The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Ramadan 2013

The home page of the Central London Mosque is still displaying the message, as at 14.30 UK time, 8th July, that the 1st of Ramadan will be on either 9th or 10th July. "We will make the announcement the exact moment the new moon has been sighted", it says. The page informs us that we can join them on Facebook and be kept informed of all announcements from them.

It strikes one as strange, or incongruous, that it is not considered objectionable, in fact it is considered quite normal, to use the latest technology, such as the Internet, mobile devices etc., to try to find out news about the appearance of the new moon (if indeed their announcement is based on appearance and not on political partisanship), yet it is considered un-Islamic to use science and technology to calculate the same appearance well in advance.

‘the Titanic of Muslim Ummah was sinking’ – Imran Khan endorsing Altaf Hussain

Submitted by Ikram.

Yesterday, Geo TV in Pakistan interviewed Imran Khan, the apparent choice of a newer generation. His comments were reported by ‘The News’ daily – Imran Khan said that he supports Altaf Hussain’s statement in which he said ‘the Titanic of Muslim Ummah was sinking’. “Altaf is correct in saying that if we do not fix ourselves, we are heading towards destruction” (link).

For starters, at least there is a long awaited admission by a few who matter that ‘the Titanic of Muslim Ummah was sinking’. Even a blind can see that all this is happening despite Ummah having –  the Quran and it’s ever increasing publication, reciters and memorizers; life and example of the Prophet and ever increasing beards on the faces, which are only getting longer; bonanza of fee for service artists that thrive on eulogizing Quran, the Prophet and God (qirat, naat, hamd, qawallis); Islamiat as a mandatory subject from elementary school through professional colleges; mushrooming of Islamic TV programs and their experts; ever increasing number of mosques per square mile and their corresponding swelling ranks of  attenders and donors; ever stricter blasephamey laws and routine lynching by mobs;  constitutional definitions of non-Muslims (read Ahmadis) and their social and economic boycotts;  cursing of Mujaddid in signed passport applications; elaborate celebrations for any religious excuse, be it the birth of the Prophet or during Nights of Meraj, Lailatul Qadar and Ramadhan, which are no less in fervor than the carnivals in Latin America.

Obviously, by any secular standards, Ummah at least is not being helped by the above rituals, no matter how diverse and intense they maybe. Rather, all these activities are more like weights around the ankles which are speeding up the sinking itself. When a novice diver loses the sight of the light on the surface of the ocean, paradoxically to save himself, he only dives deeper, hoping life but achieves death. Across the globe, Ummah is in the grips of economic abyss, moral depravity, corruption, cronyism, social upheavals, a laughing stock of friends and foe alike, admittedly though with a few exceptions, the exceptions, which cannot be the rule in this case.

Why the Ummah is ever diving even deeper? What light has it lost sight of? Now, that is the million dollar question as to – Will the Ummah continue to sink till the time that its last vestiges disappear along with Quran and the memories of the Last Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)? While at the same time, the Quran rejecters, Prophet haters and God deniers will continue to thrive? Who will have the last laugh, the Muslims or the non-Muslims?

In a different thread (link), it was mentioned: …exhausting turmoil that the Umma is in grips of for the past century and has no solution in sight. Every next doctrine that emerges in it is even more destructive than the previous one, be it a religious, secular, democratic or dictatorial effort or any combination thereof.

Both, Imran Khan and Altaf Hussain mutually agree on a much needed way out as attributed to them in the newspaper – “if we do not fix ourselves, we are heading towards destruction.” Their hearts are in the right place, but do they have a solution?

The next million dollar question is – what is the fix?

The fix sought by Imran Khan will never be achieved unless the nonsense in the name of a religion is rejected first – “Religion without solution is a myth and fable, and of no consequence to mankind.” (quote: Pillars of Faith in Islam by Khwaja Kamaluddin, p. 16, The Woking Muslim Mission and Literary Trust, The Shah Jehan Mosque, Woking, England)

Secondly, the pragmatic expectations of a religion have to be affirmed upfront  – “Religion, if from God, must come to us for the sole purpose of putting us on the path of progress”, which ironically in case of Ummah in general is not so. (quote: A Letter from Khwaja Kamaluddin, Islamic Review, Vol. XIX, Nos. 3&4, March-April 1931).

