Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and Matters — See Title Page and List of Contents
See: Project Rebuttal: What the West needs to know about Islam
Refuting the gross distortion and misrepresentation of the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad and Islam, made by the critics of Islam
Read: Background to the Project
List of all Issues | Summary 1 | Summary 2 | Summary 3 — completed, 28th June 2013
Welcome to the Ramadan Daily Quran Studies for 2021
The theme for this year’s Studies is the life, work, mission and qualities of the Holy Prophet Muhammad as depicted in the Quran.
For these studies, which are added daily during Ramadan, please visit:
or see embedded page below (and use its scroll bars).
The anti-Ahmadiyya have alleged that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad recommended to the British government of India that British soldiers stationed in India should have prostitutes provided for them from Britain itself.
They have pointed to a passage in volume 1 of the book Mujaddid-i Azam, the biography of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad written by Dr Basharat Ahmad. This volume was published in Urdu in 1939 and its English translation was published as The Great Reformer in 2007. The passage in the published English translation is as follows:
“The British Government had allowed brothels in the military cantonments to service the needs of British soldiers. In order to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, the prostitutes were required to undergo medical examinations periodically. Later, under pressure from the puritanical elements of the British society, the compulsory medical examinations were made illegal. With the change of government in London, a movement was started to restore the medical exams and the London Times wrote several articles in its support.
When Hazrat Mirza learned of this, he published a notice in which he drew the attention of the government to the fact that it was only in Islam that fornication had been declared wrong and sinful under all circumstances. He petitioned the government to find ways to maintain the morals of its soldiers and to stop them from fornicating, but if this could not be done, then the government should import British prostitutes for the Britons. Indian women should not be used to satisfy the lasciviousness of the British soldiers.”
(v. 1, p. 572; underlining is ours. In the original Urdu book, see v. 1, p. 441)
I have underlined the words which are objected to by our critics.
1. Firstly, it appears that there is no writing by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad containing the underlined words. This suggestion of importing prostitutes was in fact made by an Indian newspaper which Hazrat Mirza has merely quoted in his book Arya Dharm. Before quoting it he has commented and emphasised that it is only Islam which prohibits every kind of fornication and provides teachings on its avoidance in all kinds of circumstances.
Therefore, we in the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement have no hesitation in acknowledging that an error has been made in Mujaddid-i Azam in attributing these words to him. Perhaps by a printing mistake some text has been omitted after the words “to stop them from fornicating”, which makes it appear as if the underlined words are being attributed to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
2. Secondly, it may be objected that even if Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad did not write these words, a close follower of his has done so and thinks it is appropriate advice. But why is this statement objectionable? It is simply saying that if you cannot refrain from this immoral practice then please do not involve our Indian community in it, but go and do it among your own people who regard it as legitimate. Just before this, this statement says:
“it was only in Islam that fornication had been declared wrong and sinful under all circumstances”
This is a practical approach which is adopted today by Muslims living in the West. When they find that certain immoral practices are being promoted by Western people, Muslims say to them: Go and indulge in these yourselves, but do not involve us or our children.
The Quran itself says that fornicating men and women should confine their relations between themselves, and keep separate from the believers (24:3). It also says: “Unclean things are for unclean ones and unclean ones are for unclean things, and good things are for good ones and good ones are for good things” (24:26). Can it be said that the Quran is approving of this immoral behaviour?
3. Thirdly, our critics would not have objected if the above underlined words of the statement had been different as follows:
“… but if this could not be done, then the government should do what many Muslim Ulama advocate to Muslims: that the women of the conquered countries be distributed among the soldiers of the conquering army for use as concubines (sex slaves).”
Why would our critics not object at all to making this recommendation? It is because most of them believe in the allowability of concubines. To show this, we quote from Maulana Maudoodi’s famous commentary of the Quran, Tafheem-ul-Quran, in his footnote 44 to verse 4:24. Maulana Maudoodi writes:
“(1) It is not lawful for a soldier to have conjugal relations with a female prisoner of war as soon as she falls into his hands. The Islamic Law requires that all such women should be handed over to the government which has the right to … … distribute them among the soldiers. A soldier can only have sexual relations with the woman who has been given to him by the government officially as his property.
(6) While the Shariah has imposed a limit of four on the number of wives (for one man), there is no limit on the number of captive women (for one man)…
(8) The official handing over of the property rights over a slave-girl to a man by the government has the same legal standing as the legal standing of Nikah. Therefore, there is no reason why a man who feels no aversion to Nikah should feel any aversion to sexual enjoyment with a slave-girl.”
Our critics should ponder whether, in accordance with their beliefs about concubines, the Muslim opponents of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad should have suggested to the British government that they adopt these so-called Islamic rules for their soldiers.
— Zahid Aziz
Someone by the name of Rifhan Mohamed Ibn Ahmad has sent the following submission, in relation to a thread from 2009.
The Prophet (pbuh) informed me (Hazrath Fatima) that any prophet that comes after another prophet lives half of the life of the prophet before him. And he said to me, Isa ibn Maryam lived for 120 years, so I see that I am going to leave (this world) as 60.
– Dala’il al-Nabuwwah 7:166 – Imam Bayhaqi (rh)
Apart from Dala’il al-Nabuwwah, this statement and its variations
have been narrated in other sources like Musnad Ishaq, al-Ahad wa al-Mathani, Sharh al-Mushkil al-athar and Mujam al-Kabir.
“Aisha (ra) said that, in his illness in which he died, the Holy Prophet (sa) said: ‘Every year Gabriel used to repeat the Holy Quran with me once, but this year he has done it twice. He has informed me that there is no prophet but he lives half as long as the one who preceded him. And he has told me that Jesus lived a hundred and twenty years, and I see that I am about to leave this world at sixty’.”
– Kanz al-Ummal, vol. 6, p. 160 Narrated by Fatimatuz-Zahra (ra)
Tabarani says concerning this hadith: “Its narrations are reliable, and it is reported in a number of different versions” Narrated by Aysha (ra)
– Mu’jam Tabarani Kabeer Hadith 18464,
– Tarikh Damishq 47/481-482 Ibn Asaakir
– Ibn Saa’d’s Tabaqaat Al-Kubra (2/195)
– Mawahib al-Ladinya, vol. 1, p. 42 and Hujjaj al-Kiramah, p. 428
In the Mustadrak Al Hakim, it is reported from Ibn Umar(ra) that Jesus lived to the age of 120 years. – Tafsir Kamalain
“As for what is related about the Messiah that he was raised up to heaven at the age of 33 years, there is no sound authority for this which one could turn to.”
– Zad al-Ma‘ad, vol. i, p. 20 Ibn al-Qayyim
“If Jesus and Moses had been alive, they would have had no choice but to follow me.”
– Kathir vol II, p 245 and al yawaqit wal Jawahir, part 2, page 24; Fath al-Bayan, vol. 2, p. 246; Tafsir Ibn Kathir, under verse 81 of Al Imran, Zurqani, Vol. VI, p. 54, Tibrani Kabeer.
The London Mosque Fund was a body founded in 1910 by certain prominent Muslims, mainly of Indian origin, and some British sympathisers of Islam, with the aim of building a mosque in London. Its work led eventually to the establishment of the East London Mosque, now located in Whitechapel, London.
The minutes of the meetings of its Executive Committee have been published by Cambridge University Press. These contain several references to the Woking Mosque and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, showing that the London Mosque Fund set up the Woking Mosque Trust as the body to hold the Woking Mosque and appointed Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as Imam in 1913.
The London Mosque Fund also approved a grant for Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din to rent a location in Central London for the holding of Friday prayers. The Fund approved a form of wording for the announcement of these prayers, which was as follows:
Allah – O – Akbar
The Jooma Namaz will be held at the Lindsay Hall, Notting Hill Gate, W., regularly every Friday at 12 Noon until further notice.
Mr Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din of the Mosque, Woking will deliver the sermon and the Dua will be recited by Haireddin Effindi and Lord Headley respectively in Arabic and English.
All Moslems are cordially invited.
For full details please see the latest addition to the Woking Muslim Mission website at this link.
This is an update to the news which I published below.
The page on www.ahmadiyya.org website about this case has been revised. I have added a number of scans from some original documents relating to the case. Please visit this link.
This new edition, revised and expanded by myself, is now available at Amazon:
The first edition was published in 1987, less than two years after the conclusion of the case.
