January 29th, 2020
New area: Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and Matters — See Title Page and List of Contents
— latest, 9th July 2018: Can Muslims (-women) marry Non-Believers
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
1. A man said to the Holy Prophet:
فَقَالَ الرَّجُلُ آمَنْتُ بِمَا جِئْتَ بِهِ، وَأَنَا رَسُولُ مَنْ وَرَائِي مِنْ قَوْمِي
“I believe in what you have been sent with, and I am a messenger (rasul) of my people whom I have left behind.” (Bukhari, hadith 63)
2. A man was sent to Abu Bakr with a command from the Holy Prophet. The man was called the messenger.
فَأَتَاهُ الرَّسُولُ
“So the messenger (rasul) came to him (Abu Bakr)” (Bukhari, hadith 678).
3. Regarding the same incident:
فَأَتَاهُ الرَّسُولُ فَقَالَ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَأْمُرُكَ أَنْ تُصَلِّيَ بِالنَّاسِ.
“So the messenger (rasul) came to him and said: The Messenger of Allah commands you to lead people in prayer” (Bukhari, hadith 687).
4. Uthman sent a messenger to call someone to him:
جَاءَ رَسُولُ عُثْمَانَ
“the messenger (rasul) of Uthman came…” (Bukhari, hadith 3696).
5. The Holy Prophet sent a man with a message to Ka‘b ibn Malik. Ka‘b narrated this incident, saying:
إِذَا رَسُولُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَأْتِينِي
“when the messenger (rasul) of the messenger (rasul) of Allah came to me” (Bukhari, hadith 4418).
6. When the Holy Prophet called various clans of the Quraish to gather to listen to him:
أَرْسَلَ رَسُولاً لِيَنْظُرَ مَا هُوَ
Those who could not come “sent a messenger (rasul) to see what it was” (Bukhari, hadith 4770).
7. When the Holy Prophet asked Mu‘adh ibn Jabal certain questions and was pleased with his replies, he said:
الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي وَفَّقَ رَسُولَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ لِمَا يُرْضِي رَسُولَ اللَّهِ
“Praise be to Allah Who granted the messenger (rasul) of the messenger (rasul) of Allah that which pleases the messenger (rasul) of Allah” (book: ‘Judges’, ch. 11, hadith 3592)
Those readers interested in the pre-1914 Ahmadiyya beliefs about the claims of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad may find useful the latest addition to our website, which is accessible from this page of contents.
Please see at this link a brief note which I have prepared on the book The Prophet Promised in World Scriptures, a 2013 publication by two Turkish authors, Ali Unal and Harun Gultekin. This book covers the same subject and ground as Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi’s book Muhammad in World Scriptures, a Lahore Ahmadiyya publication.
What is most remarkable is that this book frequently mentions Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi and his book, and fully acknowledges making use of it. Such acknowledgement is quite rare to see in writings by Muslims who use material from his book. The authors have also added their own discussion and analysis of the subject, so this book (unlike other such writings) is not merely a copy of the Maulana’s book. Our congratulations to these authors!
— Zahid Aziz
In the Lahore Ahmadiyya literature, a statement by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad from an Arabic section in his (largely) Urdu book Haqiqat-ul-Wahy has long been given as follows:
“And I have been called nabi by Allah by way of metaphor, not by way of reality.”
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, Zameema, pp. 64–65; Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 22, pp. 688–689).
Our friend Kamrul Hasan Siam came across the Qadiani Jamaat English translation of the complete book Haqiqat-ul-Wahy and searched for long to find this statement in it, and failing to find it he then asked me where it was. So I looked in the Qadiani English translation and found it in the following words:
“I have been granted the name ‘Prophet’ by Allah, not in its original sense [of being raised independently], but as a subordinate Prophet.” (p. 878)
The statement in Hazrat Mirza sahib’s book is exactly as we have been translating it, the word for metaphor being majaz and the word for reality being haqiqat. A person being called “prophet” by way of metaphor means that he is not a prophet, and Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has made this point further clear by adding: “not by way of reality.”
If there could be any doubt about what he means by metaphor and reality, it is removed by his explanation, earlier in the same book, of how prophets of God were called as ‘sons of God’. He writes:
“In the earlier scriptures the perfectly righteous ones have been called sons of God. This also did not mean that in reality (haqiqat) they were sons of God, for this is heresy and God is clear of having sons and daughters. The meaning is, in fact, that God had manifested Himself as an image in the clear mirror of (the hearts of) these perfectly righteous ones. …
As to Jesus being called son of God in the Gospels, if Christians had remained within the limit of saying that just as Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon etc. were called sons of God in a metaphorical (isti‘arah) sense in the books of God, in the same way is Jesus so called, then there would have been no objection. For, just as these prophets were called son metaphorically in the books of the earlier prophets, our Holy Prophet has been called God in some prophecies. The fact is that neither were all those prophets sons of God, nor is the Holy Prophet God. All these are metaphorical expressions based on love.”
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, pp. 63–64; Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 22, p. 65–66).
Just as, in the earlier scriptures, prophets had been called ‘sons of God’ or even ‘God’ metaphorically, similarly it was by way of metaphor that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was called ‘prophet’ in his revelation and in a Hadith prophecy about him. According to Islam, the prophets did not become sons of God or God in reality by any stretch of the imagination. However, Christians took Jesus for son of God in reality, which was a great error. This amply illustrates what is meant by metaphor as opposed to reality. Similarly, Hazrat Mirza sahib was not a prophet in reality, and it is a great error to consider him so.