Essentially, what Kamaluddin alluded to above was the job description of the Prophet, which is primarily to unburden mankind of every kind of nonsense so that it can at least swim towards safety by its God given natural instincts. Secondly, the Prophet also puts man on the path of progress, to which history bears witness in the success of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself, as well of his successors:

7:157. `Those who follow this perfect Messenger, the Arab Prophet whom they find described in the Torah and the Evangel which are with them, who enjoins upon them that which is right and forbids them that which is wrong, and who makes lawful for them all the pure and good things, and makes unlawful all the impure and bad things, and who relieves them of their heavy burden and shackles that weigh them down. Indeed those who believe in him and honour him and serve him and follow the light that has been sent down with him, it is these who will attain their goal.' [translation: Nooruddin]

With the above admission by Imran Khan, an apparent Divine satire comes to mind. To keep the spirit of the message of Torah alive, which was none but a limited book with a limited scope for a limited number of ethnic people, speaking only a limited language, God ordained a chain of prophets from Moses to Jesus (peace be upon them). For example, in the case of Mary, her uncle (Zacharias), cousin (John) and son (Jesus) were all prophets within the same household.

Whereas, with Quran, since the message was complete (v. 5:5), and its preservation is a Divine undertaking (v. 15:9), logically then there was no need for any more prophet after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (v. 33:40). Essentially, ever since Quran and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), the angel Gabriel has been permanently retired with no chance for a recall to active duty under any circumstances. Still the same Almighty God in case of Muslims seems to have disappeared, He neither speaks nor sends revivers of the Book? One finds no better word than ‘Irony’ when the duo of Quran and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) are compared against Torah and Moses. Islam clearly seems to be at a disadvantage.

Unbeknownst to general Muslims, there is no such ‘Irony’. God still speaks and appoints. To prevent the natural decay that any message faces overtime, history bears witness that Divinely ordained Mujaddids, the revivers, appeared and made such a claim and worked only to unburden the Muslims (similar to v. 7:157 above), revive the Message of Quran to contemporary needs and remove any dross that might have accumulated around the Last Prophet over the period of time, and thus reset the course of Muslims to success. Every Hijrah century has seen such revivers starting with Umar bin Abdul Aziz. The last of this chain of Divine revivers who made such a claim of Mujaddid and wrote extensively was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. If not nothing else, under his direct influence numerous translations of Quran occurred on a mass scale (Nooruddin, Muhammad Ali, Sadruddin), and others were indirectly influenced (Pickthall, Muhammad Asad, Yusuf Ali).

Now, the burden is on Imran Khan and Altaf Hussain to pick any writing of the Mujaddid of the last century and ask for themselves the fundamental question that whatever Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote with his pen and whatever he spoke with his mouth, is he not who enjoins upon them that which is right and forbids them that which is wrong, and who makes lawful for them all the pure and good things, and makes unlawful all the impure and bad things, and who relieves them of their heavy burden and shackles that weigh them down?

As a final caveat, unlike the Jewish people, we Muslims do not have the luxury of any prophet after Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). We only have the alternate form of Mujaddids. As to the accepters of a Mujaddid – Indeed those who believe in him and honour him and serve him and follow the light that has been sent down with him, it is these who will attain their goal.'

Imran Khan and Altaf Hussain, both of you have been informed. Now, you know what phone number to call and which door to knock. Good luck.

P.S. To have a feel of how a Mujaddid revives minds can be seen in the writing of one of his students, who was the first Muslim missionary in the West, the same Kamaluddin who was quoted before:

“If the Religion taught in the book is a husk and a garb, if it is dogma and formulae, if it is sacrament and priest craft, a symbolism and rituals, and if it hinges upon the personality of its teacher and revolves on certain supposed events in his lifetime, it is not religion but superstition and myth. It is transitory, a fog which cannot stand in the strong rays of the sun of rationality. But if a religion gives you certain broad principles of life to meet your physical, moral, and, spiritual needs, and makes utility to mankind the criteria of ethical virtues and leaves the rest to your judicial discretion and good common sense, while appealing always to your reason for the acceptance of its tenets, it hardly hampers your progress. It, on the other hand, helps your uplift. That such principles have been revealed to man from God, and have been codified, cannot impede our advancement. If axioms and postulates revealed to Euclid have only helped our activities in our mathematical researches, why a broad-basic principle-laying religion can[not] create a moral and ethical inertia. Has not science made progress with bounds and strides, and did it not take place only after we based our researches on certain basic principles? If so we find in every avenue of human activities, why not in the realm of religion?” (quote: Free Religious Movement, Islamic Review and Muslim India , Vol. IV, No. 12, December 1916, p. 561, The Woking Muslim Mission and Literary Trust, The Shah Jehan Mosque, Woking, England)

To Be or Not To Be

Submitted by Ikram.

