image", and further it was said, "This is Christ, son of Mary, whose advent was awaited". That which the people doubt is Right and this is the one who awaited and doubt arises from lack of perception".
(Kishti-i-Noah, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 48).
- "In the third part of Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, God addressed me as Mariam. Then, as is evident from Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, I was reared in the image of Mariam for two years and continued to grow behind the veil... Later, as was done in the case of Mary, I was filled with the sould of 'Isa and I was made pregnant in a metaphorical way. At last, after a period of many months (which is not of more than ten months' duration), I was delivered from Mary in the form of 'Isa by a divine message which is contained at the end of Part IV of Burahin-i-Ahmadiya. It is thus that I was created the sone of Mary and at the time when Burahin-i-Ahmadiya, was written, God did not reveal to me this hidden mystery".
(Kishti-i-Noah, Page 46).
- "Hence be convinced that he who has descended is the son of Mary. He, like 'Isa, son of Mary, did not find a learned man, a spiritual father in his time who could become an agent for his spiritual birth. So, the Omnipotent HImself became his guardian and took him to His bosom and instructed him and name his servant 'the Son of Mary'... Hence, in a metaphorical way, this is 'Isa, son of Mary, who was born without the agency of a father. Can you prove that he has any spiritual father? Can you furnish a proof that he is included in any of your four series? Hence, who else is he but the Son of Mary"?
(Azala-i-Auham, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 659).
- "We should know that the word 'Damascus', which appears in the Tradition of 'Muslim', or, in other words, as it is mentioned in the text of 'Sahih Muslim', which says that 'Hadrat Masih (peace be upon him) will descend near the white tower in the eastern part of Damascus has always been a puzzle to the research scholars [see note below]... Be it know that God has revealed to me the interpretation of the word 'Damascus' in this way: in this place, Damascus is the name of a town where live people who possess traits like those of Yazid and follow the perverse habits and thoughts of Yazid... God has conveyed to me through Revelation that since a majority of its residents possess traits like those of Yazid, this town of Qadian has some connection with and bears similarity to Damascus".
(Hashia Azala-i-Auham, Page 63-73)
[Note: It may be pointed out that no scholar before the time of Mirza was ever perplexed over the word 'Damascus'. There is hardly any trace of amazement in the writing of all the exponents of the 'Science of Hadith'. However, surely Mirza must have been sorely perplexed as to how he could establish himself as the Promised Messiah in the presence of this clear reference in the Traditions to a well know place.]
- "I swear by God Who has appointed me, and only the accursed ones dispute over the actions of the Lord, that God has deputed me as the Promised Messiah".
(Ek Ghalti Ka Azala, Tabligh-i-Risalat, Vol. 10, Page 18).
Qadiani Community Constitutes an 'Ummat'
Mirza himself clearly affirmed the principle that a Prophet creats an 'Ummat'. He, then, proceeded on to call his community an 'Ummat'. A few extracts from his writings given below to substantiate the point:
- "The person who claims to be a Prophet will certainly affirm his Faith in the existence of God. Furthermore, such a man will proclaim that he is the recipient of Divine Revelation... In addition to this, he will relate to the people the Word of God which has been revealed to him. He will unite his followers to an 'Ummat' (body of the faithful) which believes in him as a Prophet and regards his book as the revealed Book of God".
(Aina Kamalat-i-Islam, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 344).
- "You should comprehend the real nature of 'Shariat'. He who sets out a number of Injunctions and Prohibitions through Revelation received by him and establisheds a canon for his 'Ummat' becomes an Apostle bearing the Canonic Law (Shariat). My revelations include both Injunctions and Prohibitions".
(Arba'in, No. 4, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Pages 7-83).
- "The former Masih was limited to being a Masih. Hence, his 'Ummat' was led astray and the chain of Moses came to an end. If I were also confined to being a Masih, the end would not have been dissimilar. But, I have also been appointed a Mahdi and, in addition, I am an incarnation of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Hence my 'Ummat' will be divided into two sects. Those who will succumb to the influence of Christianity shall be obliterated. The other sect will enter the fold of Mahdwiat".
(Statement by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, published in Al-Fazl, dated January 26, 1916).
Consequences of Refuting Mirza from the Standpoint of Belief
Initial Position
- "This humble person has been deputed by God to act as a Muhaddith (one who renews or reinterprets the law) among this 'Ummat' (community of the faithful). A Muhaddith (Innovator) is a Prophet in one sense. Although his Prophethood is not perfect, yet he is a Prophet in part. It is obligatory on the Muhaddith (Innovator), as it is obligatory on all Prophets that he should proclaim his credentials loudly and the person who denies the credentials of the Muhaddith (Innovator) is to some extend liable to punishement".
(Tauzih-i-Maram, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 18).
- "From the start, it has been my creed that no person can become an infidel or a Dajjal (Antichrist) on the grounds of refuting me. Nonetheless, he will be the one led astray and deviated from the right path, and I do not call him faithless, devoid of religious faith". (Marginal Note) "It should be born in mind that only such Prophets as bring Shariat (the Canonic Law) and fresh mandate from God are vested with the privilege of denouncing their refuters as infidels. With the exception of the bearer of a divine mandate, the denier of all the Innovators and the Inspired Ones, however, exalted a position they may be holding in the favour of God and in spite of enjoying the privilege of holding communion with the Almighty, does not become a heretic".
