The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

A comment on Sir Zafrullah Khan’s “Re-institution of Khilafat”

Submitted by Ikram

Re-Institution of Khilafat by Sir Zafarullah Khan – a comment.

It is interesting to note that the sole justification for election of Khalifa-II after demise of Nurud-Din Sahib was that the assembled yelled in favor of said Khalifa. Hello! ever heard of “crowd for hire” tradition in Indo-Pakistan? Ever saw a state TV coverage of the head of states in Sub-Continent addressing herded masses? Irrespective of the sentiments of the apparently “independent minded crowd” and knowing the fact that intellectuals of the Jamaat had dissented on principle, it was morally incumbent on Khalifa-II to accept the role “thrust” on him in a transitional sense only and then he should had held Jamaat wide elections soon thereafter. But how could he, as it was an obviously staged crowd. One wonders what merits did Khalifa-II have been able to demonstrate at that point of his life when he was only twenty-five. The author of the article himself admits that due to eye ailment said Khalifa was not even a high school graduate. These are the same arguments that masses are asking now for the political dynasty taking shape in Pakistan.

Contrast this behavior with the principled stance of Muhammad Ali where the author writes – “…The Sahibzada Sahib … finally said that he and those who saw eye to eye with him were prepared to make the covenant of Bai’at at the hands of anyone whom Maulvi Muhammad Ali Sahib and his group might put forward for the office of Khalifa; but Maulvi Sahib would not agree.”

Muhammad Ali or like-minded could have put forward his own name but he did not. As a candidate Muhammad Ali had a lot to offer but did not. His stand was to preserve supremacy of institutions over personalities to which the author refers to – “…Sadar Anjuman Ahmadiyya was the true successor of the Promised Messiah and that anyone else who might be elected as Khalifa, and there could be several such persons, would have only an honorific position, but would exercise no authority…”

In the same article, the Electoral College appointed by Khalifa-II that elected Khalifa-III comprised of the following:

1. The surviving sons of the Promised Messiah.
2. The President of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya.
3. All Secretaries of the Sadr Anjuman.
4. The director General and the Directors of Tahrik Jadeed.
5. The President of Waqf Jadeed.
6. The Principal of the Talim-ul-Islam College.
7. The Headmaster of the Talim-ul-islam High School.
8. The President of the Theological Seminary.
9. The President of Ansarullah.
10. The President of Khuddam-ul-Ahmadiyya.
11. Representative of Lajna Imaillah.
12. Missionaries who had worked abroad for a minimum period of five years.
13. Missionaries who had worked within Pakistan or India for a minimum period of five years.
14. Ameers of circles in Pakistan.
15. Members of the Movement who had joined the Movement in the lifetime of the Founder of the Movement.
16. The total membership of the college is approximately one hundred and fifty.

This so-called “Electoral College” of Rabwah Jamaat has everyone included except the Electorate itself i.e. the representation of the commoner of the Jamaat which can be classically summed as “Too many chiefs and no Indian.” In any democracy, e.g. United States, each eligible citizen has the right to vote and the net win by a party in a particular state then becomes the component of national Electoral College. In sum total, unless a commoner has cast his/her vote, the Electoral College does not even come into existence.

Except line items 1 and 15 above, which are irrelevant now because of passage of time, each and everyone in the list was a relative or an appointee by the Chief Executive i.e. Khalifa-II and most likely in a salaried position. How can a subservient go against the wishes of the Master. No wonder that the façade of the Rabwah “Electoral College” has a juggernaut hold on the institution of Khilafat that historically has proven to be the proxy of the wishes and interests of the famous “Khandan.”

It is ironic that in order to sanctify Khalifa-II the above linked article tries to make comparisons between him and Umar-ibn-Khattab RA. What the author fails to mention that Umar was no son of Muhammad and drew little salary or perks of his office. He walked his personal camel to Jerusalem and back despite having the national treasury under his jurisdiction, not the First Class air travel and five-star hotels from mere donations of the members. Just so that both died the same way, does not make them equal at least not in this world. All that can be said is that We know Umar; Khalifa-II you are no Umar.