Like any vibrant organization, Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha’at Islam (AAIIL) has frequent discussions about its name, “Ahmadiyya”, which unfortunately has been maligned because of Qadianis and their beliefs who also call themselves by the same name. Though named similar, both of these organizations stand poles apart in their beliefs, organizational structure and the core concept of Finality of the Prophethood. Even the mundane issue of the headship of the two organizations is in stark contrast.  The head of AAIIL is a volunteer position, a personal burden for a common citizen who accepts the office without any perks or promised privileges and has no ancestral claims or conflicts of interest. Whereas, a Qadiani Khalifa is a fought for position by various maneuverings of the candidates, where the promises of privileges and conflict of interest including ancestral lineage abound, among other things.

There are arguments for and against giving up the name “Ahmadiyya” because the misunderstandings around it are killing the very message that AAIIL stands for. While trying to clarify its position about the issues that are omnipresent and newer ones that frequently emanate because of Qadianis, AAIIL ends up defending Qadianis by proxy, e.g. every reciter of Kalima is Muslim etc. Many a times AAIIL (aka LAM) ends up between a rock and hard place, i.e. damned if they do and damned if they don’t only to save the Qadianis from themselves. This extra burden is exhausting for each and every AAIIL member in his or her private conversations, speeches and writings. Since time is a precious commodity, a lot of it is lost to wash the indelible stains of Qadianis that incessantly seeps into AAIIL fabric for no fault of latter.

The points of view of those who want to keep the name “Ahmadiyya” is summed up by Late F. K. Durrani of German mission in the foreword of his book – The Ahmadiyya Movement (pub. 1927, link):

“Suggestions are sometimes made that the Ahmadis of the Lahore section ought to give up calling themselves Ahmadis, and then other Muslims will be coming forward to cooperate with them. If the choice were offered to me personally, I would unhesitatingly refuse it. For people who can be held back by a word from a cause with which they otherwise agree are not worth it, and their objection is very often an excuse for not doing anything. When names like Chishti, Naqshbandi, Qadri, Hanbali and heaven knows how many besides are all tolerated, it is not clear why there should be any particular objection to the name Ahmadi, which after all is after the name of the Holy Prophet and defines the characteristics of the movement so well. Besides, the name has a historic significance and possesses a psychological value, and if the name and the character of the organisation are changed in order to please these objectors where is the guarantee that we shall even then obtain the cooperation and that they shall not have some more excuses? For there is no end of excuses for those who do not want to do anything.”

Maybe, the above argument held its weight at the time of its writing when AAIIL was only 13 years old then. Now, it is almost 99 years since its founding and AAIIL has suffered a lot because of the same name that needs no elaboration.

If we look into Quran, a specific name does not even matter to Allah Himself:

17:110. Say: Call on Allah or call on the Beneficent. By whatever (name) you call on Him, He has the best names…

Same we find in the personal example of Seal and Last of the Prophets when he contented to sign the peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah as Muhammad bin Abdullah while striking out with his own pen the signature line mentioning him as the Messenger of Allah, which Ali (RA) earlier refused to do so. He not only compromised on a few words about himself, but for the sake of peace even accepted the apparently humiliating terms. Rest is history when Islam singularly succeeded from the peace that followed and was assured in the Surah Al-Fath that was reveled thereafter:

48:1-3. Surely We have granted you a clear victory, that Allah may cover for you your (alleged)  shortcomings in the past and those to come,  and complete His favour to you and guide you on a right path, and that Allah may help you with a mighty help.

