The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog


Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and MattersSee Title Page and List of Contents


See: Project Rebuttal: What the West needs to know about Islam

Refuting the gross distortion and misrepresentation of the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad and Islam, made by the critics of Islam

Read: Background to the Project

List of all Issues | Summary 1 | Summary 2 | Summary 3


April 12th, 2012

Khilafat versus coming prophets: Questions by Mohammed Iqbal

Admin’s Note:I am starting here a separate post about the points raised by Mr Mohammed Iqbal in another thread which he addressed to Shabeeb Haneef. That discussion can be conducted here separately, without interferring with the one there.

Below are the points which Mohammed Iqbal sahib made in his comments, in order. (Zahid Aziz.)
 


 
Ahmadiyya Jamat Qadiani has taken two different positions re new Prophets. They are:

1) Position 1 (P1):

Prophets will come. In fact even thousands of them can. This is the position famously taken by Khalifa 2 and highlighted by this blog time and time again. What is more a prophet could come “even today”(which means Khalifa2 will relinquish his Khilafat and follow him unless the new incumbent happens to be himself.).

2) Position 2 (P2):

Yes, Prophets can come, but only in theory. But in practice, no prophet or even mujaddids will come, since the divinely ordained Khilafat has been firmly placed in the saddle. It will last for a 1000 years. This millenium long chain of Caliphs negates the need for a new prophet or reformer. So any new claimants to any divine office is ipso facto an impostor.

P2 is nowadays proclaimed from every pulpit and in private conversations very shrilly as well as in print. The reasons for my questions was to find out which of these two positions you have taken. If you hold P1, you should investigate the claims of the new claimants and certainly you are well within your right to have made e-mail exchanges with MAA (and spoken on the phone with another). And if it was as a result of your interaction with MAA, that led to the conclusion that he was he was bogus, you should tell the world about it. Dont you have a duty to inform his followers in your place about it? On the other hand if you hold P2, your interactions with them was just a waste. The purpose would only be to mock and ridicule. This was the point I was trying to make. My reasons were not to secretly scrutinize your actions as you put it. Nor do I think I need to know you personally to reply to your blog. As for running to MAA sahib and accepting him, make no mistake about it, Shabeeb. I will do exactly that, if my investigations into his claims lead me to it. But right now I am in a dilemma. Should I hold P1 and start investigating or as per P2 reject him forthwith? Kindly advise.
 


 
I was highlighting the two contradictory positions taken by Q jamaat regarding the coming of new prophets. According to P1, prophethood is wide open even today. As per P2, it is bye,bye..”Wahy-al-Nubuwwah” for now, see you after 12000 new moons! I wanted Shabeeb to tell me which of these two positions Shabeeb holds. I only wanted to answer this question in the light of his interactions with the new claimants. For obvious reasons they have shelved P1 and proclaiming only P2, from all conceivable platforms. I wanted Shabeeb to see the contradictions in these two stands. It was very much the subject matter of our discussion. Shabeeb,FYI, I am not a follower of MAA or any new claimants. I am not follower of QJ or LAM for that matter. Yes, I have a great deal of respect for HMGA, but unlike his followers I dont hold him to be infallible. Anyway I thank the moderators of this blog for not accusing me of straying off the subject. My next questions to you is if this Khilafat is so powerful as to exclude the coming of a new prophet or even Mujaddids, why give it only a lifespan of 1000 years. Who fixed this period? Why will it not “abide with you forever”, unlike the ‘comforter’ of Jesus or the ‘Qudrath-al Thaniyya’ of HMGA?What will happen after this period? Will there be a barrage of Prophets?
 


 
Dear Shabib,

You haven’t answered my question. Can prophets come today or is their coming held in abeyance for a 1000 years, the predicted lifespan for the present Caliphate?

March 31st, 2012

Qadianis change meaning of “akhirat” in Ch. 2, v. 4 to prove prophets can come

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.


Qadianis have changed meaning of Holy Quran verse.

To prove my point that Holy Quran translations published by Qadiani Jamaat in order to establish “prophet-hood” of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad after Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS have not hesitated in concocting absolutely NEW meanings of Holy Quran verse. Below are few prominent translations of Holy Quran. At the end I have quoted Qadiani Jamaat published translations.
Holy Quran Chapter 2 Verse 4:

Allama Noor ud Din:
4. And who (also) believe in that (Message) which has been revealed to you and in that which had been revealed before you, and who have firm faith in the Hereafter.

Maulana Muhammad ali:
2:4 And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee and that which was revealed before thee, and of the Hereafter they are sure.

Abdullah Yousaf Ali:
4. And who believe in the Revelation sent to thee, and sent before thy time, and (in their hearts) have the assurance of the Hereafter.

Muhammad Asad:
And who believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon thee, [O Prophet,] as well as in that which was bestowed before thy time: for it is they who in their innermost are certain of the life to come!

M.M. Pickthal:
And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter.

Shakir:
And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter.

T.B.Irving:
Who believe in what has been sent down to you as well as what was sent down before you, While they are convinced about the Hereafter;

Abdul Majid Daryabadi:
And who believe in that which hath been sent down unto thee and that which hath been sent down before thee and of the Hereafter they are convinced.

Ahmed Ali:
And those who believe with what was descended to you, and what was descended from before you, and with the end (other life) they are sure/certain .

Muhammad Sarwar:
Who have faith in what has been revealed to you and others before you and have strong faith in the life hereafter.

HOLY QURAN TRANSLATIONS PUBLISHED BY QADIANI JAMAAT
Verse 4 = Verse 5 of Qadiani Jamaat publication.
Maulawi Sher Ali:
5. And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come.
[Please note I am confident this was NOT the original translation by Maulawi Sher Ali sahib. If some Qadiani challenges me, then I will give my reason].
Maulawi Sher Ali’s 5 VOLUME COMMENTARY FALSELY credited to Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad:

5. And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and that which was revealed before thee, and they have firm faith in what is yet to come.
Sir Chaudhry Zafarullah Khan:
And who believe in that which has been revealed to thee, and in that which was revealed before thee, and have firm faith in that which has been foretold and is yet to come.

[Qadianis are so proud of Sir Chaudhry Zafarullah Khan, but their Khilafas have NOT permitted Zafarullah Khan’s translation to be officially recognized at organization level. This is the why it is NOT available on www.alislam.org and I found it on www.islamforwest.org If Qadianis wonder why? Here is the answer: Zafarullah Khan knew Qadiani Khalifas very well. He knew they will take credit of his work. So he instead of handing over his work to Qadiani Jamaat made his own trust to publish his work. Zafarullah Khan knew how Qadiani Khalifas published 5 Volume English COMMENTARY of Sher Ali sahib as QK2 work. It was result of efforts of Sher Ali sahib’s son in-law Abdul Manan Omar sahib(son of Allam Noor ud Din) who got at least the translation part published before he was forced out of Rabwah. Thus at least QK2 had to accept it. ( I doubt if qadianis on this forum know that English translation is same in Sher Ali and QK2). Same thing happened with Malik Ghulam Fareed’s short commentary. Same was the case of Urdu ‘Tafseer-e-Saghir’ which was work of Maulvi Ismail Halalpuri. Similarly, Urdu ‘Tafseer-e-Kabir’ was also work of SEVEN member committee in Rabwah. One of whose member was my father’s friend Syed Ali Muhammad Ijmari sahib]

March 29th, 2012

Can prophets come after Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw)?

