New area: Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and Matters — See Title Page and List of Contents
— latest, 23rd November 2016: Moon – Struck or Split
Refuting the gross distortion and misrepresentation of the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad and Islam, made by the critics of Islam
An example of this close relationship (and there are numerous other examples in print) is found in an article by Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig written in 1917 when a son of his died in infancy. He wrote:
"The heartfelt connection which the Promised Messiah had with me is known to everyone familiar with those times. When I took the final medical exam [to become a medical doctor] in 1897, he prayed for me, and received a revelation: 'You have passed.' Upon this, he said to me, and even wrote it in Haqiqat-ul-Wahy,: 'As there is very close relationship between me and Yaqub Baig, this is why I have been addressed in the revelation [as ‘you’] whereas Yaqub Baig is meant.'
Then the affection and kindness of the late Maulana Nur-ud-Din, khalifat-ul-Masih, is known to everyone, that he always considered me as his son. From the beginning of our connection he addressed me as 'son'. He maintained this relationship till the end. During his last illness, he would not take food or milk from anyone's hand except mine or that of Maulvi Sadr-ud-Din. And it is the grace of Allah that the very last sip he took was honey by my hand.
As to the late Maulvi Abdul Karim, it was the Promised Messiah himself who designated me as his brother, and Maulvi Abdul Karim treated me with fraternal affection till he breathed his last.
I cannot sufficiently thank Allah that He, the Almighty, provided me with so much opportunity to serve all these three elders during their lifetimes, and at the time of their final, fatal illness Allah granted me to serve them as their medical doctor." (Paigham Sulh, 22 August 1917, p. 5)
Note that it is not in Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, as stated above, but in his book Nuzul-ul-Masih (p. 223, Ruhani Khaza'in, v. 18, p. 601) that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad mentions his revelation about Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig as 'You have passed'.
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri
In my blog posts I refer to two types of Qadiani Jamaat members. One type I call ‘Mehmoodies’ and other type I call ‘Qadianis’. Many people in Qadiani Jamaat feel offended by use of term ‘Mehmoodies’. Some even complained to our current Ameer of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM). Some in LAM also think term ‘Mehmoodies’ is not appropriate. This is the reason in my blogs when I use term ‘Mehmoodies’ I write short explanation in brackets next to it. By Mehmoodies I mean those people in Qadiani Jamaat who held belief that ‘Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad was “Musleh Mahud” and do NOT believe Holy Prophet Muhmmad SAWS was the last prophet and many more prophets will come after him. Some Mehmoodies then raise objection that this set of beliefs is held by ALL members in Qadiani Jamaat. Interestingly some LAM members also erroneously believe that everyone who stayed behind in Qadian, and did not move to Lahore in 1914 at time of split in Ahmadiyya Movement of Masih Mahud Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, held the said belief.
Today I read a Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib quote from LAM member Mumtaz Ahmad Faruqui sahib book ‘Truth Trumphs’ (Urdu: Fatah-e-Haq), Second Revised Edition. This book published in 1965.
On page 2 of said book:
As to the other statement of 1914, it was given at a time when Maulvi Muhammad Ali and his friends had just left Qadian, but they still entertained hopes of effecting a reconciliation with Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, on the following terms:
According to the last Will of the Promised Messiah, the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyyah, Qadian (the Central Executive Body), would be considered as the supreme executive body whose decision shall be treated as final and binding.
Whoever is elected as an Amir or Head of the Community would take pledge from non-Ahmadis for admission into our ranks, but the already pledged Ahmadis were not to renew their “pledge” with him.
It was only on condition that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad accepted these fundamental conditions, that he could be accepted as Amir or Head of the entire Ahmadiyyah Community.
On page 5 of said book:
Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib statement published dated December 8, 1938:
Moreover Mian Sahib [QK2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad] had solemnly declared that one could take bai’at even if one did not see eye to eye with him in certain matters [here it is means have difference in beliefs—RJ]. This being his declared formula that even such people may be regarded as his followers, as call the people Muslims, whereas Mian Sahib regards them as Kafirs. Even such people also are his followers who impute Kufr to people whom Mian Sahib regards as Muslims. As for the accusers they had been his followers for years together and were very close to him.