The apparent humiliating feelings of Hudaybiyyah treaty were assuredly rectified by Allah in the peace not only in the land where people could hear the message without any prejudices, but the peace that came to minds of the participants of Hudaybiyyah. How will renaming Ahmadiyya be any different for its adherents, they will have to judge and foretell for themselves:

48:4-5. He it is Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the believers that they might add faith to their faith. And Allah’s are the forces of the heavens and the earth, and Allah is ever Knowing, Wise —  that He may make the believers, men and women, enter Gardens in which rivers flow, to abide in them, and remove from them their evil. And that is a mighty achievement with Allah,…

These examples from God and the Prophet tell us that the Divine Himself and Divinely ordained do not miss the forest for the trees which us mortals many a times tend to do so. Prophet Muhammad preferred peace, not only because this is what Islam means and stands for, but also the state of conflict was in itself injurious to his mission.

We are closing in to the Centenary celebrations of our founding. The question of ‘To Be or Not to Be” an Ahmadiyya by name and ‘What’s in the Name’ does not wax me personally, but will be always a question that might not leave us as a Jamaat.

In the meanwhile, the middle path that Rashid Jahangiri and others have suggested is quite pragmatic (Banning of Our Websites in Pakistan – link), which is to differentiate ourselves at every moment and every forum from Qadianis, in the same manner as this site mentions – ‘This is Not a Qadiani Website’ (link). Again, this middle path is what Quran also tells us in the same earlier verse:

17:110. …And do not be loud in your prayer nor be silent in it, and seek a way between these.

While we continue to discuss the issue, not necessarily to decide, we as a Jamaat must not forget the Divine command:

3:103. And hold fast by the covenant of Allah [– the Quran] all together and do not be disunited.

42:13. He has made plain to you the religion which He enjoined upon Noah and which We have revealed to you, and which We enjoined on Abraham and Moses and Jesus — to establish religion and not to be divided in (regard to) it…

Ref: Holy Quran – Translation and Commentary by Maulana Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Banning of our websites in Pakistan

Please read here a Press Release issued by the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Lahore in this connection.

See a screenshot from 19 June 2013 showing www.aaiil.org blocked in Pakistan.

Are Qadianis Justified in Defense of Their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

Recently an 18 year old girl was raped by 3 perpetrators in mausoleum of founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in Karachi. The court refused to entertain DNA evidence which reportedly proved the guilt of accused, because the victim could not produce the 4 adult male witnesses who saw the “act all the way through”. Weeks later Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) decreed that DNA evidence in absence of 4 righteous men as witnesses to rape is not sufficient for conviction under Islamic Law. (Please remember CII comprises of same kind of people who decreed that Kalima-Shahada reciters i.e. Qadianis are Kafir (non-Muslim)). I AM SURE EVERY QADIANI WILL DISAGREE WITH COURT DECISION AND CII DECREE, I.E., DEMAND OF 4 WITNESSES FROM A YOUNG GIRL WHO IS VICTIM OF RAPE.

In a recent TV interview Khalifa of Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan Mr. Munwar Hassan made the same point that if a female victim of rape cannot produce 4 adult righteous men as her witness who saw her being raped all the way through, then she should remain quite. (Please remember Munawar Hassan is same kind of person who consider Kalima-Shahada reciters i.e. Qadianis as Kafir). I AM SURE EVERY QADIANI WILL DISAGREE WITH JAMAAT-E-ISLAMI KHALIFA MUNWAR HASSAN.

Link to Khalifa Muwar Hassan Interview on youtube:

‘A woman should not report Rape if she has not 4 witness – Munawar Hassan’

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nQTTDCromw

Qadiani History is FULL OF TESTIMONIES THAT QADIANI KHALIFA 2 MIRZA MAHMUD AHMAD, in his life time, WAS ACCUSED OF RAPE BY HIS MINOR BIOLOGICAL DAUGHTERS, SONS, NIECES, DAUGHTER AND SONS OF HIS FOLLOWERS, WIVES OF HIS FOLLOWERS, ITALIAN EXOTIC DANCER. Qadianis do NOT deny those accusations but they say, “accusations hold no value as victims could NOT produce 4 adult righteous male witnesses who have seen the entire act including the “thread going through eye of a needle””.