(Taryaq-ul-Qulub, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 130).
- "Every Muslim to whom my message has been propagated, and who does not hold me as the final arbiter in all matters nor does he accept me as the Promised Messiah, nor does he believe in the divine origin of my revealed mandate, is liable to be held accountable in heaven irrespective of his being a Muslim".
(Tuhfat-un-Nadwah, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 4).
- "The person who refutes the Promised Messiah or is indeifferent to the necessity of believing in him is absolutely ignorant of the true spirit of Islam and he nature of Prophethood and the purpose of Divine Ministry. Such a person does not deserve to be called a true Muslim and a true obedient servant of God and His Apostle... 'Transgressor' is the term for those who do not believe in the Promised Messiah and drift away from his creed".
(Hujjatullah -- Address delivered in Lahore by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Reproduced here from An-Nubuwwata Fi Islam, by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., Page 214).
Final Position
- "The person who does not follow thee does not pledge allegiance to thee and remains thy adversary is a denizen of Hell, for he disobeys God and His Apostle".
(Proclamation Ma'yar al-Khyar, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, dated May, 25, 1900. Reproduced here from Kaltmat-ul-Fasl, by Sahibzada Bashir Ahmad, Page 129).
- "Now when there is no doubt in the matter that salvation cannot be attained without affirming in the Promised Messiah, why are needless efforts he made to establish that the non-Ahmadis are Muslims?
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 129).
- "Whenever Hadrat Mirza has addressed the non-Ahmadis as Muslims, he has done so because they profess to be Muslims. Otherwise, the Mirza, by an express command of God, did not look upn his deniers as Muslims".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 126).
- (After making a reference to a writing of Mirza, the text proceeds as follows): "This writing of Hadrat Masih Mau'ud (the promised Messiah) provides answers to several questions. In the first place, God conveyed to the Hadrat through inspiration that his denier was not a Muslim, and not only did God reveal this information, but also commanded the Hadrat to look upon his deniers as outside the pale of Islam. Secondly, the Hadrat expelled 'Abdul hakim Khan from the community on the ground that he addressed the non-Adhmadis as Muslims. Thirdly, to hold the view that the deniers of the Promised Messiah are Muslims is adhering to an absurd belief. Fourthly, God's blessing is withheld from the person who adheres to the above belief".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 125).
- "Heresy is of two types. Firstly, a person who refutes Islam and disbelieves in the Divine Ministry of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is a heretic, an infidel. Secondly, for example, a person denies the Promised Messiah and in spite of the provision of proofs denounces him as an imposter... When considered closely, both types form the single kind of Heresy".
(Hadiqat-ul-Wahi, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Page 179).
- "All those Muslims who have not pledged allegiance to Hadrat Masih Mau'ud, including even those who may not have heard his name, are infidels and outside the pale of Islam".
(Aina-i-Sadaqat, by Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmood Ahmad, Page 35).
- "Every man who believes in Moses (peace be upon him), but refutes Christ (peace be upon him) or acknowledges Christ (peace be upon him), yet disbelieves in Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) or believes in Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), but refutes the Promised Messiah, is not only a heretic, but a confirmed infidel and is outside the pale of Islam".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 110).
- "God sent Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) again in Qadian in order to fulfull His Promise".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 110).
- "So, the Promised Messiah himself is the Prophet of God who has appeared in the world a second time to carry out the Propagation of Islam".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 155).
- "Now, the matter is quite clear. If the denial of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) entails heresy or infidelity, a denial of the Promised Messiah must also amount to heresy, for the Promised Messiah is not other than the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) himself; they are one and the same".
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 147).
- "The person who takes up a neutral positon with regard to us is in reality our refuter, and he who does not affirm faith in us and yet speaks well of us is also our adversary".
(Statement by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, published in the newspaper Badr, dated April 24, 1903. Reproduced from Munkarin-i-Khilafat Ka Anjam, Page 82).
Consequences of Refuting the Mirza from a Practical Point of View:
- "Subsequently, Hadrat Masih Mau'ud clearly enjoined upon us: We should avoid all contacts with the non-Ahmadis in matters of bereavement and marriage. How can we say their funeral prayers, when we do not share their grief?"
(Al-Fazl, June 18, 1916).
- "The venerable Mirza observes: It is not forbidden to take the daughter of a non-Ahmadi in marriage, for it is lawful to marry women from the people of the Book".
(Al Fazl, December 16, 1920).
- "It is notified for public information that to marry Ahmadi girls to non-Ahmadi men is unlawful. Particular care should be taken in this regard in the future".
(Notification by the Secreatry, Public Affairs, Qadian, published in Al-Fazl, February 14, 1933).
- "Hadrat Mirza abstained from saying funeral prayers for his son (the late Mirza Fazal Ahmad) on the ground that he was a non-Ahmadi". (Al-Fazal, December 15, 1921).