The above two quotes from Mumtaz Ahmad Faruqui sahib tells us Maulana Muhammad also held belief that there were people living in Qadian after the split in ‘Ahmadiyya Movement of Massih Mahud Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib’ in 1914 who decided to live in Qadian and did not move to Lahore and they did NOT do ba’it of QK2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad, and they did NOT held beliefs of QK2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad. This way Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib was making distinction between two types of people living in Qadian and later in Rabwah. One type is called Mehmoodies and other type is called Qadianis.
Interestingly in Urdu section of said book in introduction Mumtaz Ahmad Faruqui sahib writes on page 5:
Here I want to thank Maulana Shaikh Abdur Rehman Misri sahib and Maulvi Abdul Mannan Omar sahib M.A. They read manuscript of this book and gave helpful advice, and made some corrections. May Allah SWT reward them.
Both Abdur Rehman Misri sahib and Abdul Mannan Omar sahib had spent good years of their adult life in Qadian. It is obvious they knew Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib was correct when he wrote that NOT everyone living in Qadian under the head ship of QK2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad held his beliefs or did his ba’it (pledge of allegiance).
1. Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote a book entitled Nur-ud-Din in response to a book Tark-i Islam by a former Muslim who joined the Hindu Arya Samaj and had explained the reasons why he had left the religion of Islam. In answering one of his objections against Islam, Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote:
“I know of no verse in the Quran containing a command which permits something or which makes something compulsory and then it is stated about the same command that what it permitted or required is forbidden. No, no, certainly not. Our Quran has nowhere said to us that a certain command in a certain verse is now absolutely abrogated. Our guide, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him, has never said: Such and such a command of the Quran is now abrogated. His holy successors were Abu Bakr and Umar, about whom God said: “And the foremost, the first of the Emigrants and the Helpers, and those who followed them in goodness — Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him” (9:100), and God declared obedience to them to be a way of earning His pleasure. They also never said that such and such a command of the Quran is abrogated, and it is not at all right to act upon it.
If naskh means to make a command void, i.e., a command is to be found in the Quran and it was abrogated, I know of no such command. If anyone claims to the contrary, he should provide evidence.”
— From the book Nur-ud-Din, p. 231–232, published from Qadian in 1904. News of its publication was announced in Badr, 1 March 1904, p. 8, foot of col. 3.
2. In his verbal teaching sessions on the Quran, commenting on verse 2:106 of the Quran (“Whatever ayat We abrogate or cause to be forgotten…”), Maulana Nur-ud-Din said:
“As to the question whether there is abrogation in the Quran or not, as far as my understanding goes I will say that I have never, till today, seen any verse which is abrogated while it is found in the Quran. There is no statement reported from the Holy Prophet Muhammad or Hazrat Abu Bakr or Umar showing that such verses are to be found in the Quran.
God says the reason for this abrogation is not Me, but because your circumstances keep on changing so My commands have to be altered.”
— Badr, Appendix, 11 March 1909, p. 19, col. 2; session dated 15 February 1909. See also his collected teaching sessions in Haqa’iq-ul-Furqan, p. 216, where this verse is numbered as 107.
(Translator’s Note: An example of what is indicated in the last statement above is that after Hijrah Muslims were allowed to fight in battle to repel their enemies, whereas before Hijrah the only command was to bear the persecution. This is change of circumstances, not abrogation of an earlier command.)
3. In his verbal teaching sessions on the Quran, commenting on verses 16:101–102 of the Quran (“And when We change an ayat for another ayat…”), Maulana Nur-ud-Din said:
“From these verses some people try to prove abrogation of verses. They face two difficulties. Firstly, they take the word ayat as meaning a verse of the Quran. Secondly, they have to show that the abrogated verse exists in the Quran.”
— Badr, Appendix, 10 February 1910, p. 147, col. 1; session dated 2 February 1910. See also his collected teaching sessions in Haqa’iq-ul-Furqan, p. 512, where these verses are numbered as 102–103.
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri
In a blog article ‘The Source of Muslim Extremism’ in The Huffington Post by Dr. Mike Ghouse, published July 11, 2016, he writes:
Contemporary Muslim scholar Hamza Yusuf writes, “This insidious disease has a source, and that source must be identified, so we can begin to inoculate our communities against it.”