To the die-hard Qadiani defendants of QK 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, I would ask them to read an article published in Pakistan's oldest English daily Dawn Online issue June 5, 2013: ‘A License to Rape’ by Murtaza Haider. Qadianis should pay special attention to following:

QUOTE:

In a well-researched paper published in 1997, Professor Asifa Quraishi explains that the rape laws in Pakistan are anything but Islamic. Drawing exclusively from Islamic sources and Quranic injunctions, Professor Quraishi makes the following points. First, the Quranic injunctions are restricted to zina (consensual sexual act by adults outside of marriage). There is no mention of rape in Quran. Secondly the intent of the Quranic injunctions was to prevent lewd behavior in public and to limit instances of false accusations. The requirement to produce four witnesses who had explicitly witnessed the sexual act is possible only if the act is being committed in public and in nude. This suggests that “unlawful sexual intercourse will be prosecuted by the state only when it is publically indecent.”

The noble Quran forbade Zina (fornication) in Surat Al-'Isrā' (17:32) and prescribed the punishment in Surat An-Nūr (24:2). The noble Quran then reads:

Those who defame chaste women and do not bring four witnesses (shuhada) should be punished with eighty lashes, and their testimony should not be accepted afterwards, for they are profligates. (24:4)

The Quranic speech is clear and without confusion. The requirement to produce four witnesses, and not just male witnesses, is required by the Quran to prevent false accusations of fornication against women.

END QUOTE.

I am sure conscientious Qadianis will NOT like to stand in ranks with CII and Khalifa Munawar Hussain and will reconsider justification of their defense of their QK2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad.

 Link to article in Dawn online (I highly recommend this article, especially to Qadianis):

http://beta.dawn.com/news/1016271/a-license-to-rape/?commentPage=1&storyPage=1

Did Late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia Get Ahmadis Declared Non-Muslim in Pakistan in 1974?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

I received an email from a Qadiani Rind Malik. He sent attachment of a column by well-known Urdu Columnist, resident of NY. His name is Hasan Mujtaba. He is a regular columnist in most published Urdu newspaper in Pakistan i.e. Daily Jang. He also writes column in weekly Urdu newspaper published in NY, NY i.e. Pakistan Post (http://www.pakistanpost.net). In its issue from May 30th, to June 05th, 2013 a column is written by Hasan Mujtaba, under heading ‘Har Buraki Ki Jar Saudi Arabia Ka Badshah’ (Translation: Root of every evil is King of Saudi Arabia). Column is on page 10 of this issue on the newspaper's website: http://www.pakistanpost.net/issues/issue-1053/

Here is the direct link to text of this column.

According to Hasan Mujtaba sahib Ahmadis were declared non-Muslim in Pakistan in 1974 by then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto under pressure of King Faisal of Saudi Arabia who visited Pakistan earlier that year on occasion of 2nd Islamic Summit held in Lahore. I know Qadianis give this reason for declaration of Ahmadis (both Qadianis and Lahori-Ahmadis) as non-Muslim under 2nd constitutional amendment in 1973 Pakistan Constitution. As I read same in column by columnist of stature of Hasan Mujtaba, I was very disappointed. I was not expecting from him to make such unfounded accusation. In column he writes he attended a wedding reception of Ahmadi (Qadiani-group) in New Jersey, I don’t understand what he ate there that overcame his better judgment.

Pakistanis, including Pakistan People Party elders, who are aware of politics in 1970s in Pakistan know that Qadiani-Group people collectively at organizational level on command of their then Qadiani Khalifa 3 Mirza Nasir Ahmad supported financially, voluntarily, and by votes helped PPP win 1970 election in former West Pakistan. That brought PPP into power and ZA Bhutto became its Prime Minister. That help of Qadiani Khalifa 3 and his younger brother who later became Qadiani Khalifa 4 Mirza Tahir Ahmad, encouraged them to interfere in politics of the country, especially in Punjab Province. And to keep pressure on ZA Bhutto, Qadiani leadership also started political contacts with PPP opponent party ‘Tahrik-e-Istiqlal’ of Air Marshal (retired) Asghar Khan. According to book ‘Bhutto Kay Akhari 323 Din’ (Last 323 days of Bhutto) by Col. Rafi-ud-Din, the military liaison in last year of Bhutto life in prison, Bhutto said, “Qadianis were becoming King Makers in Pakistan like Jews in United States”.

So to end the NUISANCE VALUE of Qadianis he declared them Kafir (non-Muslim). Rabwa Railway Station incident (in which Qadianis physically beat Muslim medical college students) provided a good chance to Bhutto to execute his game plans. Interestingly, in same book, Bhutto considered it as his “virtuous act” to get Qadianis declared Kafir. Nowhere he said that he acted under pressure of Late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. Elsewhere I have mentioned how Lahori-Ahmadis became the innocent bystander victims of the 2nd amendment in constitution.

