The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Archive for October, 2010

By Rashid Jahangiri
(The post author is responsible for the contents.)

Throughout the Khilafathood of Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (QK2) people among his staunch followers, Waqaf-e-Zindghi, prominent personalities in Qadiani Jamaat accused QK2 of immorality in his personal character, financial embezzlements in Qadiani Jamaat funds, political ambitions at time of independence from British Raj and after that in earlier years of Pakistan’s creation, inhuman administrative policies and actions in Qadiani Jamaat. The prominent among accusers of QK2 were people like Miyyan zahid of ‘Mubailiah Group’, and Shaikh Abdur Rehaman Misri sahib (who use to be acting Ameer of Qadiani Jamaat in absence QK2 from Qadian), Dr. Abdul Latif (he was husband of sister of wife of QK2), Abdul Wahab Omar (brother of wife of QK2) etc. All of these were either personal witness, or their close family members were victims of QK2 questionable character etc. Unlike these, there were QK2 followers, who though not initially victims of QK2’s his policies and actions, starting in early 1950s took up the mission of informing the Pakistani society the truth about QK2 through newspapers, booklets and pamphlets, mass mailing especially to Qadiani Jamaat followers of QK2, speeches, protest camps on government land across the main highway in Rabwah, Pakistan etc. This group of mainly 6 young men formed the group ‘Haqiqqat Passand Party (HPP)’ (The Party of Realists).

Professor Chaudhary Ghulam Rasool sahib, M.A. (Arabic), M.A. (Islamic Studies), L.L.B. of Chak #35, Sargodha, Pakistan was the first person to question QK2. The HPP movements started with a single sentence, in a personal letter, that Professor C.G. Rasool sahib wrote to QK2 in reply to his (QK2) Friday sermon and in defense of Maulana Noor Ud Din sahib. Later Professor sahib got so much on the nerves of QK2 that even in last speech of his life on Annual Jalsa, in 1956 (available on Qadiani Jamaat official website ‘Khilafat-e-Haqa-Islamia’) QK2 mentioned Professor sahib name 3 times. Professor sahib is also mentioned in ‘Tarikh-I-Ahmadiyyat’ (History of Qadiani Jamaat), volume 19, authored by their historian Doost Muhammad Shahid.

Up till now there has been one-sided propaganda, and name-calling of Professor sahib by QK2 speeches and his followers though the use of Qadiani Jamaat newspapers and other publications. Now with the power of Internet and YouTube Professor sahib has video recorded his side of story. Hopefully in due time Professor sahib’s version of story, comprising on many hours of interview will gradually become available on Internet.

Professor sahib version of story is important for Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (LAM) for two reasons. One: In his interview Professor sahib has clarified that HPP was indigenous movement of Qadianis, and had NO support from LAM. Two: Abdul Manan Omar sahib (Marhoom and Maghfoor) (son of Hazrat Maulana Noor Ud Din), who represented LAM in 1974 Pakistan National Assembly trial of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib, was NOT a member of HPP and had NO role in its founding, or in its mission. And all the stories regarding Abdul Manan Omar sahib as the person, and LAM as a party behind HPP was concocted by QK2.

Link to series of interview of Professor Chaudhary Ghulam Rasool of Chak #35, Sargodha on YouTube:
‘Azhar-e-Haq’
Meeting with Professor Chaudhary Ghulam Rasool Sahib AKA # 35 Sahib
http://www.youtube.com/ahmediyyagazette1#p/u/3/WBdMAmbW2rY

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Lt. General Azam Khan
The man who stopped the charging mob on LAM headquarters in 1953.

At the height of 1953 Anti-Ahmadiyya riots, a huge mob was advancing towards Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement world headquarters ‘Ahmadiyya Buildings’, Brandreth Road, Lahore, Pakistan. Maulana Sadr ud Din, head of LAM at the time asked his friends to leave the premises and he alone will defend the property. So, he decided to stay and stood-alone in the courtyard of LAM mosque on the premises. Maulana Sadr ud Din was standing in mosque courtyard, and mob had reached close to ‘Ahmadiyya Buildings’ that Allah sent His help in form of Major General Azam Khan, who imposed martial law in the city and sent army troops to control lawless situation in the city.