Shaykh Hamza Yusuf co-founded liberal arts Zaytuna College: http://www.zaytuna.edu
His bio on faculty pages says:
“Hamza Yusuf is a president, cofounder, and senior faculty member of Zaytuna College. He is an advisor to Stanford University’s Program in Islamic Studies and the Center for Islamic Studies at Berkeley’s Graduate Theological Union. He also serves as a member of the board of advisors of George Russell’s One Nation, a national philanthropic initiative that promotes pluralism and inclusion in America. In addition, he serves as vice-president for the Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies, which was founded and is currently presided over by Shaykh Abdallah bin Bayyah, one of the top jurists and masters of Islamic sciences in the world.”
It is in my knowledge that in early 1990s Hamza Yusuf, after “testing the waters” with Professor Dr. Hibbatul Mannan Omar AKA Dr. Khalid Omar (son of Abdul Mannan Omar), highly praised Maulana Muhammad Ali English translation and Commentary of Holy Quran. Around half a dozen years ago I mentioned this to a former Quadiani, who was student of Hamza Yusuf in San Francisco Bay Area, on internet. Sometime later Hamza Yusuf was put on spot where he expressed somewhat appreciation of Maulana Muhammad Ali scholarly works. Recording of this came to public knowledge in a YouTube video. Dr. Zahid Aziz gave Eid Khutba (sermon) and quoted words of appreciation by Hamza Yusuf, see pages 4 – 5 of this link.
Eid Khutba by Dr. Zahid Aziz came into knowledge of opponents of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement. They built pressure on Hamza Yusuf. He wrote a long article to dispel the impression that he considers Maulana Muhammad Ali as a Muslim. See: "Sticks and Drones May Break Our Bones, but Fitna Really Hurts Us".
In rebuttal Dr. Zahid Aziz wrote an article: Hamza Yusuf’s retraction of his praise for Maulana Muhammad Ali
On October 31, 2015, APPNA (Association of Pakistani Physicians of North America) winter meeting dinner was held at Fairmont, San Francisco. Hamza Yusuf was key note speaker. I twice met him after the speech. I told him what is wrong with his above mentioned article. I gave him copies of the Eid Khutba by Dr. Zahid Aziz, his own article, and Dr. Zahid Aziz's rebuttal article. I also gave my cover letter. I gave him my private phone number and email address. I requested him to please read the material I gave him and asked him to email me his reply. He promised he will, and during conversation he kept looking at me with a piercing look, perhaps to memorize my face. It has been more than eight months; he did NOT get back to me. Following is portion of text of my cover letter:
Dear brother Hamza Yusuf,
Dear brother, I feel that you have factual errors in your article ‘Sticks and Drones May Break Our Bones, but Fitna Really Hurts Us’. Brother I have full conviction that guidance only comes from Allah SWT, but as a Muslim brother of yours, I feel it is my responsibility ti at the very least point out your factual errors. With this I do my duty.
Brother, please email me your rebuttal of article by Dr. Zahid Aziz. I will forward it to him for posting on his blog. I look forward to your reply. Brother you know better than me, we all will die and we all will be accountable for our oral words, written words, actions and inactions. Ref Holy Quran 33:67, 34:31-38, and 40:47-48.
Brother Hamza you must have read about Mohammad Alexander Russell Webb. He was the first American Muslim convert. He converted to Islam after correspondence with Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the MUJADDID of 14th Islamic century. After his tenure as US ambassador in Philippines, on his way back to USA he visited India. His plan was to meet Hazrat Ahmad in Qadian. Before he could get to Qadian from the port city where his ship anchored, he met many Muslim scholars who advised him against visiting Qadian. They convinced him that as his plan is to propagate Islam in USA and open Isamic Centers etc., so by his visit to Qadian and meeting with Hazrat Ahmad will discourage Muslims in India to financially contribute towards his objective in USA. Anyways, Mr. Webb did not visit Qadian and returned to USA. He did get some funds from Indian Muslims but as history is witness they did not last and he could not fulfill his mission. Later he had regrets of not visiting the reformer of the age in Qadian, and kept contacts with LAM [Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement] elders and even edited book ‘The Teachings of Islam’ which is Hazrat Ahmad’s book translation by Maulana Muhammad Ali. Brother my point is, we humans sometime due to temporal [reasons] and fear of losing popularity stray away from our belief that source of all kinds of strength is Allah SWT. Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS despite all the odds against him preached and practiced Holy Quran teachings that don’t call Kafir to anyone who says Asaalam Alikum, let alone a Kalima Shahada reciter. By the way one such person who discouraged Mr. Webb from visiting Qadian, himself accepted Hazrat Ahmad as Mujaddid of era and was an elder of LAM.