It is clear that the Qadiani translation of this statement has no justification whatsoever. They have converted “prophet by way of reality” into “independent prophet” and converted “being called prophet by way of metaphor” into “being a subordinate prophet”, while the statement contains no mention of independent or subordinate at all.
— Zahid Aziz
Please see this link to this new publication.
The work Faḍl al-Bārī is an Urdu translation of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī with extensive explanatory notes by Maulana Muhammad Ali. Its first volume, consisting of nearly the first half of Bukhari, was published in 1932, and the rest as the second volume in 1937.
Maulana Muhammad Ali, shortly before his death in 1951, had started an English translation of this voluminous work. He reached only as far as Book 2, ch. 21, and left the manuscript with Maulana Aftab-ud-Din Ahmad to continue the translation. Maulana Aftab-ud-Din Ahmad was a scholar and missionary of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement who had, during the 1930s, served as Imam of the Woking Mosque and Muslim Mission in Woking, Surrey, England. He had also been editor of the Islamic Review and was since 1950 editor of The Light, the Lahore Ahmadiyya weekly organ. Sadly he died in 1956, having completed the first three Parts and some of the fourth Part. The first three Parts were published in 1956, 1962 and 1973 respectively, and the incomplete fourth Part was serialised in The Light between 1983 and 1985.
(Note: The collection of Bukhari has, like the Holy Quran, been divided into 30 roughly equal parts, irrespective of subject-matter.)
In 2015 we decided to continue the translation and take it up to the beginning of Part 8, since that is the point where Bukhari completes his coverage of the fundamentals of Islam. The Parts that we completed were placed online individually as they were done, and now, in October 2019, we have combined them into one volume (see link given above).
There is, of course, a well known English translation of Sahih Bukhari by Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan. However, it contains almost no commentary. I am unaware of any other English translation of Sahih Bukhari. In Urdu there are several translations and commentaries of Bukhari. So it appears that our work is the only English translation with commentary of Bukhari (although, of course, it consists of only the first 2046 reports out of the total of 7563 reports in Bukhari).
In the preface to his Urdu work, Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote (and this part of his preface is included in our English translation):
“I have to confess my handicap that I lack a sufficiently broad knowledge of the field of Ḥadīth. Most of all, I regret that, for the translation of Bukhārī, I could not benefit from the vast and detailed knowledge of the learned Maulana Nur-ud-Din, as I had done in case of translating the Holy Qur’ān. This regret was expressed by the Maulana [Nur-ud-Din] himself in the last days of his life when he said to me: “The Qur’ān has been done, but Bukhārī remains.”
I must also mention here that this shortcoming of mine has to some extent been removed by the participation of Maulana Ahmad in this work, who shared with me the task of writing the footnotes. I also received much help from Maulana Abdus Sattar.”
The Maulana Ahmad mentioned here was the paternal grandfather of the esteemed contributor to this blog Mr Abdul Momin.
— Zahid Aziz
Around the last weekend I had read by chance in a local online UK newspaper, Birmingham Mail, speculation about the date of Eid-ul-Fitr. In this connection they displayed a table showing that on Monday 3rd June the new moon would not be visible in Makkah, Rabat the capitlal of Morocco, or various UK cities. (Note: Makkah and Morocco were listed because Muslims in UK follow moon sighting reports from these places, Makkah for obvious reasons, and Morocco because of being the nearest Muslim country.)
When Monday 3rd June came, the same online newspaper published the following news: “The date of Eid al-Fitr 2019 has been confirmed after a sighting of the first crescent of the new moon.The moon was seen at Mecca in Saudia Arabia on Monday, June 3, which is the 29th day of the holy month of Ramadan.”
On this, I e-mailed the reporter and said that this sighting was astronomically impossible, and in proof of this I referred them to the earlier story in their own newspaper (!), as well as other sources. I thought this would be the end of the matter, but the newspaper decided to publish a story based on this, to which I of course readily agreed. In fact, they published two items on this, the links to which are: item 1 and item 2.
I had hardly recovered from seeing my name in these items that a relation let me know that it had been picked up by Apple News from the UK national newspaper the Daily Express. See link.
I will let you read these yourselves, rather than summarising them.
— Zahid Aziz
Addendum to the above:
Here is a news item from The Economist, London, 8 June 2019, about moon sighting and that the Saudi Arab sighting was not accepted in some countries of the Middle East.
Here is a news item from the Urdu Daily Ummat, Karachi, 8 June 2019, about the error in the Saudi Arab announcement.
Here is a link to my Eid-ul-Fitr khutbah of today in London.
— Zahid Aziz
A well-known Muslim astronomical and moon sighting website carries the report that the first sighting of the moon anywhere in the world was in Brisbane, Australia, Tuesday 4 June. This would be at 5.00 pm, local sunset time. That corresponds to Tuesday 4 June, 10 am in Makkah, 9 am in Europe and 8 am in UK. See:
https://www.moonsighting.com/
It was announced from Saudi Arabia on the evening of Monday 3 June that the moon had been sighted. Due to this false announcement, most people in Saudi Arabia and many people in Europe and UK had already said their Eid prayers on Tuesday 4 June even before the new moon was sighted anywhere in the world.
— Zahid Aziz
Here is the Eid-ul-Fitr Message, June 2019, of Hazrat Ameer Dr A.K. Saeed, Head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement.