The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Hadith about khilafat after despotic kings

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).

When Europe loved Islam

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.

Link: http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/05/when-europe-loved-islam-interwar-weimar-republic-wilmersdorf-mosque/?utm_content=bufferc8e77&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Visit this link to read further about The Wilmersdorf mosque, located on Brienner Street in southwest Berlin and this link for Shah Jahan Mosque in Woking, England.

Women as house owners like men

The Quran instructs Muslims:

"There is no blame on the blind man, nor any blame on the lame, nor blame on the sick, nor on yourselves that you eat in your own houses, or your fathers’ houses, or your mothers’ houses, or your brothers’ houses, or your sisters’ houses, or your paternal uncles’ houses, or your paternal aunts’ houses, or your maternal uncles’ houses, or your maternal aunts’ houses…" (24:61)

Firstly, houses of males and females are mentioned equally here. Secondly, it shows home ownership by women. Now someone may say that houses of "your sisters" and "your aunts" might be owned by their husbands. But even if that were so, still your sister or aunt has the right to entertain you in that house.

But what about "your fathers' houses and your mothers' houses"? Each of the other pairs mentioned here (your brothers and sisters, your father's brothers and sisters, and your mother's brothers and sisters) would normally have a separate house. Thus the wording about the pair fathers and mothers indicates that someone's father and mother may own houses each in his/her own right. When you have the right to own property, it means you have all the rights of a human being to conduct your affairs.

In the UK, before the Married Women's Property Act of 1870: "any money made by a woman either through a wage, from investment, by gift, or through inheritance automatically became the property of her husband once she was married. Thus, the identity of the wife became legally absorbed into her husband, effectively making them one person under the law. Once a woman became married she had no claim to her property as her husband had full control and could do whatever suited him regarding the property" (see link).

Zahid Aziz

Use of word ‘rasul’ for non-prophets in Hadith

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

Muhammad Anwar Shaheed Day commemorated

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.

Zahid Aziz.

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.

There was Reason Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Declared Religious Jihad Haram

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

There are many kinds of Jihad e,g. Jihad against one’s own bad habits, thoughts and actions; Jihad against illiteracy; Jihad against poverty in society; Jihad against injustice in society etc. HMGA never opposed it, rather encouraged it. Then there is another Jihad that is to protect political and geographical boundaries of a country, like Pakistan Armed Forces defending the land, air and sea boundaries of Pakistan. HMGA never opposed it. Contrary to that, he predicted in 1905 that military attack on later West Pakistan will be defeated which happened in 1965.

It is Jihad in name of religion that HMGA declared Haram (forbidden). He gave reasons that now the situation in world is not that endangers Islam, and now the time warrants propagation and defense of Islam in a peaceful, tolerant way by preaching and distributing high quality literature. His opponents to this day accuse him of abrogating an important tenet of Islam. People used to question how he could use such a strong word. HMGA perhaps gave such a strong edict under influence of Divine thought. Hundred years after HMGA we see how ‘Religious Jihad’ has harmed Islam more than anything in its entire fourteen hundred years plus history. In last fifteen years terrorism is done on name of religion by Muslims around the world. This includes terrorism done in European capitals and in Muslim countries, latest one is in Lahore, Pakistan where Christians are killed. Muslim world cannot eradicate this evil among their fellow believers until and unless they unequivocally declare ‘Religious Jihad’ Haram (unlawful).

‘Mehmudi’ Lawyer Mujeeb-ur-Rehman

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Mehmudi Lawyer Mujeeb-ur-Rehman is a LIAR.

Mehmudi (Qadianis who hold belief that their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mehmood Ahmad was a “Musleh Mahud”) talk very highly of their organization member Mujeeb-ur-Rehman, Pakistan Supreme Court lawyer. Today I came across  youtube clip. After seeing this clip, and knowing about his poor performance in  Mehmudi Jamaat cases in Pakistan Shariat Court, it is more appropriate to call him a Mehmudi Liar.

In following clip Mujeeb-ur-Rehman LIAR is giving ‘fight on khilafat’ as the reason for split in 1914 in Ahmadiyya Jamaat of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Mujjaddid of 14th Islamic Century.

Why a small Group (Lahori Ahmadies) was separated from Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat in 1914.flv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rT6gg05ahU

High Court Muslim Judge in India asks:  Why a Muslim Woman Can’t Have Four Husbands?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

In a news item published in Deccan Chronicle, March 7, 2016 issue, a Kerala High Court Muslim Judge Justice B. Kamal Pasha questions Sharia (Islamic Law).  I was under the impression that Indian Superior Courts judges are more sensible than Pakistani Superior Courts judges. I am disappointed.

I wish someone can tell this honorable judge: you make a law allowing women to have four husbands. But it will not work. It is not natural. It is not practical. Women will soon realize it is nothing but their exploitation. They themselves will not practice it.

Condition of a woman having four husbands is worse than a prostitute. Prostitute has a right to refuse to have sex with a customer, if she is not interested that day for number of reasons, her health, physical tiredness, pregnancy, postpartum, nursing a new born etc. Moreover when she decides to have sex it is on her terms. And she receives money for her service. Compare her to a woman who has four husbands. This woman could be in last trimester of pregnancy from husband #1, and husband #2 does not care for her physical condition and wants to have sex; she delivers baby and husband #3 does not care as it is his turn and he wants to have sex; she has to breast feed her new born and husband # 4 has no feeling for new born and wants his share of sex… and cycle keeps on repeating in other situations too. In her ordeal she is unable to refuse without risking her marriage, and also unable to receive some compensation either.

Link to news article:

Kerala judge slams Muslim law, asks why women can’t have 4 husbands

DECCAN CHRONICLE.

Published Mar 7, 2016, 6:16 am IST

http://deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/070316/kerala-high-court-judge-criticises-muslim-law.html

If Ahmadis were British agents, how did the following happen?

This is the question I pose: How then did this happen which is described in this link?

Remember that in this account, Maulana Sadr-ud-Din was talking to General Sir Alfred Keogh, Director-General of the War Office, London, and General Sir Edmund Barrow, Military Secretary at the War Office. How did Maulana Sadr-ud-Din so boldly and bluntly put to these high and mighty generals the case for proper funeral rites and burial or cremation in England for Indian soldiers according to their religions? And note the great concern he showed for Muslim soldiers, for their treatment in military hospitals, and for proper Islamic janaza and burial for the dead conducted by himself.

Just in these incidents, Maulana Sadr-ud-Din did more for Muslims than the entire Pakistan National Assembly of 1974 ever did. And this was the Assembly in front of which he had to appear (aged 92 years) to prove that he was a Muslim!

Zahid Aziz

Page from history: Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Berlin Mosque

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

In Dawn online January 27, 2016 there is a blog article 'How  a Muslim-Jewish Romance Shapped One of India's Biggest Pharma Giants'.

Here is info that i like to share with readers:

One day in 1925, Hamied joined some friends on a lake cruise near Berlin. One of the passengers on the boat was a young woman named Luba Derczanska. Luba was born in Wilno in Russian Poland (now Vilnius, Lithuania) and had come to Berlin to study. From their first meeting, the romance between Abdul Hamied and Luba Derczanska blossomed.

In 1928, Hamied married Luba in Berlin’s only mosque, and the following year they were again married in the Choral Synagogue in Wilno and the marriage was “solemnised” at a Register Office in London.

Link to Dawn article