The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Dear. Dr. Zahid Aziz, thank you greatly as always for your deep points of insight. What you have said helps me very much in my understanding about this subject. Do you think there can be individuals that can arise in the future, that may not be mujaddids, but whom the khilafat verse of 24:55 may still be applied to?

Thank you Dr. Zahid Aziz! I’d just like to present what I’ve understood. I’ve just read Maulana Muhammad Ali’s article in the Islamic Review from 1920 regarding Khilafat in Islam and have read the translation of Sirr-ul-Khilafah by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Maulana Muhammad Ali explains, “In short, the doctrine of the Khilafat in Islam requires the maintenance of a strong central Muslim Government, which should also be the supreme ruling authority over Arabia. It is true that succession to the Holy Prophet includes succession to both offices, the temporal as well as the spiritual. But such succession was only limited to the first four Caliphs, to Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Ali, peace be on them, to those great men who were prepared for the high office under the eyes of the Holy Prophet. Hence it is that the first four Khalifas are distinguished from all the rest by the addition of the wordRashidin to the word Khulafa, i.e. they are called Khulafa-i-Rashidin, or the rightly directed Khalifas. They combined both the spiritual and the temporal offices. People looked to them not only as the chief ruling authority but also as types of virtue, as religious guides, as the exponents of the Islamic Law. But those who came after them were only Khalifas in the sense of rulers or kings, the spiritual office being inherited by the learned imams or by the great saints or the mujaddids, i.e., the reformers. Thus succession to the Holy Prophet after the first four Khalifas ran in two parallel channels, the temporal office devolving on the ruling authorities and the spiritual office on the learned imams or the great reformers, uniting only rarely again, as in the case of Umar II. This is the reason why the Khilafat of the later rulers is sometimes called kingdom (mulk) to distinguish it from the Khilafat-i-Rashida. But still the guardianship of the holy places and kingship of the Jazirat-ul-Arab is honoured with the name of Khilafat. Thus Khilafat, as it now stands, is essentially temporal, being spiritual only in the sense that it is a religious institution which cannot be denied by any Muslim. Yet it must be clearly borne in mind that it is not like an ordinary Muslim kingdom. The Khilafat is the heart of the Muslim political power in the world, which may be shorn of its glory by the fall of a kingdom in the East and a kingdom in the West, but a blow directed at the heart amounts to giving a deathblow” (Islamic Review, April 1920, p. 156-157).

If anything is not correct in my understanding in what I state below, please correct me. Sorry if I come across redundant; just trying to correctly convey the right message to my fellow family-members, especially to those are willing to have a discussion about this.

So, the first four khalifas in Islam (Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan, and Ali) whom held the distinction of being “rightly-guided” held not only physical rule with an established kingdom in Arabia, but also spiritual rule in that they were not only seen as temporal leaders, but also as spiritual and moral guides to their people (but not appointed by God as Q-Jamaat claims since the first four khalifas were of course elected by their people). So it was in this sense that their “khilafat was on the precepts of prophethood” since the Holy Prophet too had that combined role as a physical ruler and spiritual/moral guide to their people (albeit as a prophet).

Then after them, physical rulers were only seen as kings without having that spiritual authority as was once seen with the first four khalifas but were nonetheless khalifas in the physical sense as they held rule over Muslims in Arabia and guardianship over the holy places of Makkah and Madinah. But in the spiritual sense, the promise and coming of mujaddids was a continuation of the khilafat of the Holy Prophet, whom are the spiritual successors of the Holy Prophet. It was only the first mujaddid (i.e. Umar II), however, whom had both offices (temporal and spiritual) combined in his rule, and can therefore be said to be part of that category of khilafat that would find reemergence on the pattern of prophethood.

I would think that until there is a general acceptance of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as Mujaddid of the 14th century Hijrah, whom we know named the movement, Ahmadiyya, after the second name of the Holy Prophet (i.e. Ahmad), representing the first phase of the Prophet’s life when devoid of physical rule and political power in Makkah and amidst heavy persecution,  that such a khilafat “on the pattern of prophethood” that exemplifies both spiritual and political power, could not possibly be brought about until that happens; hence, all the more need to clear up the enormous misunderstanding of the true status and claims of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, for the greatest obstacle today in advancing the mission of the Promised Messiah, a great mission for the everlasting unity and sympathy of mankind and world-peace, is regretfully the mistaken belief being perpetuated in his good name by the Q-Jamaat of his laying claim to prophethood!

Thank you so much Dr. Zahid Aziz for pointing out these booklets; I will do my best to study these. You've been a great help to me in enhancing my understanding about this subject througout this discussion. Kind regards, Omar.