On All Things Pakistan, a blog is published on Lt. General Azam Khan.
‘A View from Bangladesh: Remembering Lt. Gen. Azam Khan’
http://pakistaniat.com/2010/10/12/azam-khan/#more-15220

An e-mail came to our website address from someone called Ahmed Toson, a member of the Qadiani Jamaat in Egypt. I responded, which then led to further exchanges.

At this link you can read our correspondence.

I have decided to make it public because I found the following statements and questions by Ahmed Toson to be grossly opposed to the writings of the Promised Messiah:

[quote]

“However , Allah never ask from us to believe in mojadedon and mohadeson, never sent them to accomplish the prophet’s missions , mojadedon never declared that they have sent from Allah to the people ,, never people been punished if reject the mojadedon
…
– Why Allah decided to sent the mojadeden to accomplish the prophets missions and change his habit ” sona ” ? do you think Allah may continue in changing his sonas and decide to come in the form of humans?

– Are there any verses from the Quran ask people to believe in mojadedon or mohadeson if declared that the god sent them?”

[unquote]

(His argument from this is that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet.)

To see just how Ahmed Toson’s view about mujaddids and muhaddases is totally against the teachings of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, please read the following sections of his book Shahadat-ul-Quran:

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/books/testi-hq/ch2c.htm

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/books/testi-hq/ch2d.htm#n

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/books/testi-hq/ch2b.htm#lo

I quote below some extracts, in order, from the above links.

But you will observe that Ahmed Toson has very cleverly tried to bar me from quoting from the Promised Messiah by saying:

“So every beliefs or words that conflict with the holy Quran should be rejected and any beliefs should be accepted from the quran and because of that I have asked you to reinforce your beliefs about the promised messiah PBUH that he was a mojadid and mohaddes from the Quran and prove that he wasn’t a heresy ” bedaa ” but you chose instead to tell the promised messiah statements and which we believe that you understand it in a wrong way according to the book ” Ayk Ghalati Ka Izala “.

Ahmed Toson wanted me to answer his questions from the Quran only. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has already answered them in his book which he entitled Shahadat-ul-Quran (‘Testimony or Evidence of the Quran’)!

Extracts from Shahadat-ul-Quran:

(In the context of this discussion, I have slightly amended below my own earlier translation as given in the above links.)

— according to the Divine custom (sunnat-ullah), that can only happen if there come, from time to time, deputies of the Holy Prophet (na’ib rasul) possessing all the blessings of messengership by way of image, having been granted all the favours given to the prophets.

— The word khalifa has been adopted to indicate that they shall be heirs of the Holy Prophet and partake of his blessings, as used to happen in the earlier ages; the faith shall be revived at their hands and security shall be established after the prevalence of fear, i.e. they shall come at times when there would be disruption in the house of Islam. Then, after their coming, those who rebel against them would be the evil-doers and the wicked. This is a reply to the point raised by some ignorant people who ask, Is it obligatory upon us to acknowledge the saints (auliya)? God says that certainly it is obligatory, and those who oppose them are transgressors, if they die in the state of opposition.

— when, after the passage of a period of time, the dust of corrupted notions settles upon the holy teachings, and the face of the pure truth is hidden, then to show that beautiful face there come mujaddids, muhaddases and spiritual khalifas.

— Unfortunately however, the critic does not understand that mujaddids and spiritual khalifas are needed by the Muslim people in the same way as were the prophets required from ancient times.

— It should also be remembered that for every age the conclusive proving of the case for Islam takes place in a different sense, and the mujaddid of the time comes with the powers, faculties and qualities upon which depends the reformation of the prevalent evils. God will ever continue to do this, as long as He pleases, so that signs of righteousness and reform remain in the world. These matters are not without proof; on the contrary, repeated observations testify to them.

— And to say that it is not obligatory to believe in the mujaddids is to deviate from the command of God because He says: “And whoever disbelieves after this, they are the transgressors” (24:55), i.e. after the sending of the khalifas, whoever remains a denier of them, he is among the transgressors.