I wonder how administrations at Stanford University and Berkeley’s Graduate Theological Union will deal with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf when they come to know truth about him and find out he speaks from both sides of his mouth. On one hand he impresses people like Dr. Mike Ghouse and on other hand he endorses extremist ideologies of Pakistani Mullah-Mafia. How he will “inoculate our communities” when in principle he agrees with those ideologies?
Please read the following blog article that exposes Hamza Yusuf modus operandi: Reform In Islam To Come From Within, which says:
The economist has an interesting article on reform in Islam:
I commented as below (buried in 4 pages of comments to this economist article):
"Look, for example, at the personally courageous stance of Hamza Yusuf, an American-born scholar with a wide following in the Islamic heart-land"
Ah where was the courage of Hamza Yusuf when he backtracked and apostasized the Lahori Ahmadis and removed his youtube of half hearted praise.
Courage is exhibited when a scholar upholds principles that can be deeply unpopular at the time. Hamza Yusuf did not pass this test.
"And Pharaoh said: Chiefs, I know no god for you besides myself; so kindle a fire for me, Hāmān, on (bricks of) clay, then prepare for me a lofty building, so that I may obtain knowledge of the God of Moses, and surely I think him a liar." (The Quran, 28:38)
Pharaoh = Z.A. Bhutto.
Chiefs = His ministers
"I know no god for you besides myself" — expresses accurately what he thought about himself.
Hāmān = Yahya Bakhtiar
lofty building = Pakistan National Assembly
Moses = Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
God of Moses = His beliefs
"And he was unjustly proud in the land, he and his armies, and they thought that they would not be brought back to Us. So We caught hold of him and his armies, then We cast them into the sea, and see what was the end of the wrongdoers." (28:39-40)
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.
In 1974 Pakistani anti-HMGA Muslims were successful in getting 2nd amendment to Pakistan’s 1973 Constitution. Although on the surface they were successful in creating hindrance in mission of HMGA, but unknown to them their action created environment for spread and correction of its mission in minds of those who were on the wrong path. In aftermath of this amendment Lahore Ahmadiyya Movements members were forced to realize that HMGA teachings are needed outside the geographical boundaries of Pakistan. As a result more books of HMGA and literature of LAM got translated into European languages. And with the advent of internet, its computer servers and websites are placed and hosted outside Pakistan. Similarly, Mehmudies (those Qadianis who believe QK2 Mirza Mehmud Ahmad was Musleh Mahud) were forced to emigrate to Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Canada and USA. This is giving Mehmudies chance to correct their wrong beliefs and providing them space to revolt against their Qadiani Khalifas 2-5 teachings and policies. Interesting thing is that QK5 Mirza Masroor Ahmad knows this, but he is not in a position to tighten his grip. Recent Panama Leaks has further eroded whatever moral authority he had. Here are two such examples:
I know a Qadiani Jamaat member who is physician. He is known for opening Aftar (breaking fast in Ramadan) with Muslim friends but then not offering Mughrib prayers. Three weeks ago a common Muslim friend’s son died in accident. There was Janaza (funeral prayer) in town mosque. Before Janazah there was Asar prayer. This Qadiani physician first offered Asar prayer with common Muslims behind non-Ahmadi imam, and then offered Janazah of common Muslim behind non-Ahmadi imam. Please note there were at least 300 Muslim in mosque.
Today a colleague of mine, psychiatrist by profession, his paternal aunty (cha chi) is sister of QK 4 Mirza Tahir Ahmad, told me that Qadianis are NOT reporting their true income to Qadiani authorities for purpose of compulsory and non-compulsory Chanda (financial) collections. Qadiani authorities have started demanding W-2 form (it is official form issued by employer that reports total income and federal and state taxes etc withheld). So Qadianis have refused to provide this document to Qadiani Jamaat goons who come to collect Chanda. Instead they are told to get lost and get out of their homes.
One thing is becoming clear by the day, that Qadiani Khalifas are losing their hold on his followers and followers are questioning their Khalifa policies and beliefs.
Link to W-2 form:
Links to Panama Leaks:
Submitted by Omar Raja.