— Zahid Aziz
Please see below report from Al-Fazl, 22 October 1913, of a visit by Abdullah Yusuf Ali to Qadian where he met the Head of the Movement Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din. It is reported that he was brought there by Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, who was later a founder-member of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jamaat. Yusuf Ali was at the time in the Indian Civil Service of British rule of India, as stated in the report. Later, of course, he translated the Quran into English in the 1930s.
—Zahid Aziz
This is further to the point discussed in an earlier post about quotations from the Quran being given, in recognized Islamic literature, in words differing from how they occur in the Quran. (See the earlier post.)
There is a book by Shah Ismail Shaheed (d. 1831) entitled Abaqaat. In the original Arabic book we find the following:
Here a verse of the Quran is quoted in the words: Wa in min qaryat-in illā khalā fī-hā nadhīr — “There is no town (qarya) but a warner appeared in it”. To my knowledge the actual verse in the Quran (35:24) does not say qarya (town) but umma (people).
There is an Urdu translation of Abaqaat by Maulana Manazir Ahsan Gilani (about him see link 1 and link 2). In his translation this appears as follows:
(This is at the bottom lines of page 401 of his translation, see link).
He has even added before the quotation: “Similarly, the famous Quranic verse” before quoting Wa in min qaryat-in illā khalā fī-hā nadhīr. But this wording does not occur in the Quran!
There are indeed verses in the Quran (three as far as I know) which contain the words nadhīr and qaryat-in. These are 25:51, 34:34 and 43:23, but none of these has this wording.
Most probably, Shah Ismail Shaheed mistakenly recalled qarya as occurring in 35:24, and a century later the translator Maulana Manazir Ahsan Gilani did not realise this. Human beings make mistakes like these. It doesn’t detract from their high standing and we don’t throw unfounded accusations and slurs at them.
— Zahid Aziz
“And in the mountains are streaks, white and red, of various colours and (others) intensely black. And of mankind and beasts and cattle there are various colours likewise.” (The Quran, 35:27–28)
See more such photos of these mountains at this link.
At this link, you may read in this connection the article The Philosophy of Colours in the Holy Quran by Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi.
— Zahid Aziz
The annual gathering of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Lahore took place in Lahore from December 25th to 27th, 2020. It has been taking place on around the same dates since December 1914, and is a continuation of the annual gathering or Jalsa instituted by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in December 1892.
The audio recordings of the speeches are available as follows:
Professor Mahmood Ahmad Ghazi (d. 2010) of the International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan, appeared for the defence in a court case in Cape Town in 1987. The case was brought by a Sunni Imam, Sheikh Jassiem, against the Sunni Muslim Judicial Council (MJC) and its President and involved a discussion of the point whether Jassiem was right in treating Lahore Ahmadis as Muslims after they had been declared kafir and apostate by the MJC.
Professor Ghazi, who later became Rector of International Islamic University, Islamabad, a judge in the Federal Shariah Court, and later still the Minister of Religious Affairs in Pakistan, testified to prove that Lahore Ahmadis are non-Muslim.
In her judgment of February 1990, the lady Judge Van Den Heever, assessed Ghazi’s testimony as follows:
“He has been involved with various Pakistan government bodies… As a witness Professor Ghazi has the disadvantage that he correctly concedes that where the government of the day supports an idea that idea flourishes. The Pakistan government having legislatively declared Pakistan Mirzais to be a non-Muslim minority, he himself would have problems on his return home were he to thump any but an anti-Ahmadi tub. That tub he thumped with great vigour, displaying his total bias against Mirza [Ghulam Ahmad]. He concedes that he has the “strongest possible” anti-Ahmedi feelings — a concession it was unnecessary to extract from him since he seldom missed an opportunity of running Mirza down. He was not prepared to give Mirza the benefit of any doubt whatever, to regard him as perhaps bona fide but misguided, but likened him to a “criminal” whose “justification” should not be taken as face value. Of possible interpretations put on Mirza’s words and actions, he always chose the worst. …
… his evidence was often illogical, inferences unjustified. Indeed, he appears to be more interested in the political than the spiritual aspect of Islam…
Advocate de Villiers’s comment to Ghazi “you do seem to make up rules as you go along” or words to that effect, was not without foundation. Ghazi has dual standards for apostacy and almost everything else, one for Mirza and one for others.” (pp. 93–95).
1. It is in Arya Dharm because he is contrasting the purity of the sexual morality as taught in the…
----Apr 6, 21:57