As far as Late King Faisal is concerned he knew Lahori-Ahmadis are Muslims. Here are two examples:

1-Late King Faisal offered Eid and other prayers behind Lahori-Ahmadi Imams at Woking Muslim Mission (Shah Jehan Mosque) during his visit/stay in UK.

2-In 1950s during his six months stay as personal guest of late Saudi King Ibn-Saud, late Abdul Manan Omar sahib spent considerable time in Makkah. During his stay posters against him by Mullah in that city were distributed, stating that he was Kafir (Nauzubilah). Late King Faisal was at that time was Governor of Makkah. He intervened and with help of Imam of Kaaba Sharif (Masjid Al-Haram) he resolved the issue.

So it is absolute concoction that late King Faisal initiated and pressure Bhutto to get Qadianis delared Kafir.

I wonder when Qadianis will realize that in era of ‘Great Equalizer’ i.e. Internet, their lies cannot remain unexposed. When Qadianis will realize they are only deceiving themselves and occasionally others like Hasan Mujtiba sahib, before people find out the truth?

I will try to reach columnist Hasan Mujtiba and keep readers posted on this blog.

King Faisal photo at Woking Muslim Mission Mosque:

http://www.wokingmuslim.org/photos/faisal.htm

http://www.wokingmuslim.org/photos/is-rev-aug35-2.htm

Secretary General of the Organisati​on of Islamic Cooperatio​n (OIC) visits our mosque in Paramaribo

Thought Provoking Questions by Qadiani Friend Nasir Mahmood

Thought Provoking Questions by Qadiani Friend Nasir Mahmood.

I received an email from a Qadiani friend Nasir Mahmood sahib. He commented on speech delivered by QK3 Mirza Nasir Ahmad on November 6, 1977, at Masjid Aqsa, Rabwah, Pakistan to annual rally of Majlis Khuddamul Ahmadiyya. In email Nasir Mahmood sahib also raised some poignant questions. I see it as a sign of Islal (correction)in Qadiani beliefs and practices. Though Qadiani friends have long way to travel, but journey has started. Allah-O-Akbar. Email is copy-pasted below.

Rashid Jahangiri.

Hadi Ali Chaudhry Sb,

The Editor, Ahmadiyya Gazette

Reference: Article on Khilafat and Mujaddidiyyat (May 2013 issue)

http://www.ahmadiyyagazette.ca/articles/521.html

Assalam-o-Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

Herein below the undersigned enlists some questions and comments on the above document with the request to please answer and clarify these in your next issue of Ahmadiyya Gazette:

1) It does not make sense why the author chose to build up his views on the basis of some ambiguous sayings of a few scholars prior to Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) whereas he claimed to be the third Khalifa of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) who has dilated (expounded) upon this subject covering it abundantly in all aspects in his books and sayings.

2) The history of Jamaat and its literature is witness to it that up until 1968 it was the unanimous faith of Jamaat of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) that Messengers, Prophets and Mujadadeen shall keep on descending in the Jamaat Ahmadiyya (i.e. true Islam) until the day of resurrection. What prompted him to put forward this innovation contrary to the teachings of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as)? Also, third Khalifa’s statements in Pakistan National Assembly of 1974 that no Ummati Prophet will come after Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) in the Ummah was in direct contradiction of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as)’s clear statements that Ummati Prophets shall keep on coming in future as well. (Reference: Roohani Khazain, Volume 20, Page 227)

3) Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) has defined that a Khalifa is the substitute of the Prophet who rejuvenates the faith (Reference: Malfoozat, Volume 2, Page 666). The term “Khalifa” means the Rank and the term “Tajdid” describes his function. The effort of the author to unnecessarily confuse the readers is highly deplorable.

4) The author has admitted the claim of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) that he is the 13th Khalifa of Islam who descended at the turn of 14th Century. So it simply means that in previous 13 centuries there was only one Khalifa in each century and it refutes the innovation of the author that the Arabic word “Mann” in the hadith of Mujadadeen may mean more than one in a century. Can you provide a reference from the writings of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) to this effect? Why should an Ahmadi disregard the teachings of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) the “Hakam” and “Adal” and prefer others over him?

5) Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) has described that the verse “Inna Nah-nu NazZal NazZikra Wa Inna La-hu La Hafizoon” (Al-Hijr Verse 10) is the fundamental verse regarding this subject and the Ayaat-e-Istakhlaf is subservient exposition of the same (Reference: Roohani Khazain, Voume 6, Page 338). The hadith of Mujadadeen is further exposition of both above mentioned verses, but the author has not taken into his account this basic fact in his article.

6) The author has stated that there is no mention of the word “Mujadad” in Holy Quran. But doesn’t he know that there is no mention of the words “Masih-e-Maud”, “Qudrat-e-Sania” and “Khilafat Ahmadiyya” in the Holy Quran? Then why did he believe that?

7) The author has tried to belittle the rank of Mujadad while Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) says:

a) That in being Messenger of God, the Prophet and the Mohaddas have the same rank (Reference: Roohani Khazain, volume 6, Page 323).

b) The Mujadadin and Roohani Khulafa are needed in the Ummah as there was need of prophets since ever (Reference: Roohani Khazain, Volume 6, Page 340).

Since the Mujadad should necessarily be the recipient of the Holy Spirit (Rooh-ul-Qudas) also comes in the garb of a prophet, therefore signs to recognize him are the same as that of a prophet. Moreover it is incumbent upon a believer to recognize the Mujadad / Imam-uz-Zaman of his century and have faith in him and thus avoid dying in a state of ignorance. Did the author ever announce his claim to be the recipient of the Holy Spirit?

8) The author has based his views about Khilafat Ahmadiyya on the basis of hadith stating Khilafat Rashida will be for 30 years, but Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) has not given much credibility to this hadith as compared to others for the current age (Reference: Roohani Khazain, Volume 6, Page 338). Therefore any reference for the author’s approval of it is simply an imputation and “dajjal”.

9) The author’s assertion that his views are in accordance with the teachings of his predecessor Khulafa is incorrect. First Khalifa states (Reference: Badar, 23 May 1913) that Qudrat-e-Sania means that Mujadadeen will keep on coming in support of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as). Similarly 2nd Khalifa says the same in Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 9, Page 319.

10) The author further says that it is not necessary that a Mujadad should announce his claim. But we find in the practice of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) that prior to his receiving the honor of rank of Masih-e-Maud in 1889, earlier he was granted the rank of Mujadad in 1885 and he did publish it (Reference: Roohani Khazain, Volume 2, Page 319). Did he do an unnecessary thing by announcing of his becoming a Mujadad?

11) Further the author says that if someone believes that after Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as) any Mujadad should come he belittles Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as)’s position. To such thinkers, the question is this that sometime after the Holy Prophet (saw) the Khatam-ul-Anbiyaa (Nabi-e-Akhir-uz-Zamaan), Mujadadeen and Ummati Prophet have advented but his (saw) position has not been belittled; rather his (saw) beneficence increased, then how such occurrence will belittle the rank of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (as)?

Unity of Jamaat is much desirable but it cannot be achieved by disobeying Almighty Allah, His Prophet (saw) and Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud’s (as) teachings which is what happens when the people start following the whimsical views of any person contrary to it.

Wa Salaam,

Nasir Mahmood

25th May 2013

The Finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and its Utility

Ikram has submitted a post with the title given above, in commemoration of the death anniversary of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad today, 26 May. Please read it as a pdf file at this link.

BBC Documentary on Marmaduke Pickthall

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

BBC Documentary on Marmaduke Pickthall and video of Shah Jehan Mosque (Woking Muslim Misson)

Marmaduke Pickthall (7 April 1875 — 19 May 1936) was a Western Islamic scholar, noted for his English translation of the Qur’an. A convert from Christianity, Pickthall was a novelist, esteemed by D. H. Lawrence, H. G. Wells, and E. M. Forster, as well as a journalist, headmaster, and political and religious leader. He declared his conversion to Islam in dramatic fashion after delivering a talk on ‘Islam and Progress’ on November 29, 1917, to the Muslim Literary Society in Notting Hill, West London. He was also involved with the services of the Woking Muslim Mission in the absence of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, its founder.

http://www.virtualmosque.co.uk/who-was-marmaduke-william-pickthall/?utm_source=subscribe2&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=postnotify