- "So, bear in mind, as God has revealed to me, it is unlawful, definitely unlawful, for you to say prayers behind a person who charges us with apostasy or one who refutes us or one who wavers. Your leader in prayer should be one of your own community".
(Arba'in, No. 3, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad)."
- "My belief is that it is unlawful to say funeral prayers for those who pray behind the non-Ahmadis, for in my view such people are outside the pale of Ahmadiyat. Similarly, it is unlawful to say funeral prayers for those who give their daughters in marriage to the non-Ahmadis and die without offering repetance for this sin".
(Letter of Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmood Ahmad, published in Al-Fazl, April 13, 1926).
- "Hadrat Mau'ud has permitted only such dealings with the non-Ahmadis as were held lawful with regard to the Christians by the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Our prayers were segregated from the prayers of the non-Ahmadis. It was forbidden to marry our daughters to them. We were enjoined upon not to say their funeral prayers. What else is there that we can share with them? There are two types of relationship--Religious and Worldly. The principal link in religious relationship is joint worship and the chief means of worldly relationship is matrimony. But, both of these relationships are forbidden to us. If you ask, 'are we at liberty to take the daughters of the non-Ahmadis?" My answer is, 'the daughters of the Christians are also permitted to us". And if you enquire, 'why do we extend salam to the non-Ahmadis'? The answer is, 'it is established from the Tradition that on certain occasions the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) returned even the greetings of the Jews'.
(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, Page 159).
[We are very grateful to brother Hammad Ahmad Awan for having taken the time to reproduce the text of this Historic Statement in electronic format. May Allah(SWT) reward his service to Islam and Muslims.]
|
Statement of Maulana Syed Abu'l Ala Maududi
The Problem of Qadianism
Muslims scholars representing various Muslim organizations and parties from all parts of East and West Pakistan held a conference in Karachi to discuss government suggestions and recommendations for the new constitution presented to parliament. The meeting ended with many suggestions and reforms one of which was "... we demand that the government should consider all those who believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a religious leader a minority equal to many non-Muslim minorities in the country and give them one seat in Punjab's parliament".
Other suggestions were so reasonable and clear that enemies were unable to attack them, and when some invective writers did, their influence was null among the educated.
A great number of educated Pakistanis were not convinced that the suggestion which demanded the separation of Qadiyanis was reasonable and necessary. But here, I am going to explain quite clearly why all Muslim scholars agreed to stand by this suggestion.
Being an independent non-Muslim minority is a natural and reasonable result of all that Qadiyanis chose for themselves. They caused and urged everything that result in making them a non-Muslim community. The first of which is their fabrication of the meaning of "the Last of Allah's apostles", by which they differed from all Muslims who believe in Mohammad (peace be upon him) as the Last Apostle and that there will be no apostles after him until the day of judgment takes place. This is the meaning which the Apostle's companions understood and derived from the following verse "Mohammad in not the father of any of your men, but the Apostle of Allah and the Last Apostle" (Sura Al-Ahzab verse 40). The Apostle's companions fought all those who pretended being apostles after the death of Mohammad (peace be upon him). And this was the meaning which Muslims understood from all the sources, and thus they did not and do not accept any one who pretends to be an apostle.
Qadiyanis only, and for the first time in the history of Muslims, interpreted the Quranic phrase "The Last of the Apostles" (*Malfuzal Ahmadiya by M.Manzur Ilahi pp.290*) to mean that Mohammad is the Apostle's stamp which certifies and signs other Apostle's Messages. What we have said can be proven by the texts quoted here from Qadiyanis books and essays. Here are three quotations.
--"The promised Christ (peace be upon him) said in his interpretation of `Khatamu Nabiyeen': what is meant is that no Prophet's message can be authorized and certified except by Mohammad's stamp. As every document is not accepted unless affirmed or confirmed by stamp and signature, so every message that is not confirmed by Mohammad's stamp is not true. (Malfuzal Ahmadiya edited by M.Manzur Ilahi pp.290)
--"We do not deny that Mohammad (peace be upon him) was the seal of prophets, but what the majority of people understand contradicts the greatness of the prophet (peace be upon him) since it leads to the conviction that the prophet had bereft his nation from Allah's greatest favor - prophets. What is meant by this phrase is that the prophet is the seal which confirms messages after his, so there will be no prophet if not affirmed by the holy prophet Mohammad. In this meaning only we do believe". (Al-Fadl, 22 Sept 1939)
--"The seal is the stamp, and if the holy prophet is the stamp, how can he be a stamp and no prophets to be confirmed". (Al-Fadl, 22 Sept 1923)
The differences between all Muslim and Qadiyanis are not limited to the explanation or the fabrication of one word "Khatem", but differences went to extremes since Qadiyanism claimed openly and frankly that not only one prophet is likely to appear after Mohammad (peace be upon him) but thousands of prophets. This is to be found in Qadiyani texts, some of which are the following "The rise of many new prophets is as clear a fact as the sun in midday". (The Reality Of Qadiyanism by Mirza Bashir Mahmud pp.228)
--"Muslims falsely claim that the sources of Allah ran out and no more prophets will appear. They do not justly estimate God. As for me, I say that not only one prophet may appear but thousands". (Anwar Khilafat by Mirza Bashir Mahmud pp. 62)
--"If a man sharpened swords close by my neck threateningly asking me to say that no prophet will appear after Mohammad(peace be upon him) I would say to him, you are a liar, it is right, there must be prophets after him". (Ibid. pp.65)
After Ghulam Ahmad had opened the way of messages and prophets, he pretended he was a prophet. Qadiyanis believed his pretense and accepted it completely. We quote here some of their declarations and sayings to witness to their deviations and fabrications as well as can be.
--"The promised Christ declared his claim to a Message and to be a prophet, as he wrote `I am a prophet and an apostle' (Al-Badr 5 Mar 1908), or as he also wrote `I am a prophet according to Allah's orders. If I deny this I am sinful. And If Allah calls me thus how can I deny it. I will stand by this claim until my death' (Letter to Akhbar Am by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad written three days before his death and published on his date of death i.e., 26 May 1908).
--"The characteristics Islam gives of the promised Christ means that is truly a prophet". (The Reality Of The Message by Mirza Bashir pp.174)
An essential element in all the persons who pretend to be prophets is to charge those who do not believe in him with disbelief and refection of faith. This is exactly what Qadiyanis do in their congregational speeches and publications against Muslims who deny their pretense. I quote the following from their speeches:
--"All Muslims who do not swear fealty to Ghulam Ahmad are disbelievers, even if they have not heard his name". (Ayina Sadakat by Mirza Bashir Eddin pp. 35)
--"Every man who believes in Moses but not in Jesus Christ, in Mohammad but not in Ghulam Ahmad is not only a disbeliever, but in the deepest levels of rejection of faith". (Word Of Demarcation by Bashir Ahmad pp 110).
--"Since we believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet, and all non-Ahmadis disbelieve in him, we consider non-Ahmadis disbelievers according to the Quranic verse which says that in one prophet is a rejection of the whole prophets".(Mirza Bashir Ahmad's article in Al-Fadl, 26 May 1922).
Qadiyanis not only say they are anti-Muslim in Ghulam Ahmad's message, but say that there are nothing to connect them with Muslims since their God, Islam, Quran prayer and fasting are unlike the Muslims.
Qadiyani caliph's speech published in Al-Fadl on 21 Aug 1927, under the title of `Advice for Students' explains to his followers the differences between Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis. He says "... Since the promised Christ said that their Islam, their God, and their pilgrimage are unlike ours, we always differ from them in every thing".
In Jul 30, 1931, Al-Fadl published another speech by the Qadiyani caliph in which he mentioned a dispute that ensued between two groups of Qadiyanis. One reasoned that since differences between Qadiyanis and Muslims are known, and the promised Christ has clarified them there is no need to establish independent Qadiyani schools: we can learn all undisputed matters in Muslim schools. The other group disagreed. While they were still arguing, the promised Christ himself entered and listened to their dispute. Then, he gave his judgment saying: "It is wrong to say that we differ from Muslims only in the matter of Christ's death. We disagree with them in the wholeness of God, in the prophet, (peace be upon him), in the Quran, in prayer, in pilgrimage and in Al-Zakat. In short, he explained to them that we disagree quite completely with Muslims concerning all religious matters".
Qadiyanis themselves broke relations with Muslims in accordance with the great gap they had dug between them and Muslims. They organized themselves independently, as if they were a non-Muslim minority as affirmed by their own writings.
--"The promised Christ made it clear that Ahmadis should not be led in prayer by a Muslim. Many letters come questioning this matter. My answer to them all is that no matter how many times you repeat the question, I will answer that it is not right, not right, not right to be led in prayer by a non-Ahmadiyan". (Anwar Khilafat by Mirza Bashir Mahmud pp. 89)
--"We must neither believe in non-Ahmadiyan Islam, nor be led by them in prayer, because in our opinion they are disbelievers in one of Allah's prophets". (Ibid. pp. 90)
--"If a non-Ahmadi's son died why ,we do not pray for him though he does not disbelieve in Ghulam Ahmad as the promised Christ! I myself ask those who have questioned me why we do not pray for the son of a Hindu or a Christian when they die....The non-Ahmadi's son is one of the non-Ahmadis and for this reason prayer for them is not right". (Ibid. pp.93)
--"The promised Christ was loathsome of an Ahmadiyan who wanted to let his daughter a non-Ahmadiyan. The man asked him many times, but the promised Christ ordered him not to do so. Then the man allowed his daughter marriage after the death of the promised Christ, so the caliph drove him away from his religious position and did not accept his penitence though the man repeated it many times until six years elapsed". (Ibid. pp. 93-94)
--"The promised Christ did not allow any transaction with Muslims, except those permitted to be so with Christians and Jews. He distinguished us from Muslims in prayer, prohibited intermarriage with them, and prayer for their dead, so what is left to connect us with them? Interactions between people depend on two things and have two forms; a religious and a worldly transactions. The greatest means of religious transactions is to pray together and to intermarry. These two kinds are prohibited in our religion, and if you say that we are allowed to marry Muslim girls, I say that this applies to Christians, too. And if you question me why it is right to greet non-Ahmadis, my answer will be that according to a true prophet's Hadith, he returned the greetings of Jews". (Word Of Demarcation published in Rioy av Religinter, pp. 69)
Not only did Qadiyanis broke relations and transactions with Muslims in their speeches and writings, but they did so in practice as hundreds of thousands of Muslims had reported. They made an independent nation of themselves refusing to pray or intermarry with Muslims.