Regarding the hadith: "Prophethood will remain among you as long as Allah wills. Then Caliphate (Khilafah) on the lines of Prophethood shall commence, and remain as long as Allah wills. Then corrupt/erosive monarchy would take place, and it will remain as long as Allah wills. After that, despotic kingship would emerge, and it will remain as long as Allah wills. Then, the Caliphate (Khilafah) shall come once again based on the precept of Prophethood (Masnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Mishkat, Chapter Al-Anzar Wal Tahzir)
This hadith cannot be interpreted to mean a new khilafat will be established after the Promised Messiah because the Promised Messiah himself did not even interpret it as such! Furthermore, a divinely-ordained institution of everlasting khilafat after the Holy Prophet already existed and continues to exist with the coming of mujaddids whom are in fact the spiritual khalifas of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, to include the Promised Messiah as he himself explained and claimed to be, stating mujaddids are in fact "deputies and spiritual successors (khalifas) of the Messenger of Allah" and come "by way of zill." (Fath Islam, 22 January 1891, p. 6 footnote).
The hadith in question can only mean the early days of Islam and the last days are similar in terms of an abundance of blessings for the progress of Islam. The Promised Messiah explained, "it is proven from the Hadith that there are three ages: first, the period of the righteous khilafat, then the "age of corruption" in which there were to be tyrannical kings, and after that the last days which would be on the pattern of the times of prophethood. The Holy Prophet has gone so far as to say that the early days of his followers and the last days would be very similar, and that these two ages are like the rain: it is full of such good and blessings that one knows not whether the blessings lie more in the beginning or in the end. (Shahadatul-Quran pp. 45-46).
Submitted by Ikram.
When Europe Loved Islam
“Before the continent started banning hijab, European aristocrats used to change their names to Abdullah and Muhammad, and going to the local mosque was the latest trend.”
Please read-on the contribution of Lahore Ahmadiyya for European love of Islam.
The following are four examples of such use of the word rasul ('messenger') in Sahih Bukhari:
1. In a long narration in Bukhari, a Companion of the Holy Prophet, Ka‘b ibn Mālik, relates:
“When forty out of the fifty nights elapsed, then the rasul of the rasul of Allah came to me…”
— Book: Expeditions (Maghāzī), hadith number 4418.
Here a messenger sent by the Holy Prophet is described as his rasul.
2. During his last illness the Holy Prophet sent a message to Hazrat Abu Bakr to lead the prayer, as he was too weak to come out. It is related:
“The messenger (rasul) went to Abu Bakr and said: The Messenger of Allah (rasul-ullah) orders you to lead the people in the prayer.”
— Book: Call to Prayer (Adhān), hadith number 687.
Again a messenger sent by the Holy Prophet is called a rasul.
3. A man describes his meeting with Hazrat Uthman when the latter was Khalifa. He says:
“Then the messenger (rasul) of Uthman came and I went to him (i.e., to Uthman)…”
— Book: Excellences of the Companions (Faḍā’il Aṣḥāb), hadith number 3696.
Here a messenger sent by a Muslim ruler is called a rasul.
4. There is a famous incident that the Holy Prophet, shortly after taking up his mission, climbed the Safa mountain and called upon all the clans of the Quraish to assemble around him. He asked them if they would believe him if he were to tell them that he could see an enemy on its way to attack them, and they replied that they would believe him as they knew him to be truthful. It is stated in hadith relating to this event:
“Any clan which could not come sent its messenger (rasul) to see what it was.”
— Book: Commentary on the Quran, in explanation of 26:214, hadith number 4770.
Evidently, these observers sent by the clans, each observer being called a rasul, were unbelievers.
The following is an example from the Hadith collection Abu Dawud. The event mentioned in this hadith is very well known.
“When the Messenger of Allah decided to send Mu‘adh [ibn Jabal] to Yaman [as Governor], he asked him how he would decide cases. Mu‘adh replied: ‘By the Book of Allah’. He asked: ‘But if you do not find [any direction] in it’. He replied: ‘Then by the practice (Sunnah) of the Messenger of Allah’. ‘But if you do not find [any direction] in the Sunnah’, he asked. ‘Then I will exercise my judgment and spare no effort’, Mu‘adh replied.
The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Praise be to Allah Who has granted the messenger (rasul) of His Messenger (rasul) what pleases the Messenger of Allah (rasul-ullah) ’.”
— Abu Dawud, book: Office of the Judge (al-aqḍiyah), ch. 11, hadith number 3592.