This topic has been started at the request of Mr Shabeeb Haneef. See this comment for his request.

I hope that contributors will make clear their views on what is a prophet in this context, what authority does he posseess, and what does the appearance of a prophet require us to do?

Our standpoint can be read at this link.

March 22nd, 2012

Are Qadiani Jamaat Friends in violation of teachings of their “Musleh-Mauood”?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.


Qadiani Jamaat people believe their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was the “Musleh-Mauood”.

For Qadianis practice in teachings of their QK 2 is matter of their belief. This is the reason they cite when they decide not to offer Namaz-e-Janazah (funeral prayer) of Lahore Ahmadiyya Jamaat members. Please remember LAM members do not consider any reciter of Kalima-Shahada as Kafir (non-Muslim) regardless of how aberrant their beliefs and practices of Islam are. This is the reason LAM members do not consider Qadianis as Kafir. My point is that in practice of their beliefs Qadianis don’t give a hoot to blood relations, close family ties and the hurt that they cause by showing disrespect to the deceased and his survivors.

QK 2 in his famous book ‘Anwar-e-Khilafat’ from page 124 to 127 has written following statements:

“I say there shall be thousands of prophets”

“I say even now there can be a prophet”

“Even if someone placed a sword on my neck and ask me to say there cannot be any nabi after Rasul Allah, I will say you’re a liar, and nabi can come after and they will come.”

Now given the teachings of QK 2 that “thousands of prophets” can come after Holy Prophet Muhammad Rasool Allah (SAWS), it is incumbent upon Qadianis that should accept at least the following new prophet in Germany, especially when he endorses Qadianis belief that HMGA was “prophet” and invites Qadiani-Ahmadis to pledge to him:

The New Claimant of Prophethood Zahid Ali Khan:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp9xl5_a-new-claimant-of-prophethood-zahid-khan-denouncing-ahmadiyya-cult_lifestyle

Kanal von khanverlag

http://www.youtube.com/user/khanverlag

Khan’s Rede und die Gegenveranstaltung der Muslime

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPufZz1nHzA&feature=related

Here I ask question to Qadiani Jamaat friends:

Don’t you think you people are in violation of QK 2 teachings by delaying in accepting Zahid Ali Khan as NEW prophet??

Thanks in advance for answering.

March 19th, 2012

Christians under attack – Al Jazeera report

Submitted by Ikram.


Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran (Vatican) – President, Council For Inter-religious Dialogue

The above link was posted by Rashid in a different thread.

The Cardinal sidestepped certain questions pertaining to Vatican view about whether Islam in an intolerant religion, potential attack on Iran by United States, message to Israeli authorities and how they deal with Christian communities, the concerns of Muslim about invasions into their countries etc.

The interview brought out certain pertinent points, though not in the interview but nevertheless relevant to the topic and are addressed below:

Failure of West to recognize that even though they might have separated Church and State from their own perspective, but the world has not. Any attack on Muslim country is perceived as an attack on Islam by Christianity. Then as a reaction, the Christians become target of reprisal attacks in communities which is obvious from Al Jazeera report:

According to the Vatican, more than half of Iraq’s Christians have left the country since the US-led invasion in 2003. On New Year’s, a bomb went off in a church in Egypt, killing at least 20 people. And in Nigeria a bomb destroyed a church on Christmas 2011, leaving 35 people dead.

Next time, when any Muslim country is attacked by a Western power, they must take the above facts into equation as for the Muslims the current wars might be a continuation of the crusades. If nothing else, the Vatican must disassociate itself from any Western Power that initiates war or imposes sanctions on others, excommunicate it when it breaks the Christian message of “love, peace and forgiveness” and Vatican itself must make unequivocal declaration that crusades have ended, rather than the sporadic vague apologies:

Saving one of his most audacious initiatives for the twilight of his papacy, John Paul II yesterday attempted to purify the soul of the Roman Catholic church by making a sweeping apology for 2,000 years of violence, persecution and blunders…The Pope did not identify guilty individuals or name the crusades, the Inquisition or the Holocaust, but the references were clear…Pope Urban II, anxious to assert Rome’s authority in the east, sent a military expedition in 1095 to reconquer the holy land. The crusaders ravaged the countries they passed through and massacred the Muslim, Jewish and even Christian population of Jerusalem after capturing it in 1099. After 200 years of conflict Muslim armies drove them out for good, but the crusaders’ symbol of the red cross remains provocative. [Pope says sorry for sins of church – Sweeping apology for attacks on Jews, women and minorities defies theologians’ warnings – Rory Carroll in Rome, The Guardian, Monday 13 March 2000 06.37 EST]

Vatican has to end its dichotomy and wishy-washy stance on Palestine. Read, the following text of Al Jazeera with regards to Vatican view about state of Christians in Middle East:

“For me the great temptation for the Christians in the Middle East is to emigrate. I think if Christians would leave the Middle East, it would be a tragedy, because first of all they are leaving the earth where they were born because Christians have always been in the Middle East. And all the holy places would become museums and that would be a catastrophe… You cannot deny that they are the target of a kind of opposition. I have been in the Middle East for many years and what I felt was that Christians feel they are second-class citizens in countries where Muslims are the majority.”

Now for a brief moment, replace the word Christian with Palestinian (i.e. both Muslims and Christians) and replace Muslim with Jews, then on the same moral principles, Vatican must address the Israeli government:

“For me the great temptation for the Palestinians in the Middle East is to emigrate. I think if Palestinians would leave the Middle East, it would be a tragedy, because first of all they are leaving the earth where they were born because Palestinians have always been in the Middle East. And all the holy places would become museums and that would be a catastrophe… You cannot deny that they are the target of a kind of opposition. I have been in the Middle East for many years and what I felt was that Palestinians feel they are second-class citizens in countries where Jews are the majority.”

Vatican is making efforts for inter-faith harmony. Pope John Paul II did reach out to other religions including Muslims when he stated:

3. The Holy Spirit is not only present in other religions through authentic expressions of prayer. “The Spirit’s presence and activity”, as I wrote in the Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, “affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions” (n. 28).

Normally, “it will be in the sincere practice of what is good in their own religious traditions and by following the dictates of their own conscience that the members of other religions respond positively to God’s invitation and receive salvation in Jesus Christ, even while they do not recognize or acknowledge him as their Saviour (cf. Ad gentes, nn. 3, 9, 11)” (Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue – Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Instruction Dialogue and Proclamation, 19 May 1991, n. 29; L’Osservatore Romano English edition, 1 July 1991, p. III).

Similarly, the current Pope Benedict XVI stated:

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 30, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Whoever seeks peace and the good of the community with a pure conscience, and keeps alive the desire for the transcendent, will be saved even if he lacks biblical faith, says Benedict XVI.

These statement by Vatican are not too far from Quran:

2:62. Surely, those who (profess to) believe (in Islam), and those who follow the Jewish faith, the Christians and the Sabians, whosoever (of these truly) believes in Allâh and the Last Day and acts righteously shall have their reward with their Lord, and shall have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.

Al Jazeera quoted Pope Benedict, based upon Vatican transcripts that Pope either supports or re-quotes other experts for the verse “2:256 – There is no compulsion in religion” and that this verse (erroneously) belongs to Makkan period when Muhammad was powerless. Essentially, Vatican supports the abrogation dogma.

This is fundamentally where Vatican must be taking the opposite stand. The moment it does so, the Muslims themselves come into spot light. Imagine a debate where Robert Spencer is emphasizing that the verse 2:256 was never abrogated and that he cannot understand as to why an ignorant Mullah is targeting minorities in his country. What a spectacle would it be! A deer caught in the headlights. With this simple change of perspective, there will be beginnings of peace in Muslim lands, as it will pull the rug from beneath the Mullahs. Amen!

Since the dogma of abrogation is a favorite topic with Islam haters and Islam distorterers (from within Islam), it is part of discussion in Project Rebuttal – Issues 5, 9c and 21. The verse 2:256 has been addressed from different angles in Issues 4, 23, 25, 37a, 40a, 40b and 44b.

Q.E.D. How disastrous it becomes when man tampers with Word of Quran, in this instance the concept of abrogation of Quranic verses of peace and tolerance, thus creating a man made religion. Out of such tampering then naturally polytheistic tendencies take hold. The deities of hate, intolerance and vengeance gain footing into ones mind and belief systems. With passage of time man starts sacrificing everything to such false internal gods. Kalima Shahada – “There is no God, but Allah…” is the next victim as such internal gods now have to be bowed to, no matter what the cost to self or humanity. By then the priestly class has become the foremost advocates of such deities. Soon soulless homilies and rituals become more important than the soul of the religion. That’s when Islam of Moses changes to Judaism, of Jesus – Christianity, of Zoroaster – Zoroastrianism, of Rama/Krishna – Hinduism. Now its the turn of Islam of Muhammad. Is it not anything but Islam? Such is a natural decay of a religion which is essentially the job assignment of the Devil:

4:119. `And certainly, I will lead them astray and assuredly I will arouse vain desires in them, and I will incite them (to polytheistic practices)…

Allah can only stand behind and guarantee His own Laws and their outcome, not of that of man. No wonder every sin can be potentially forgiven in Quran but the sin of polytheism:

4:116. Allâh does not forgive (without repentance on the part of the sinner) that a partner be associated with Him though He forgives everything short of that to whomsoever He will. And he who associates a partner with Allâh has strayed, indeed, a far off straying.

Some might argue or complain against the unforgiving nature of Allah in the above verse, but that’s how His Laws stand. We see all the chaos in the world as a consequence of this very Law of His being broken with polytheism at the heart of it. It is a natural cause and effect. In physical world, one of His Law is that of Gravity. Next time, if one jumps off from a second storey of a building, that person will be lucky to walk off with just a sprained ankle. Similarly, the moral and spiritual laws have their own injuries when violated. Unlike human laws which have mostly negative consequences if broken, His Laws have rewards when followed:

2: 261. The attribute of those who spend their wealth in the cause of Allâh is like the attribute of a grain (of corn) which sprouts seven ears, each ear bearing a hundred grains. And Allâh multiplies further for whomsoever He pleases, for Allâh is Bountiful, All-Knowing.


verses quoted above are from the translation of Holy Quran – Nooruddin.

March 17th, 2012

Dreams and spirituality

Pakistani Islamic scholar Nilofar Ahmed sahiba has written an article under above title, in Dawn.

She wrote:

“The Prophet said that after him nothing would be left of prophecy, except for a true dream. He also said that dreams are one in 46 parts of prophethood (Bukhari)”

Javed Ahmad Ghamdi sahib is also of the opinion that after Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS, people and saints can only receive prophecies in form of true dream.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib made claims of receiving divine communications in forms beside dreams.

Sigmund Freud and other psychoanalytics have never attracted me towards their theories, may be because I had read HMGA book ‘Islmaee Usool Kee Philosphy’.

I will appreciate if anyone who has read HMGA writings on the subject of Dreams and Spirituality, can give us gist of what he wrote. I will forward that reply to Nilofar Ahmed sahiba. Thanks.

Dawn article:
http://www.dawn.com/2012/03/16/dreams-and-spirituality.html

March 3rd, 2012

Religion and Rationality – a debate

Submitted by Ikram.


Hamza Tzortzis and Pervez Hoodbhoy on Religion & Rationality- A Discussion @ LUMS.

The above youtube link was earlier posted by Rashid in a different thread.

It was an interesting debate to a certain extent where both participants came from different ends of the spectrum, Tzortiz (T) from the assumption that there is God whereas Hoodbhoy (P) from the given that there is Science. The logic of T encompassed pre-Big Bang but without any proofs. Whereas, P was limited by time and space of the physical world only after the Big Bang and he was not in the room to deny the non-physical i.e. moral/spiritual space that T dwell upon. T tried to move in his argument spectrum towards P but could not encapsulate P for the mere fact that P was there for only cold logic of his science which was a flat rebuttal in itself.

Please note that both T & P are not from different and opposite ends of spectrum, rather from different corners of the room and not necessarily with antagonist points of view. What the debate lacked was a knowledgeable moderator, who should had initially set the tone of what this debate was about and then structured the debate with shorter but multiple opportunities for both to make the point rather than one time long speeches and then one time rebuttals. In between transitions, the moderator then could had shaped the arguments of one participant for the other. Due to lack of this structure, it is not that which of the debaters won, but it is the audience who lost an opportunity to learn rather than just hear. And both participants spoke past each other. T seems to be a skilled orator with common colloquial punch lines, whereas, P was more concrete in his space, but that is who they are. T probably with theological influence & Western literature background and P from Trieste physics. At least to me the arguments of P were clear to be thought about. Whereas, T was more philosophical and vague, though he had clever interjections and quotes which somewhat had a wow factor, but little sustainable substance.

The debate brought out certain points, paraphrased below by each that are briefly touched upon and are identified by their name letters. Comments with indented paragraphs are added by me.

T – Concept of God transcends time and space.

Comment:

57:3. He is (from) the very First (there was nothing before Him), and (He will exist to) the Last (there will be nothing after Him), and when nothing remains He will remain (He being an eternal Being). He is the Supreme Being (subordinate to no one). And (whereas He comprehends everything) He is Incomprehensible. He has full knowledge of everything.

T – Universe out of nothing.

Comment:

The natural question arises as to how it all came to be over past, present and future:

2:117. (God is) the Wonderful Originator without depending upon any matter or pattern of the heavens and the earth; and when He issues a decree He does but say to it, `Be’ and it comes to be.

The time frame in the verse above and it comes to be is bound by the nature of that particular creation:

36:82. Verily, His command, when He intends (to evolve) a thing, is (only) that He says to it, `Be’ and it comes into being (at the proper time).

On a celestial scale, the law of conservation of matter has given way to the law of conservation of energy and e=mc^2. Nowadays it is not surprising for matter to emerge from non-matter.

On the spiritual plane:

…to create something out of nothing is also His work. Just as you see it in a scene in a dream He creates a whole world without any matter, and shows nonexistent things to be existent. Thus such are all the wonders of His power… [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad – The Light – U.K. Edition, May 2008 Special Century Edition, page 19]

Whereas, in evolutionary transformation of matter:

6:95. Verily, it is Allâh Who splits the (seed) grains and (fruit) stones. He bring [sic] forth the living out of the lifeless and He brings forth the lifeless out of the living. Such is Allâh, wherefore then are you turned back.

In summary:

“Everything in the world appears to have been enchained by the Law. It follows it implicitly Is it then other than Allah’s religion that they seek (to follow), and to Him submits whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, and to Him shall they be returned? (3:82). Nature discloses regularity, precision, punctuality, knowledge, power, command, intellect, preordination, prearrangement, precaution, and several other features that are the possessions of the mind exclusively. In their presence the universe cannot be taken as the outcome of accident; It needs an intelligent Design to precede the process of its creation. The word design is sometimes used to bore minds with skeptical tendencies, but it now carries wider connotation. It brings within it so many facts and figures recently discovered by Science that disbelief in God would amount to ignorance.” [Introduction to Study of The Holy Quran, by Khwaja Kamaluudin, p. 21. Note: “intelligent Design” referred to here has no relation to contemporary evolution debate]

T- Self Creation of ?God

Comment:

59:22. He is Allâh, He is the One beside whom there is no other, cannot be and will never be One worthy of worship but He. (He is) the Knower of the unseen and the seen. He is the Most Gracious, the Ever Merciful.

59:23. He is Allâh, beside whom there is no other, cannot be and will never be One worthy of worship but He, (He is) the Supreme Sovereign, the Holy One, the Most Perfect, Bestower of peaceful Security, the Guardian, the All-Mighty, the Compensator of losses, the Possessor of all greatness. Holy is Allâh, far beyond and above the things they associate with Him.

59:24. He is Allâh, the Creator of (the matter and the spirit), the Maker, the Bestower of forms (and fashioner of everything suiting to its requirement). All fair attributes belong to Him. All that lies in the heavens and the earth declares His glory; He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.

85:13. It is He Who originates and continues reproducing.

85:14. And He is the Protector, the Most Loving;

85:15. Lord of the Throne (of Power), the Lord of all Glory,

85:16. Absolute Performer of what He intends (to carry out). [Here “He intends” can be extrapolated to include according to His Laws]

112:1. Say,`(The fact is) He is Allâh, the One and Alone in His Being’.

112:2. `Allâh is that Supreme Being Who is the Independent and Besought of all and Unique in all His attributes’.

112:3. `He begets none and is begotten by no one’.

112:4. `And there is none His equal’.

114:2. `The Sovereign, the Controller of all affairs of mankind,

114:3. `The God of mankind,

P – Clarifies the topic of the debate – “Religion as a rational enterprise, is it or is it not?”

Defines Rationality as – Interlinks (of ideas) that link cause to effect based upon set of universal rules e.g. deaths in epidemics results from scientific reasons e.g. germs, hygiene, genetics, malnutrition etc. Religious rationalism emanates from “somebody displeased” i.e. God, for earthquakes, tsunamis etc. to happen. Then why on earth the poor and believing people were hurt first in 2005 Kashmir earthquake?

Comment:

More often than not our own lack of knowledge forces us to blame preordination or destiny for an affliction or disaster. The black plagues were widely believed to be a curse by God instead of what they were: infections whose cure was then unknown. However, it was probably easier for people to blame the cause on God rather than accept responsibility for human ignorance. In modern times, under-developed societies suffer disproportionately from natural disasters or epidemics. The question then becomes why does God’s wrath descend mostly on the under developed world? Is God disciplining the poor disproportionately or is this disproportionate human destruction a function of human ignorance?

64:11 (Nothing happens haphazardly in the Universe.) No calamity befalls but according to the laws of God. Whoever (understands this and) believes in God guides himself deep down in his heart. God is the Knower of all things (and events). [Nations that understand the laws in nature are better equipped to take preventive measures against natural disasters. Izn = Leave = Permission = Laws] – Shabbir Ahmed.

P – If religion was a rational exercise then there must be universal consensus on its principles similar to consensus in scientific rules, whereas it is not. For example Muslims and Jews believe in one god, Christians in three, Hindus in 5700+.

Comment:

What P missed was that all of the above i.e. Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus etc. have one common thing. They all believe in God for the mere fact:

“The greatest height intellect can elevate us to, is that there ought to be a God. But whether He is actually there, is a question that surpasses the region of our stereotyped intellect. No amount of argumentation can bring home to the blind that light is there. What he can perceive is only this much, that there ought to be something called light, as there are so many reports to show its existence. But the law of nature, where there is a demand there is a supply, compels us to believe that there must be some solution or other of the problem. So far as man’s capacity for the acquisition of knowledge is concerned, he has two instruments, sense organs and intellect. But both of these are ineffective to take us beyond the quagmire of doubt and suspicion so far as the existence of God is concerned. The craving for first-hand sure knowledge is there. Law of nature requires the possibility of means to satisfy the craving. Sense perception and intellect, the two sources of knowledge, are not potent enough to help us out of the difficulty. Therefore, there must be some other channel of ascertaining truth, to accept which we must not be reluctant.” [God Speaks to Man (Revelation) by M. Muhammad Yaqub B.A., Islamic Review and Muslim India, Vol. VIII, No. 6-7, June-July 1920, p. 273]

P – People belong to a religion because they are born into one. Only 0.1% change their birth religion.

Comment:

Quran agrees to a certain extent of what P says:

5:104. …They say, `Sufficient for us is that (tradition) whereon we have found our forefathers.’ What! (would they follow them blindly) even though their forefathers had no knowledge whatsoever and had no guidance?

But, then there is an example of a non-physics i.e. moral force which made the change in history. The same virtuous force persists with the same principles prevailing for the present and the future:

110:1. The help of Allâh and the victory (over the Makkans) has indeed come (in fulfillment of the prophecies),

110:2. And you see people thronging in to the fold of the Faith of Allâh.

P – Quran is not a book of science. You cannot do any experiment to reject a theological doctrine.

Comment:

Yes, Quran is not a book of science but in step with science for all its secular arguments. It does not contravene science of whatever we know of it. While discussing the validity of science in Qur’ân, the main purpose of Qur’ân is much more and is summarized as follows:

“The aim of the Qur’ân is to spiritualize our souls. It makes numerous statements based on historical facts, but it is not a book of history. It draws attention to different stages of the creation of the universe (7:54; 14:33; 21:28-33; 71:15-18), the origin of life from water (21:30; 24:45), and concerning humans (71:14; 32:7; 39:7; 40:67), but it is not a treatise on the evolution of life. It makes several references to the laws governing the wonderful system that revives the dry earth through rain (7:57) and maintains the supply of sweet and salt water in rivers and oceans (25:54; 35:12), but it is not a manual of Meteorology, Hydraulics, or Ecology. It says: ‘We create a human being from an extract of clay; then We reduce him to a drop of sperm (and place him) in a safe depository; then We form the sperm into a clot; then We develop the clot into a lump of flesh; then We fashion bones out of this lump of flesh, then We clothe the bones with flesh, and thereafter We evolve him into another being’ (23:12-14); yet it is not a work on Obstetrics. Several of its verses contain references to the achievements in the material sciences and activities in the field of trade, space research, and weaponries. He has let the two bodies of water flow freely; they will (one day) join together. (At present) a barrier stands between them. They cannot encroach one upon the other. Pearls and corals come out of both (these seas). And to Him belong the ships raised aloft in the sea like mountain peaks (55:19-24 – a hint on the construction of the Suez and Panama Canals and the huge ships crossing them). It adds: O body of JINN (- fiery natured) and (ordinary) the people! If you have the power and capacity to go beyond the confines of the heavens and the earth, then do go. But you will not be able to go unless you have the necessary and unusual power. Flames of fire, smoke and molten copper will be let loose upon you and you will not be able to defend yourselves (55:33), and yet the Qur’ân is not a book about material sciences, rockets, missiles, or sputniks. It says that when Pharaoh Meneptah was drowning and as death overtook him, he was told: ‘So, on this day We will preserve you in your body (only) that you may be a sign (to learn a lesson from) for the coming generations’ (10:92). The Bible makes no mention of this, nor does any book of history, but still, the Qur’ân is not concerned with Egyptology or Archaeology. Its purpose is not to teach History, Nature, Philosophy, nor to teach any other Science or Art but, as previously stated, to spiritualize our souls. It states, discusses or cites a thing only to the extent relevant to its aim and object, leaving out details as it returns to its central theme and its invitation. When the Qur’ân is studied in this light, there is no doubt that the whole Scripture is a closely reasoned argument and there is continuity of subject throughout the Book.” [The Holy Quran – Introduction, Nooruddin, pg 48-a – 49-a]

P – Builds his case upon the absurdities of theological constructs e.g. he quotes that some claim that angels travel at speed of light, hence nothing can be faster than the angles and by implication nothing can be faster than light. Then he quotes recent CERN results where neutrinos were found traveling faster than light with a Q.E.D. of neutrinos being outside of God’s control.

Comment:

P is right on the money when he ridicules the proponents of psedo-Islamic science, the Mullah mentality (-the blind fellowship) in an otherwise outwardly secular professional.

6: 116. Should you obey the majority of those on earth, they would lead you astray from Allâh’s way. They follow nothing but mere surmise and they do nothing but make conjectures.

P – You do no service either to science or religion when you combine the two.

Comment:

Here I disagree. One does not exclude the other as long it is not a Mullah’s scientific view. The concept of God does not threaten science. George Johnson summarizes this in his review of Owen Gingerich’s God’s Universe:

“… there are two ways to think about science. You can be a theist, believing that behind that veil of randomness lurks an active, loving, manipulative God, or you can be a materialist, for whom everything is matter and energy interacting within space and time. Whichever metaphysical club you belong to, the science comes out the same.” [Scientists on Religion: Theist and materialists ponder the place of humanity in the universe, by George Johnson, Scientific American, Volume 295 Number 4, October 2006.]

P – Self critique – Muslims have not produced any science worth mentioning in last 1000 years. Not even one example can be quoted from any field.

Comment:

P is once again right on the money. The reason is simple because the Muslims misread the following verses in theological sense only and forgot that it is all about science. Qur’ân encourages and nurtures science. It asserts the vast extent of scientific knowledge:

18:109. Say, `If every ocean became ink for (recording) the words and creation of my Lord, surely, the oceans would be spent up before the words and creation of my Lord came to an end, even if we brought to add (therewith) as many more (oceans).

31:27. And if all the trees in the earth were pens, and the sea with seven more seas added to it (were ink), the words of Allah would not be exhausted. Surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Surely the above verses cannot refer to polemics or theology. They clearly signify that God intends man to discover the Laws of science that are also created by Him.

P – Quran tells you how to behave, what your moral values should be, social and ritual structuring.

Comment:

P points out the core purpose of Quran in a generic sense, even though he limits it, but that’s okay. P is generally short sighted in that his frame or arguments are confined to physical world only, but “man cannot live by bread alone”. Like any other human P must have his own value system which must be unique but congruent to universal values of love, hate, yearn, seek, accept, reject, wish, rejoice, repent, regret etc, the all natural human emotions and expectations. Either he can live the current life as an experiment to fully learn the trick of the trade of life and society then hope for a re-incarnation to live an optimized life second time around or live like us mortals this life once and try to make most of it in non-physical aspects. Some may call it even “opium of the masses.” But it is opium for the addict and not for the patient who needs it from the trauma suffered, or a vaccine to prevent an illness, or a nutrition to bring to fruition what life has to offer, or a purpose to otherwise purposeless life and death cycle. That we find in Quran because:

2:2. This is the only perfect Book, wanting in naught, containing nothing doubtful, harmful or destructive, there is no false charge in it…

2:185. The (lunar) month of Ramadzân is that in which the Qur’ân (started to be) revealed as a guidance for the whole of mankind with its clear evidences (providing comprehensive) guidance and the Discrimination (between right and wrong)…

3:4. … And He has revealed (the Qur’ân as) the Criterion of judgment (between truth and falsehood)…

10:57. O mankind! there has come to you an exhortation (to do away with your weaknesses) from your Lord and a cure for whatever (disease) is in your hearts, and (a Book full of) excellent guidance and a mercy, (and full of blessings) to the believers (in the ultimate form of the Qur’ân).

14:1. …(This is) a great Book which We have revealed to you that you may bring mankind, by the leave of their Lord, out of different kinds of darkness into light, to the path of the All-Mighty, the Praiseworthy,

14:2. (To the path of) Allâh, to Whom belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth…

17:105. We revealed it (– the Qur’ân) to suit all the requirement of truth and wisdom and it has come down (to you) with truth and wisdom…

43:2. This perfect Book that makes (the truth) perspicuously clear bears witness (to the above truth).

P – Quran is not about science.

Comment:

Yes, Quran is not a book of science in a classical sense, yet it does not abhor it either. There is a core common premise of a Muslim and a Scientist, that is both:

2:3. Those who believe in the existence of hidden reality, that which is beyond the reach of human perception and ordinary cognizance…

P – There is no point in digging out science from the Quran.

Comment:

That is too broad a brush stroke by P. Of course, one will never be able to find details of M-Theory in Quran, but Quran encourages the core aspect of mind that makes a “good” scientist:

12:108. Say, `This is my path. I call to Allâh. I am on sure knowledge verifiable by reason and (so are) those who follow me. (I believe that) Holy is Allâh. I am not of the polytheists.’

Qur’ân, thus, sets the standards for knowledge, verifiable by reason, which is commonly referred to as “science.” This verse by itself excludes a Mullah from both the science and the logic of Quran.

 


 
Some pertient points in Rebuttal session are as follows:

T – Quran does not go against reality of science. Quran uses science as a supporting argument.

T – People belong to faith and values because of prevailing consensus.

T – How and Why are two different things e.g. How pregnancy happens? Answer: union of sperm and egg. Why my wife became pregnant? Answer: Because I loved her.

T – An atheist can only verify facts but is far removed from the causality of life and universe.

P – With a Sir Syed-ian view, P rejects the relationship of physical world and the prayer e.g. If whole of Saudi Arabia prays for rain, will it become a tropical rain forest? Quran is correct and science is correct. You have to read Quran in a way that the possibility of miracles becomes allegorical.

P – Admonishes the opponent about his superficial understanding of scientific constructs and prevents him from using his understanding in theological arguments.
 


 
Q&A session – some of the highlights are below:

T – Allah from nothing?

P – Science will not tell you somethings. It will not tell you why you exist, what is the purpose of your life, what your morals ought to be. Science only deals with the physical universe after the big bang and not with the issue of a “Creator” who was there before it.

Audience: How can an atheist be sincerely an atheist when he does not even entertain that domain of thought of a Creator?

P’s reply – Science is separate from atheism, agnosticism and religion. These domains only deal with what brought all this about? If the Holy Book had science in it then in the last 1000 years we should had gained in knowledge of a testable experiment, some machine that must had been build, in the form of some device.

Comment:

Since P is a professor of physics in a leading university and was under tutelage of great Abdus Salam in Triest, he must ask his students to re-read the first verses of Muhammad’s revelations in a different light:

96:1. Read in the name of your Lord Who creates

96:2. creates man from a clot (of blood)

96:3. read and your Lord is most Generous,

96:4. Who taught by the pen,

96:5. taught man what he did not know.

96:6. No! Man is surely inordinate,

96:7. because he looks upon himself as self-sufficient.

96:8. Surely to your Lord is the return. [Muhammad Ali]

A keen reader will immediately notice the path to human progress when one is to Read in the name of your Lord Who creates the basis of all material and non-material opportunities in life; and the Divine guarantee of success if one is to read and your Lord is most Generous; and the knowledge that He taught man what he did not know which leads to progress; but the natural impediment to this progress is the human side of man i.e. Man is surely inordinate, he looks upon himself as self-sufficient and thus robs himself of the progress that the Almighty has in store for him. Embedded in these first commandments is the message that lays down the very foundation of what we call individual scholarship and, collectively, as the universities in modern day a.k.a. Harvards, Stanfords, Oxfords, Triestes…

 


 
The Bottom Line to this kind of debate was summarized by Khwaja Kamaluddin in earlier part of last century:

“True Science and true Theology are one and the same. One reveals the Laws of God working in the various manifestations of the Universe, on the physical plane; the other discloses the same Laws at work in the Moral and Spiritual sphere. All these laws emanate from the same First Intelligent Cause, and cannot, therefore, admit of any mutual discrepancy.”

“A person with an atheistic turn of mind cannot but admit the essential reasonableness of the Qur-ánic Theology. The ‘God’ of the Qur-án is the ‘God’ of Nature. If the working of Nature disclose a reign of law, which demands implicit obedience to it from all the component parts of the Universe, and if different forms of the law exhibit different characters and features of that Great Mind, Who is admittedly working behind the scene, it is not difficult to arrive at some of the conceivable attributes of the First Intelligent Cause; and a true theology must reveal them.” [Islam and Zoroastrianism by Khwaja Kamal ud din, p. 91, 93, pub: 1925]


 
Note: Unless otherwise indicated, all the above verses from Quran are taken from the Translation of the Holy Quran by Nooruddin.

February 27th, 2012

Myths minus the Logos in Quranic Interpretations

Submitted by Ikram.


An ongoing project on this site is the Project Rebuttal, which is a rebuttal of the documentary “Islam: What the West needs to know.” This documentary is primarily based upon theological distortions of Islam both from within and without Islam. The Islam haters of the said documentary frequently quote the translation of Quran by Mushin and Hilali to make their case for a violent Islam. Dr. Aziz in his comments on a previous thread has pointed out the short comings of these translators. Obviously, these translators instead of using Quran as the starting point of discussion, make it the end point of a discussion originated elsewhere and then parenthetically use Quran to prove their theological view.

One such angle is their belief of a mythical advent of a violent Jesus/Mehdi etc. Since their belief is already jaded, they will never be able to bring out the purpose and message of Quran and the secular peaceful principles (beside moral and spiritual spheres) that made Prophet Muhammad PBUH, the most successful secular figure in history.

The world view of Mr. A.S. Shaikh and these translators is to begin with mythological and repugnant to human reason, so is their translations, interpretations and reading of Quran. The Islam hating vultures such as Robert Spencer, Serge Tifkovic and others hover around such carcasses of ideas to swoop down on every morsel of conjecture. They then quite successfully make a case to the ignorant and vulnerable about Islam as a carrion of a religion.

Such interpretations of Quran from Muhsin/Hilali that Dr. Zahid Aziz points out, create contradictions within Quran. How can these translators and the HMGA hating protagonists reconcile their violent Jesus and his mission with the following excerpted verses of Quran, taken from Issue 29b of the Rebuttal?

“God Consciousness” is mandated for a Muslim at any given time. There is no right of superiority for a Muslim over any other race for the mere fact that – “And (all) people are but a single nation…” (10:19). No Muslim can ridicule anyone, be it a non-Muslim because – “O you who believe, do not let a people laugh at (another) people, perhaps they may be better than they…(49:11). Quran even goes further, it forbids aggression based upon hate – “And do not let hatred of a people … incite you to transgress. And help one another in righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin and aggression, and keep your duty to Allah. Surely Allah is Severe in retribution.” (5:2).

Difference in faiths is not a basis for aggression because for a Muslim the same Allah is source spring of all religions, books and prophets – “The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. They all believe in Allah and His angels and His Books and His messengers. We make no distinction between any of His messengers…”(2:285). No wonder, there are no caricatures of Moses and Jesus nor Torah or Bible burnings in Muslims communities.

Even idols are to be respected – “And do not abuse those whom they call upon besides Allah, in case, exceeding the limits, they abuse Allah through ignorance.”(6:108) To cap it all, a Muslim does not monopolize the concept of God for his own faith because for him Allah is – “…the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, the God of mankind” (114:1-3).

Quran thus brings the whole humanity under one God and leaves no room for anyone to be children of a lesser God. Quran thus identifies the sources of hate, which are race, religion, Books, prophets, deities and obliterates the instigating tendencies, one by one, and eliminates them altogether by inculcating God Consciousness in Muslims – “Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him.” (49:13 – Asad)

Muhammad said – “Help and not fight, assimilation and not destruction, harmony and peace and not dissension.” In his final Hajj sermon he left for the world the magna charta of world peace “”Remember you are all brothers. All men are equal in the eye of God, and your honours, your lives and your properties are all sacred and in no case should you attack each other’s life and property. Today I trample under my feet all distinctions of caste, colour and nationality. All men are sons of Adam and Adam was of dust.” [Islam’s Contribution to Peace of the World, by S.A. Haq, p.52, p.20]

It behoves Muhsin/Hilali and others to ponder on the following verse when they interject their violent view on Quran and Islam:

4:82. Will they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.

Footnote: The Quran was not written out and given on one occasion, but it continued to be delivered in small portions during twenty-three years under the most varying circumstances. But what is striking throughout the entire revelation is that it keeps up one and the same strain — absolute submission to Allah, entire trust in Him, perfect confidence of future success, a liberal view of humanity, an attitude of charity towards all nations and religions, and goodness to all alike. The spirit of the revelations to the solitary, persecuted, and rejected preacher of Makkah does not differ in these and a hundred other particulars from the spirit of the revelations to the sole temporal and spiritual monarch of Arabia.

The key word in above verses is discrepancy that these translators inevitably create in their interpretation of Quran. While Quran emphasizes till the Day of Judgment “2:256. There is no compulsion in religion”, Muhsin/Hilali preach “8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah alone [in the whole world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly Allah is All-Seer of what they do.”

With Muhsin and Hilali among our midst who need Spencer and Trifkovic?
 


 
While trying to tarnish HMGA’s view of Jihad which is congruent to the Message of Quran, Tahir states:

“However, when it comes to the writings on Jihad they put a certain twist on it and trick the reader or researcher. The truth of the matter is that Jihad or fighting in the name of Allah is incumbent on all Muslims. However, certain conditions must be met…”

Obviously, Tahir seems to have identified one of the obligations of Muslims, that is, to engage in “Jihad or fighting in the name of Allah” and makes the Jihad “incumbent on all Muslims.”

Let us, try to see through the lens of Quran as to how and when is a Muslim obligated to strive and/or fight “in the name of Allah”, Thus:

29:69. And those who strive hard for Us, We shall certainly guide them in Our ways. And Allah is surely with the doers of good.

One thing is obvious from Quran that Our ways can only be tread by doers of good, e.g. the Christian rule of Nijashi in Ethopia where Muslims first migrated to. Can Tahir quote us any significant example where a Mullah or a jagirdar, or a nawab or a king in India was more doer of good than the British rule? Start with Punjab University, King Edwards Medical College, all the colleges, schools, hospitals, courts, railway stations, post offices, telegraph, phone exchanges, roads etc. etc. at province, division, district and tehsil level, to name a few of the goods done by British, that has yet to be matched qualitatively by any government since creation of Pakistan. Even in hindsight, these zealot Jihadists blurred by the cataract of imaginative grandiosity, might prefer Sikh rule over the Muslims when a simple call to prayer (Azan) was punishable and the Badshahi Mosque Lahore was turned into a stable for the Sikh army. They forget that it was the British that restored the religious freedom to Muslims and they were finally able to even secure a separate homeland for themselves.

One of the ways and acts of goodness can be seen in the following verses:

22:39 Permission (to fight) is given to those on whom war is made, because they are oppressed. And surely Allah is Able to assist them —

22:40. Those who are driven from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And if Allah did not repel some people by others, surely cloisters and churches and synagogues, and mosques in which Allah’s name is much remembered, would have been pulled down. And surely Allah will help him who helps Him. Surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.

Footnote: The religious freedom established by Islam has not yet been surpassed by the most civilized and tolerant of nations. It deserves to be noted that the lives of Muslims are to be sacrificed not only to stop their own persecution by their opponents and to save their own mosques, but to save churches, synagogues and cloisters as well — in fact, to establish perfect religious freedom. Mosques, though they are the places where the name of Allah is remembered most of all, are mentioned after churches and synagogues. Early Muslims closely followed these directions, and every commander of an army had express orders to respect all houses of worship, and even the cloisters of monks, along with their inmates.

Thus, it is incumbent on Tahir to pick up a “sword” in his Jihad when he obligatorily stands guard for the sanctity of the churches, synagogues, cloisters, imambargah’s, Ismaili Jamaat Khanas, mosques of Ahmedis (both Qadiani and Lahoris) in whichever land and country he dwells in. With such a rightful act, he will be someone who helps Him. Did any government before or after British guarantee the sanctity of the houses of of worship in which Allah’s name is much remembered? Answer is plain no. It was only the British that guaranteed the safety of worshipers and the houses of worship.

Further, it is incumbent on him to come to defense of a non-subversive minority point of view in Muslim countries no matter how hateful it may be to him:

5:3. … And do not let hatred of a people — because they hindered you from the Sacred Mosque — incite you to transgress

[Footnote: The principle laid down here requires from Muslims equal treatment for all nations, for those whom we hate as well as for those whom we love. Only this principle of Islam can serve as the basis for an international code for the modern world and an international law.].

And help one another in righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin and aggression, and keep your duty to Allah

[Editor’s note: Muslims ought only to cooperate with one another in matters of goodness, and are forbidden to help each other in wrongdoing against others. This injunction prohibits the evils of blind patriotism and unconditional support for one’s own people even when they commit injustices against others.].

Surely Allah is Severe in retribution.

Finally, he is expected to standup for the weak among the men and the women, with Asia Bibi as case in point :

4:75. And what reason have you not to fight in the way of Allah, and of the weak among the men and the women and the children, who say: Our Lord, take us out of this town, whose people are oppressors, and grant us from Yourself a friend, and grant us from Yourself a helper!

4:76. Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the devil. So fight against the friends of the devil; surely the struggle of the devil is ever weak.

The above are some of the examples of true Jihad where one acts as a friend and helper of Allah in His cause. I am not sure if Mr. Shaikh or Mr. Tahir will do some of these acts in the way of Allah, but history of India tells us that British government did each of the good things that these verses enjoin on Muslims to do. Contrary to what Mr. Shaikh and Mr. Tahir expect one to depreciate, any person with sense of reason and fairness cannot but appreciate those doers and guarantors of good, namely the British Government in India.
 


 
Note: Unless indicated otherwise, all verses above are from the translation and commentary of Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

February 23rd, 2012

Jihad — Wordings of Divine Revelation?

Note by Rashid Jahangiri:

Opponent of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib, and of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement and hero, sweetheart of Khatam-e-Nabuwat-Academy-UK, creator, owner of www.ahmedi.org Ahmad Karim Shaikh of Mississauga, Canada has written an article under the the above title on his website. Article is translated into English, and has even mentioned ‘Lahori-Group’ name in it. I am copy pasting his article here. Let’s have some discussion on his article. This will provide opportunity to him and everyone to learn some thing.

Link to article:
http://ahmedi.org/general/jihad-wordings-of-divine-revelation#more-782

(Note: Per my information A.S. Khan is the same person A. K. Shaikh i.e. Ahmad Karim Shaikh — Rashid Jahangiri)
 


 
Wording of The Divine Revelation?
By A.K. Shaikh

The commandment of Allah is: “Jihad (fighting in the cause of Allah) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing, which is actually good for you and that you like a thing, which is actually bad for you. Only Allah has the absolute knowledge but you do not know.” [2:216]

This commandment of Allah is obligatory on every Muslim and is valid for all times – just like none of the commandments of Prayer, Fasting, Hajj and Zakat (obligatory alms) are temporary. There are certain conditions, however, like Hajj will only be performed during the days of Hajj; fasting will be in Ramadan; prayers during prescribed timings and Jihad (Qitaal) [fighting by sword] when it becomes obligatory etc.