The problem being so, it is unreasonable that Qadiyanis remain a part of the Muslim community. It is not necessary that their independence should be legally enacted, since this had been a fact during the last fifty years.
By their attitude, Qadiyanis have proved what was difficult to prove before this time concerning the wisdom and practical benefits of the cessation of Allah's messages. In the past, one used to wonder why Allah's revelation and inspiration and Apostles cease to come.
Nowadays, experience has proven the great wisdom and beautiful benefits of this good favor from Allah. The belief that Mohammad was the last prophet united all monotheists in following only one prophet, and thus endowed them with what strengthened and ensured their unity and interactions. The renewal of a doctrine by many prophets separate the nation into many communities. If we expel Qadiyanis, none will dare to rise among us and pretend a new message to destroy our unity and solidarity. But if we overlook Qadiyanism, we will help and encourage many pretenders to rise and feign, and thus we participate in harming Muslim solidarity. And if we neglect this danger, our example will be followed by our sons, and thus the destruction will not stop and our society will face a new kind of danger everyday; dangers which split the Muslim nation.
This is our true argument on which we base our demands of making Qadiyanis a minority which has the rights of any non-Muslims minority. In fact, the argument that reaches home is with us and no other reasonable argument can be brought against our demand. Those who oppose our demand want to divert people from it with pretexts and objections that have nothing to do with the matter under question. They say, for instance, that various Muslim groups are still charging each other with disbelief and, if we go on separating group after another, the nation will vanish. Moreover, they say there are independent Muslim sects, as Qadiyanism, though they do not differ with Muslims in doctrines. Thus, they ask us whether we still intend to break relations with them or whether we chose to treat Qadiyanis a such out of hatred and wrath.
Many others were deceived by Qadiyanis' call to Islam. "Qadiyanis are defending Islam against Christian and Aryan attacks, and spreading it all over the world, so it is right to treat them as you do", they used to say. But we are going to discuss each of these points to answer any possible question.
1. It is lamentable true that Muslims' various groups are still charging each other with disbelief, but it is wrong to make this a pretext for Qadiyanism as a true Muslim sect; that is because:
a) It is unreasonable to give examples of bad charges and judge that any charge is unacceptable, and that charging anyone with disbelief is not right. In fact, it is as wrong to charge people with disbelief for trivial differences as to accept clear and certified deviations from the fundamental principles of Islam. Those who conclude from false charges against some scholars that all kinds of charges are not right are requested to answer whether a Muslim remains a believer if he pretends to be God or a prophet, or if he deviates from Islam's fundamental doctrines.
b) Muslim groups and sects whose charges against each other are being utilized held a conference in Karachi and agreed on the fundamental principles of the Muslim state. They agreed on the same principles because each considers the other a Muslim group or sect. None of them charged the other of being out of pale, though there were minor differences among them. Thus, to think that separating Qadiyanism from the Muslim nation will be a cause for separating many others is an illusion.
c) The Muslim nation's charge of Qadiyanis with disbelief is unlike any charge against others. Qadiyanis falsely pretended the existence of a new prophet who considers those who believe in him a separate nation and those who do not as disbelievers. Thus, all Qadiyanis agree on charging Muslims with rejection of faith, and Muslims have judged Qadiyanis as disbelievers, too.
Hence, it becomes quite clear that this is a fundamental difference which cannot be considered trivial and minor differences, as among various Muslim sects.
2. No doubt there are some sects other than Qadiyani who have withstood Muslims and broken their relationship with them, and organized their sects independently, but the wrong these have done is quite different from that done by Qadiyanis in many respects.
a) These sects have completely separated themselves from the Muslim nation to the extent that they have become like sl*g lying by the road which is neither harmful nor harmed. Their existence is bearable. Qadiyanis mix with Muslims, pretending to believe in their doctrines, discuss them with others, and to argue in the name of Islam, seeding, in fact, to split members off the Muslim community and win them to their side. A great tumult, disgraceful disunity, and oppressive occupations befell Muslims from Qadiyanis agency to foreign countries. For this and many other reasons we cannot abide with them.
b) The sects that have differences with the Muslim community are judged by Islamic jurisprudence. It decides whether their private beliefs drive them out of pale. And even if we suppose that they are not followers of Islam, their beliefs will not endanger Muslims and will not cause any social, economic, and political problems. But Qadiyanis' fabrication do endanger the faith of hundreds of thousands of Muslims and cause a social problem in every Muslim family that is influenced by them to the extent that husband forsakes his wife, and father abandons his son, and an enmity rises between two brothers. Moreover, other non-Qadiyani sects do not have any political trends that can be considered a danger to our national life. Qadiyanis do have some dangerous political tendencies that cannot be overlooked.