Of note are the contents of the Will of Nurud-Din Sahib (Khalifa-I) where he writes, “…My children are young and there is no money in our house. Allah is their Guardian. No provision should be made for them out of any fund for orphans and the needy. A loan might be provided for them which should be repaid by those of my sons who grow up into a position to do so….”

Any takers of the such standards of Khilafat? … Khalifa-II onwards?

Why followers of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib have not governed Pakistan?

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.

People who have studied HMGA (Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) the Mujaddid of 14th Islamic century, know very well that by the time his earthly life ended, all the prominent, influential Muslim families in today’s Pakistan’s Punjab had accepted him and done ba’it. On his death there were great numbers of mourners assembled on every train stop from Lahore to Batala, India. The number prominent people among the Muslims joining Ahmadiyya Movement of HMGA kept on increasing during tenure of Maulana Noor Ud Din. Being an Ahmadi was considered as embodiment of virtue. It was considered an honor to be an Ahmadi. Infect many members of Ahmadiyya Movement use to write suffix ‘Ahmadi’ with their names.

Unfortunately, after the split in movement in 1914 and during the Qadiani Khalifatship of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in Qadian until the independence in 1947 prominent Muslims who had previously joined Ahmadiyya Movement of HMGA constantly kept on leaving it.

Despite all the attrition, there were still many prominent intellectuals and personalities in Pakistan that remained Ahmadis (both belonging to Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement and Qadiani Jamaat).

At the time of independence of Pakistan followers of HMGA were occupying prominent positions in Politics, Civil bureaucracy, and Military establishment. The simple fact that Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was invited to address Pakistan Military officers and men in their garrisons and cantonments, tells this. Qadianis were able to get a town of ‘Rabwah’ for themselves from civilian administration points to their influence. Politicians belonging to Ahmadi families were elected to assemblies.

Now question is how come hardly anyone knows that Generals Tikka Khan, and Zia ul Haq were from Ahmadi families; Prime Ministers Moein Qurashi and Shaukat Aziz were from Ahmadi families; current politicians like Chaudhry Sujjat of Gujrat, Manzoor Watto of Okara, Malik Jaffar Khan from Attock, minister in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto government etc Kasuris of Kasur belonged to Ahmadi families; prominent scientists in Pakistan like Munir Ahmad and many other belonged to Ahmadi families; intellectuals J. Salik and Iqbal had done ba’its of HMGA etc

How come numbers of HMGA followers who have done ba’it have decreased instead of increasing since 1914? How come today’s number of Ahmadis who are born in Ahmadi families of those who did ba’it of HMGA don’t count themselves who believe in truthfulness of HMGA?

Today number of HMGA followers is only a small fraction of what it should have been if their elders, who joined Ahmadiyya Movement so enthusiastically, had not left it.

Unfortunately, because of hatemongering and divisive beliefs, speeches, statements, and books written by Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, his brother and their followers spread so much hate in Pakistani society that, in retaliation Muslims adopted same attitude towards followers of HMGA, and his followers that to protect themselves and excel in their lives they gradually stopped being associated to Ahmadiyya Movement.

Although, majority of followers of HMGA who left him belong to Qadiani Jamaat, but because of bad reputation associated with being ‘Ahmadi’ in Pakistan in particular and world in general, even children of member of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement gradually started to disassociate themselves e.g. Tariq Aziz (right hand man of General Musharraf), Wasim Sajjad (former Chairman of Pakistan Senate).

I am very sure if it was not because of Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, split caused by him in 1914 and his subsequent beliefs, claims, policies; today the numbers of Ahmadis occupying important positions in Pakistan’s politics, military, civil bureaucracy, education, health etc would have been many times more than at time of creation of Pakistan. I’m sure Ahmadis would have formed governments and defined Pakistan’s future, strategies, foreign and domestic policies. Just imagine if followers of HMGA, who believe in peace and respect of every religion and sect were at the helm of Pakistan’s affairs. Pakistan would have been a prosperous and peaceful country helping its neighbors, all Muslim countries in the world and even extending to the non-Muslim countries. Pakistan would be solving its conflicts from Kashmir to any issue with negotiations and peace. The world would have a peaceful place.