Here the Holy Prophet himself has described a Companion, whom he is sending, as rasul of the rasul of Allah.
— Zahid Aziz
Here is the link to the text of my talk last Sunday 3rd April 2016 at Muhammad Anwar Shaheed Day, who was Imam at the UK Lahore Ahmadiyya Centre, 1982-1986. Muhammad Anwar was shot dead on 9th April 1986 while visiting Guyana by a fanatic who believed that by killing an Ahmadi he was conducting jihad and serving Islam.
Also at the same function last Sunday, an article on this incident was read out which was written in 1986 as an editorial by Choudhry Masud Akhtar in The Islamic Review. The text of this editorial is given below.
Imam Anwar Shaheed — The Martyr of Guyana
by Ch. Masud Akhtar
From The Islamic Review, California, USA, June-July 1986
(Slightly abridged version of the original)
Our hearts bleed at the assassination of our United Kingdom missionary, the late Imam Muhammad Anwar Shaheed at Georgetown, Guyana, in April. We hope all sane persons will join us in condemnation of this brutal, pre-planned and conspiratorial murder.
It is tragic that some wolves in the garb of clerics go about in the world of religion even in this era of civilisation and enlightenment. We know of no scripture which teaches murder, arson, looting and rape simply on account of a difference of opinion in religious matters. It is borne out by history that in spite of no scripture permitting compulsion in matters of belief, the establishment clerics in various eras have been sowing seeds of hatred and prejudice in the minds of their followers against their fellow human beings in the very name of God and Religion. Even presently, we Ahmadis and many other religious groups are being persecuted in many lands at the behest and call of the so-called fundamentalists whose ranks are swelled with the pseudo-religionists, the so-called establishment ‘ulama.
Day in and day out, they exhort their ignorant followers to commit criminal acts against those who do not agree with their viewpoint in religious beliefs. Little do they realise that if all religious groups acted on the rules followed by these criminals, then millions of heads, including theirs, would roll in the dust overnight. By their black deeds, they in fact bring their religion into disrepute and do not render any service to God or the religion itself.
Religion, no doubt, is and can prove to be a fortifying force for humanity, but only if the establishment clerics let free the harmonising teachings of the religion, based on love, compassion and understanding. It is high time that the professional priests and establishment clerics, who have hitherto ruled in the arena of religion as more powerful than God Himself, make way for God and the word of God. For the survival of the human race, it is essential that this usurping of power by the establishment clerics in the name of God and the religion should end, or else the religion that they stand for will drown along with them. Today's mankind can ill-afford any forces of hatred, prejudice and divisiveness, even if these be in the name of religion. The hard choice we have to make is between establishment clerical-ism or religion as a force of unity.
For us, the matter is crystal clear. The late Imam Anwar Shaheed laid down his life in the path of preserving freedom of conscience. Freedom of conscience is a gift of God to mankind. Honourable and righteous persons at different junctures of history have preserved this freedom, even by paying the price of laying down their lives. If it was not so, then truth, justice, righteousness and true religion would have been completely wiped out from the earth. If the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, and his companions had not made supreme sacrifices by suffering at the hands of their torturers for the sake of upholding the truth, the world would not have been enlightened by the light of the beautiful teachings of Islam.
Again, Iman Hussain and seventy-two family members of the Prophet’s family laid down their lives for the preservation of the freedom of conscience rather than submitting to the tyrannical forces of injustice. Thus they have lit up the path of human freedom, which serves as a lighthouse for the forces of freedom for all ages. The state and the establishment clerics had joined hands in murdering Imam Hussain and his family members, as they have joined hands against us today. Imam Hussain is a symbol of freedom and righteousness for all freedom fighters, whereas Yazid and his partisan ulama are a symbol of evil and injustice. This war between Hussainiyat and Yazidiyat is an ever-continuing process. We are following in the footsteps of Imam Hussain by being ready to suffer even our lives for the sake of preserving our freedom of conscience and not submitting to the forces of evil. The ultimate victory of the forces of truth and righteousness lies in our willingness to smilingly suffer all adversities and afflictions in the cause of the religion of Allah. The martyrdom of Imam Anwar is just evidence of our convictions and dedication in the cause we espouse. He is just one more victim of Yazidiyat, just another star on the path of Hussainiyat. By embracing death in the cause of Allah, he attained life eternal.
May Allah bless his soul.