Qadiyanis were quite certain that, in an independent free Muslim society, a pretended message could not grow up or achieve its aims. They know that the Muslim nation abhors such pretenses as these which disperse Muslims, destroy Islamic laws, and split Muslim society.
Being aware of the attitude of the prophet's companions towards pretenders of holy messages, and of the fact that whenever Muslims take power in any country they will never admit new and false pretenses, Qadiyanis chose to connect themselves with disbeliever government because under no other shelter they can destroy Islam by feigning it.
They have made the Muslim nation their prey since they call to their doctrines, in the name of Islam. They know so well that it is in their interest to support foreign occupation because it suffocates Muslims and helps them achieve gains and destroy Islam. An independent and free Muslim nation is a hateful unfruitful land which they abhor greatly.
We can quote many texts taken from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's assertions and from his followers' declarations, but it suffices us to quote some and without commentary.
--"The English Government has bountifully rewarded, helped, and favored us to the extent that if we leave this country neither Mecca, nor Istanbul would shelter us. So how came you to doubt its goodness". (Ahmadiyan Talks, vol 1 pp.146)
--"I am unable to perform what I wish in Mecca, Medina, Domascus, Persia, Kabul or Rome except under this government's protection for whose glory and victory I do pray God". (Conveying the Message by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, vol VI pp. 69)
--"Oh, just think a little which land all over the world will shelter you, if you leave this country. Mention one government that will welcome and shelter you. All Muslim countries detest you and wish to kill you because, in their opinion, you are disbelievers. So estimate well the heavenly favor (the favor of British occupation) and be aware that Allah had not brought the British into this country except for your welfare and interests. If catastrophes befall the British, you will not escape their dire effect and if you demand a proof of what I say, go and find shelter under any other regime and when you do this you will see what happens to you. The British are Allah's mercy and blessing, and a citadel for your protection. Estimate the British well and love them dearly because they are a thousand times better than Muslims who oppose you. It is sufficient to convince you with only one thing: the British do not wish to humiliate or slaughter you". (Ghulam Ahmad's valuable advice in conveying the message vol 1, pp. 123)
--"It is well known to all those who study the history of nations how the Persian government maltreated Mirza Ali Mohammad Bab, the founder of Babism and his followers. It destroyed Babism for nothing else than religious disputes. It is as well known how the Turkish government ill-treated Bhah'Allah, the founder of Baha'ism and his followers between 1863-1893. It imprisoned them in Istanbul first, then in Edranovel and Acca. We also not know any other three countries which demonstrated religious fanaticism and narrowness and which do not cope with the age of civilization and culture. Our knowledge of these three countries leads us to the conviction that the freedom of Ahmadis is closely related to the British throne.
All true Ahmadis who believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a holy prophet sent by Allah to people do believe, without any little bit of flattery, that the British Government is Allah's favor and the shade of His mercy. They also believe that the life of the British Government is theirs". (Al Fadl 13 Sept 1914)
These above mentioned assertions quite clearly certify to the fact that this gang of pretenders are aware of the benefits of disbelievers' occupation of Muslim counties because under the protection of occupation they can achieve their aims. If Muslim got power into their hands, these pretenders will be crashed because free Muslims will not abide with those who destroy their religion and split their society.
More dangerous still is Qadiyanis tendencies to establish an independent state in Pakistan. One year after the rise of Pakistan, the Qadiyani caliph made a speech in Ku'ta in Jul 23, 1948, published in Al Fadl, in Aug 13, 1948. He said "British Plukhistan is allotted to you. (Now part of Pakistani Plukhistan). Its population is five or six hundred thousand inhabitants. Though less populated than other districts, it has a great importance. As individuals are valuable in our world, this district is as valuable as any part of Pakistan. An example from the American constitution will clarify its importance. Each state has an equal number of representatives no matter how big or populated it is. Now if we add British Plukhistan to Blukhistan district, the inhabitants will number a million. I think you realize the difficulty of converting the people of a big district. But don't you see that we can convert the people of a small district? If we take care we will spread Ahmadiyan banners over it all. Our doctrine will not succeed unless its roots are deep in the ground. Thus work and spread your doctrines and make them solidly rooted. Establish it in a place first and then if we succeed in converting people we will be proud of our district. As for converting people it is not an easy matter".
After all this talk, I wish to ask those who want us to abide with Qadiyanis and their deeds and who cling to the pretext that there are many sects in Islam whether there are such dangerous tendencies and policies as those of Qadiyanis. Does any sect find Islam harmful, and anti Islamic system beneficial? Is any sect going to abhor Muslims and prepare to establish an independent state in the heart of an Islamic regime? It appears that there is no sect that behaves as Qadiyanism and thus we ask why they want us to treat Qadiyanism as other sects?
This minor sect faces with another problem, it demands independence from us. Is it not right that we should expel it out of pale?
It has been said that necessity drives man to demand anything. The truthfulness of his demand depends on the acuteness of his necessity. Qadiyanis' existence among the Muslim majority harms Muslims greatly, for this the majority demands the legal separation of this harmful minority from its community. Qadiyanis are, in practice, independent from the Muslim majority and utilize their independence to organize their sect and destroy Islam's principles according to a pre-plotted methods. They also hide behind Islam and throw the seeds of split and differences among Muslims. By their cunning method of pretending Islam, they gain more administrative positions and employments. This harms the community and thus what pretext remains for any to let the minority persecute the majority or to refuse our demand of legal separation of Qadiyanis from the Muslim nation.
The majority did not create cause for separation, but the minority did when they established independent societies and broke social and religious relations with Muslims. This refusal to be legally separated from Muslims makes Qadiyanis utterly responsible for their refusal.
Allah had endowed you, readers, with mind and insight so look how they refuse to accept the results of their deeds. If they want to deceive, harm, and mar the unity of Muslims, how do you let the majority, while you are its representatives, fall a prey to the cunning of this deceitful minority.
Let us deal with the last problem which claims that since Qadiyanis defend Islam and spread it, it is not right to treat them as we do.
In fact, this is a groundless argument which tempted some newly educated people. We ask them to study and contemplate what we are going to quote from the writings from Ghulam Ahmad himself which will strip the aims of this pretender's defense of Islam. He says "I have been publishing books in English, Arabic, Persian and Urdu, out of my own enthusiasm to convince Muslims that their duty is to be faithful to the British Government that they should leave the notion of the holy strive and shun waiting for the Mehdi who sheds blood and all other trivial illusions which cannot be verified by the Quran. If they still adhere to these mistakes they must not, at least, deny the favors of this generous government or they will be sinners of disloyalty by Allah's laws". (Tiryak Al Kuloub 28 Oct 1902 pp.307)
In this same petition to the British Government he writes, "It is time I proudly say to my charitable government that this is my twenty year service to you. No Muslim family in British India can do as mine did. It is quite clear that twenty-year-long continuous effort to convince people with the above mentioned teachings cannot possibly be the work of a hypocrite. It is the work of a man who feels faithfulness and sincerity towards this government. I confess that I discuss religious matters with other priests, but with honest intentions. I have published many arguments about Christianity, but I also confess that when some missionaries wrote invective against Islam like the impolite wording of the mischievous argument in Nur Afshan in which the missionary charged our prophet with robbery, lust, adultery with his daughter, lies, and bloodshed, I feared lest these writings irritate Muslims who are quickly angered, so I found it a good policy to write against these books in order to extinguish the fire of Muslims' wrath and lessen the consequent general abhorrence and to deaden the anger of people who may react and cause disturbances that threaten the national security. It is clear that I only wrote against these invective books, because I found that writing was the only way to extinguish the flame of wrath among Muslim enthusiasts". (pp. 308-309) Then he goes on to say "All I wrote against missionaries was motivated by a wish to control Muslims with wisdom and entertain them and deaden their monstrous rebellious minds. I declare I am the most faithful and the most helpful Muslim to the British Government. There are three causes which brought me up to this first rate loyalty to the British; the first is my father's influence, the second is the great favors of this government, Allah's revelation". (pp. 309-310)
Mirza also wrote the same in the annex of his book Shahadatu'l Quran entitled a request worthy of the government's favor, "My religion which I declare once and again is that Islam is divided into two parts. The first is to obey God, the second is to obey the government which ensures the nation's security, shelters us, and protects us from oppressors. This government that we should all obey is the British government".
We also find in his Conveying The Message, vol. VII, a petition to his majesty the district ruler in which he assured the ruler of his family's sincerity to the British Government. He reported the letters Mirza Ghulam Murat Khan had received from Lahore's ruler and Punjabi financial advisor, as well as other British rulers who witnessed to his great services which denote his sincerity, faithfulness, loyalty, and love to the British, and enumerated the most important members of his family who served the British. Then he said ,"The most important work to which I was and still am devoted to is to divert the hearts of Muslims from Islam towards sincerity, love, loyalty and truthful gratitude to the British government, and to get rid of wrong illusions such as the holy war and other silly beliefs which impair sincere relations with the British (pp. 10).
I did not only concentrate on filling the hearts of Indian Muslims with sincere obedience to the British, but also wrote many books in Arabic, Persian and Urdu in which I clarified to the inhabitants of Muslim countries how we spend the days of our life in security, happiness, prosperity, and freedom under the British Government's sheltering care". (pp. 10) Then, he gave a long list of his books which certify to his sincere love and great loyalty to the British. Then, he wrote, "The government should verify whether those thousands of Muslims who call me a disbeliever, swear at me and at my followers, and harm us because I wrote thousands of declarations which were full of my grateful thanks to the government dictated by myself and out of my conscience, heart, and utter conviction and published them in all the Arab countries. Are not these matters clear? I assert that my sect has a first-rate loyalty to the British government and that it is the most sincere, faithful and loyal Muslim sect, because it declares its readiness to sacrifice everything for the British. The principles of the British do not, in any sense, endanger ours". Then he wrote, "I am certain that so long as my followers increase, those who believe in the holy war against occupation decrease. Belief in me is a denial of the existence of a holy war". (pp. 17)
Disregarding whether this language and these expressions are worthy of a prophet, we wish to attract the reader's attention to the fact that these are the aims of the founder of this religion and these are the purposes for which he exerted himself, "defended Islam", and "spread its teachings". Is this service to "Islam" still worthy of thanks and respect after all that we have seen of its stimuli and aims? And if it is still difficult for some people to know the reality of this service to Islam, we ask them to contemplate what we are going to quote from Qadiyanis' confessions.