Now, Mirza Sahib’s declaration is:

“But this commandment (i.e. Jihad) was temporary and time-specific – it (Jihad) wasn’t meant for all times.” [Collection of Advertisements, vol. 3, page 223]

“We have written time and again that the Noble Qur’an absolutely does not teach Jihad.”
[Collection of Advertisements, vol. 3, page 250]

The following words of Mirza Mahmood Sahib, the 2nd Gaddi Nasheen [hereditary successor] of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib, would not be without much interest:

“I am not denying that some of the directives were changed during the time of the Prophethood (of Muhammad s.a.w.), but I do not find any proof with regard to any of the Qur’anic commandments that originally it was something else but it was changed later on. In my opinion, all those commandments that were temporary in nature were sent through non-Qur’anic revelations and did not get inscribed in the Noble Qur’an. That is why it was not required to alter the Qur’an.” [by Mirza Mahmood – reference preserved (available upon request)]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib has repeatedly written in his books that he used to receive Wahi [Divine Revelation]. And he has also written samples of his Ilhamat [inspirations] and Wahi in his books with which his mental and intellectual level can be ascertained. But some of his claims in his books are such that they clearly repeal the basic tenets of the Qur’an. And Mirza Sahib presents these claims as the Divine Commandments of God.

Whereas, the Divine Decree is: “This day, I have perfected your religion for you” [5:3]

Mirza Sahib explains it in his own words as follows:

And it is not worthy for Allah to send a Prophet after the Khatam-un-Nabiyyeen [The Seal of the Prophets], and it is not worthy for Him to revive the lineage of Prophethood in spite of having terminated it, and to abrogate some of the Qur’anic commandments or add to them.” [Roohani Khazain, vol. 5, page 377]

Dear Readers! We all know that Allah revealed the Qur’an to His Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh), and the Prophet also attests and vouches that he himself does not have any authority to amend, alter or transpose the Qur’an.

Now, Mirza Sahib says, “It was written in the Ahadith earlier that fighting in the name of religion would be made Haraam [unlawful] when Masih would come.” [Collection of Advertisements, vol. 3, page 284]. Here, Mirza Sahib has cited a very feeble thing to abrogate a tenet of Deen.

Now, the Divine Revelation is sent down to Mirza Sahib with which he declares the fighting for the religious cause as Haraam [unlawful].

“From today, the human “Jihad” that used to be performed with sword has been abolished by Allah’s orders”. (Majmooa Ishteharat, vol. 3, p. 295).

A Question to Ahmadiyya Movement!

The abovementioned Divine Injunction, which according to the advertisement of 28th May 1900, was sent down to Mirza Sahib. Then, what were the original words of that Divine Revelation or Injunction?

Does this (alleged) revelation of Mirza Sahib not repeal this Qur’anic commandment? “Jihad (fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it.” [2:216]

Does any human, even though he might be a Prophet, possess the authority to abolish the Words of Allah (Divine Commandments)?

The question to Ahmadiyya Movement is: what are the original words of the Wahi or Divine Injunction by which the Jihad with sword was abrogated (by Mirza Sahib)?

A. K.Shaikh

Note:

Ahmedi.org website’s challenge to Ahmadiyya Movement is: if the Movement provides the original wording of the Divine Revelation (about abolishment of Jihad) sent down to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib, then this website will give a reward of USD 50,000 (fifty thousand US Dollars) to the Gaddi Nasheen [hereditary successor] of the Movement. In this regard, the Movement may also seek assistance from its Non-Pledging Group, viz. Lahori Group.

Ahmedi.org announces unequivocally to both groups of Ahmadiyya Movement that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad never received any such Divine Injunction. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad stated lies and wrote lies – and he was also false in this claim (about the abrogation of Jihad).

A.S. Khan
Translated by: Bashir Ahmed

February 20th, 2012

Age of Hazrat Aishah (ra) at marriage

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri


Recently in the Pakistani English daily Dawn an article is written by Nilofar Ahmaed on age of Hazrat Aisha RA at time of her Nikah (solemnization) and Rukhsati (consummation) with Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS. According to this article, Hazrat Aisha (RA) age at time of Nikah was 18 years and 21 years at time of consummation of marriage.

I am glad to read this article, as it gives me hope about bright future of Muslims, when I see scholars among Muslims other than members of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement write in public what Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib started and is continued by LAM. By this I mean clarifying misunderstandings about character and teachings of Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAWS). I sent the following email to the author. Her reply follows my email.

Dear Respected sister Nilofar Ahmad,
Asalam Alaikum,

Thank you for writing on such an important topic as ‘Age of Hazrat Aisha at time of Nikah and Consummation of her marriage with Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS’. Your effort to correct misunderstanding about this often ridiculed incident by opponents of Islam will not only help clear this for these opponents but also for ‘Aishiqan-e-Rasool’ i.e. Muslims.

I would highly recommend you to please read the following links, and see how members of ‘Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement’ starting from Maulana Muhammad Ali are sacrificing their energies, time, and finances to clear a great misunderstanding on the blessed character of our beloved Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS.

Please check following links:
Hazrat Aishah Siddiqah’s Age at Her Marriage:
[Proves that: The Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) Married Hazrat Aishah When She was 19 Years of Age and not When She Was 9.]
by Ghulam Nabi Muslim Sahib, M.A.
Translated by: Masud Akhtar, B.A., LL.B.
The Light (Sep 24, 1981, pp. 13-17).
http://aaiil.org/text/acus/islam/aishahage.shtml

Lady ‘A’ishah’s age at the time of the consummation of her marriage to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sas) http://aaiil.org/text/books/others/ghulamnabimuslim/aishahagetimemarriageholyprophetmuhammad/aishahagetimemarriageholyprophetmuhammad.pdf

The Marriages of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): Accusations answered
http://aaiil.org/text/acus/islam/marriagesholyprophetmuhammad.shtml
http://aaiil.org/usa/magazines/islamicsunrise/2008/islamicsunrise_200808.pdf
http://aaiil.org/text/articles/islamicreview/1941/05may/islamicreview_194105.pdf
http://aaiil.org/text/articles/hope/2010/hope201009_burnquranday.pdf

In Urdu:
Rukhsati kay Waqt Ummul Mu’mineen Sayyeda Ayesha Siddiqa kee ‘Umar:
by Ghulam Nabi Muslim
Hazrat Ayesha’s (rta) age at the time of her marriage http://aaiil.org/urdu/books/others/ghulamnabimuslim/rukhsatiwaqtayeshaumar/rukhsatiwaqtayeshaumar.shtml
I will appreciate if you kindly acknowledge my email. Thanks.
Allah Hafiz.
Yours sincerely,
Rashid Jahangiri, M.D.
Manhattan, NY.
P.S. I will post this email on LAM blog:
https://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress

Ms. Nilofar Ahmed’s reply:
Assalamu alaikum.
Thanks. In case you would like to read more than 25 of my articles,
1) Go to: www.dawn.com
2) In the search box type: By Nilofar Ahmed
Regards,
NA

LINK TO MS. NILOFAR ARTICLE IN DAWN:

Of Aisha’s age at marriage
http://www.dawn.com/2012/02/17/of-aishas-age-at-marriage.html