— To say that the Quran and the Hadith are sufficient for us, and that association with the righteous is not necessary, is itself against the Quranic teaching because Almighty God says: “And be with the truthful ones [sadiqin, plural of sadiq]” — (9:119). … the “truthful ones” are the prophets, messengers, muhaddases and the completely perfect holy men (auliya kamil), upon whom heavenly light fell and who saw God Almighty in this very world with the eye of certainty.

— And the mujaddid whose work bears striking similarity to the appointed task of one of the apostles, is called by the name of that apostle in the sight of God.

— Now it has been proved from the Holy Quran that in this blessed Muslim nation a system of perpetual khilafat has been established in the manner and likeness of the one which was established in the dispensation of Moses, and there is merely a verbal difference to the effect that at that time, for the support of the Mosaic religion, there used to arise prophets, but now muhaddases come.

— For this reason, the mujaddid of this century came in the likeness of Jesus, and was called the Promised Messiah because of intense similarity.

— so it was that our Holy Prophet was also granted servants of the law who, in accordance with the hadith “The learned ones among my followers are like the prophets of the Israelites”, were Divinely inspired (mulham) and muhaddas.

— If it is said that in the Mosaic order those who were raised for the advocacy of the faith were prophets, and Jesus was also a prophet, the reply is that the prophet (nabi) and the muhaddas are on a par in terms of being sent (mursal). Just as God has called prophets as mursal, so has He termed muhaddases as mursal.

— …by “messengers” (rusul) are meant those who are sent, whether such a one is an apostle (rasul), prophet (nabi) or muhaddas. As our Master and Messenger, may peace and the blessings of God be upon him, is the khatam al-anbiya, and after him there cannot come any prophet, for this reason muhaddases take the place of prophets in this religious system.

An objection has been raised that whereas in one or two places the Holy Quran says:

“Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they have their reward with their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.” — 2:62

but in another verse it says:

“And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” — 3:85.

The first verse says that people of other religions will get reward from their Lord, but the second one says that they will be losers in the hereafter.

What 3:85 means is clear from the verse preceding it. Let me first quote only a part of it:

“Say: We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us, … and to Him we submit.” — 3:84

If this was all that 3:84 had said, i.e. that belief in Allah and belief in the revelation that came to Muslims is what constitutes Islam, then indeed one could justifiably claim that 3:85 means that whoever is simply a non-Muslim, and does not believe in “that which is revealed to us”, will be a loser in the hereafter.

But 3:84 does not only say “We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us,”, even though these words are quite sufficient to describe and identify Islam. In full it says:

“Say: We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us, and that which was revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and that which was given to Moses and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord; we make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we submit.”

The words which I omitted earlier, and which I have placed in italics above, point out a particular aspect of Islam. Islam, as such, is adequately covered by the words “We believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us”. Therefore what 3:85 means by “whoever seeks a religion other than Islam” are those who go against the particular teaching mentioned here, i.e. they do not accept the teaching that revelation also came to other prophets besides their own prophets, nor the teaching that no distinction should be made between prophets.

Examples of making a distinction are: (1) To believe that Jesus was partly Divine but other prophets were mortals; (2) To regard only Jesus as sinless and other prophets as having committed sins; (3) To believe in the truth of Moses etc. by applying some criteria but to reject the Prophet Muhammad even though he fulfills the same criteria.

The teaching of Islam that revelation from God came to all nations through their prophets establishes the equality of all nations, and belief in all such prophets is the basis of peace and mutual respect between followers of different religions. The notion that revelation from God came only to one’s own nation, because it is the favourite and chosen one of God, leads to concepts of national superiority over others, and hatred and prejudice against people of other religions and nations. Such are the doctrines or religions that will not be accepted by God and lead to their adherents being losers in the end. “Not accepted by God” means they do not lead to human development but debasement.

According to 2:62, by believing in God and the Hereafter and doing good, any person gains. According to 3:85, by being narrow-minded and looking down on other nations as deprived of Divine revelation, while believing one’s own nation to be the chosen one of God, a person loses.