-- "We came across a book by an Italian engineer who held an important position in Afghanistan. The book was once published and by mere chance only that we got this rare copy. In it, the author says that Sahib Zadeh Abdullatif, a Qadiyani, was killed in Afghanistan, because he was urging people to shun 'the holy war'. The government feared lest his call weakens the passion for freedom in the hearts of Afghanis and thus enslave them to the British. We deduce from this fact that Afghanistani regime did not kill that Qadiyani, except because he called people to shun 'the holy war'. (Mirza Bashir's speech on a Friday Al-Fadl 6 Aug 1935).
-- Afghanistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs issued the following declaration, "After Mulla Abdulhalim Jihar Asiyanis and Mulla Nur Ali Hanuti had become Qadiyanis, they began to teach their fabricated doctrines in the name of reform.....After some time, they were arrested for another matter and tried. Letters from some foreigners were confiscated which prove their agency and conspiracy against the interests of Afghanistan. The letters reveal quite clearly how far they went in selling themselves up to the enemies of Afghanistan". (Al-Fadl, 3 Mar 1925)
-- "Though I went to Russia to call people to Qadiyanism, I always did and served the British Government at the same time because our interests and British Government's are in complete harmony with each other". (Mohammad Amin, a Qadiyani preacher in his essay published in Al-Fadl 28 Sep 1922)
--"The world considers us British agents. When a German minister participated in the opening of Ahmadiyan center in Germany, his government blamed him and asked him 'why did you participate in a special occasion related to people who are British agents'". (A speech by Qadiyani's caliph Nov 1934)
--"We hope that with the increase of British empire, the chances for more converts from Muslims and non-Muslims will increase". (Opinions concerning Lord Harding's tour in Iraq published in Al-Fadl, 11 Feb 1910)
--"The British Government is like paradise to us. Ahmadis are going on well under the shelter of this paradise. If you leave it, you will see what frightening shower of poisonous arrows will come down upon you heads. So why don't you thank this government's favors when you all know what its interests are united with ours, its desolation means ours, and its prosperity affects ours. Wherever this government wins a new country to its domain we win a new field for our doctrines". (Al-Fadl 19 Oct 1915)
--"The relations between Qadiyanis and the British Government are unlike any other; that is because our interested demand this. What benefits the British Government enriches us, and as the British empire increases our chances for progress increase. if it is harmed - God forbid - we will not be able to live safely. (Qadiyanis caliph's declaration Al-Fadl 27 Jul 1918)
Thus, we have clarified the reality of Qadiyanism, uncovering its doctrines, trends, and deeds. And now we are going to explain the rise of this sect.
1. Half a century elapsed and Muslims were still living the worst kind of life under British occupation. Then suddenly a man pretended he was a prophet. He claimed that it was insufficient for Muslims to believe in Muhammad (PBUH), but they should, if they wanted true faith and the right Islam, believe in him, too. Disbelievers in him are out of the Islamic pale. Thus, a pretender rises among the unified Muslim nation to say he is a prophet.
2. According to his false pretense, this man established a new community and an independent society which opposed Muslims as Hindus and Christians do, and disagreed with Muslim beliefs, habits, hopes, and sufferings.
3. The founder of this new community felt, since the beginning of his pretense, that Muslim society cannot bear to be destroyed, so he and his gang chose to be loyal, sincere, and loving servants of the British occupation. This was not only a practical policy, but also in awareness of the fact that his interest are consistent with the victory of the British, not only in India but also in the other Muslim countries in order to spread his poison and fabrications.
4. This sect, according to a conspiracy with the British, disappointed all Muslims' efforts during the past fifty years to separate it from the Muslim community. The government continued to insist on the sect being considered part and parcel of Muslims despite all differences. Muslims were harmed greatly by these measures, while Qadiyanism won great benefits.
The government, despite all scholars' efforts, continued to convince Muslims that Qadiyanis are one of the sects of Islam to enable Qadiyanis to spread their doctrines among Muslims. A Muslim will not abstain from following Qadiyanism, if it is legally considered a Muslim sect, and this benefits Qadiyanis greatly because they are increasing their numbers and power. Muslims are harmed because a new community which opposed them was growing up like cancer in their body.
The plight of Qadiyanism appeared in Punjab, harmed, and destroyed it; so it was natural that the most wrathful Muslims against Qadiyanis are the Punjabis.
This sect won all the favors of the British Government and the most army, police, justice, and administrative posts in the country. It is strange that this sect won all these posts from those assigned to Muslims because the government considers it one of the Muslim sects and continues to convince Muslims that these posts are assigned to them only. Muslims are treated as such in economy, trade, industry, and agriculture.
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote 
Topic: Evolution of Religion
Tweet
Topic Options