What an opportunity lost….

Florida Church Plans ‘Burn a Quran’ Day to Mark 9/11

Submitted by Ikram.

Florida Church Plans ‘Burn a Quran’ Day to Mark 9/11 – The Christian Post.

If we analyze the above linked news article, it highlights the following:

Hate masqueraded as protest: “We only did it because we felt there needed to be an outcry against Islam, because Islam is presenting itself as a religion of peace,” explained Dr. Terry Jones, senior pastor of Dove World Outreach Center, to The Christian Post on Tuesday.

Underlying fears of the church coming to surface: “We see the effects of Islam on Europe. As it has done nothing, Islam is beginning to take over there,” he added.

Religion as the last refuge of the scoundrel: Participants of the burning plan to light up Qurans on the church property to remember the victims of 9/11 and to “stand against the evil of Islam,” according to the group’s Facebook.

A rational response from Muslims: The Council on American-Islam Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim advocacy group, has responded to news of the “International Burn A Quran Day” by announcing an educational “Share the Quran” dinner on Sept. 11, which falls during Ramadan. “American Muslims and other people of conscience should support positive educational efforts to prevent the spread of Islamophobia,” remarked Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director of CAIR.

The work cut out for Muslims to change the negative perception: A survey released by LifeWay Research in April found that 42 percent of Protestant pastors believe Islam “promotes violence” and more than half agree with a statement by well-known evangelist Franklin Graham, who said Islam is an “evil” religion.

See also the blog post on Time Magazine:
Following Newt’s Advice – link

Something that AAIIL can do is to call the said pastor, Dr. Terry Jones to a dialogue and debate on this forum. And to send him and Newt Gingrich the book “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” by Dr. Zahid Aziz

An article on the Worldwide Qadiani Population

Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri

I came across following article on website of crtics of HMGA and Qadianis (This website has not criticized LAM explicitly, as of my knowledge). The article analyzes worldwide population of Qadianis based on their annual fiancial contributions. This information is submitted to UK government office of Charities. I’m posting this article here because Qadianis tell us falsely, i.e. LAM members, about their worldwide population.

Critique My Calculation Of The Ahmadiyya [QADIANI JAMAAT] Population
by Hussain » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:05 pm

As we know the Ahmadiyya movement is based in the UK and as a result they have to adhere to the charity commission regulations. The most recent accounts submitted for “Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat International” are for the year ended 31 December 2008. Thus I will use this to come up with a figure. Please correct my mistakes:

… …

[Removed for brevity. Please see link below for full article.]

… …

Ahmadiyya adherents worldwide: 190,228

… …
… …

Ahmadiyya adherents in the UK: 4,800

This is purely based on each household paying the compulsory Chanda Aam, nothing else. Now my request, is my logic off? Please correct me. Even if you think I have calculated this correctly do let me know. If I have made mistakes, please let me know. All I can say is…. 200 million? Purrlease! Tens of millions? Yea right!

Link to source of article:
http://www.thecult.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=652

Ismail Peck passes away in Cape Town: “Second Plaintiff is declared to be a Muslim”

It is with the deepest grief that we report the death in Cape Town today, 27th July, of Mr. Ismail Peck, inna li-llahi wa inna ilai-hi raji`un.

Mr Peck was the plaintiff in the Cape Town civil court case, 1982-1985, against various bodies of the anti-Ahmadiyya Ulama, in which he laid the claim that he, an Ahmadi, was a Muslim and it was defamatory to call him kafir, and it was a denial of his legitimate rights to refuse him burial in a cemetery that was designated for Muslim burial.

While knowledgeable in the Quran and the Bible, Mr Peck was a humble man of an ordinary position in life. But it took extraordinary courage to stand up as the plaintiff when the Ulama did all they could to get the case withdrawn. Once the litigation process began, Mr Peck was at risk of his life since if he had died the case would have terminated. Despite all dangers, he stood firm like a rock and saw the case through to the end, including appearing in court to give personal testimony.

When the judge, Mr. D.M. Williamson, read out his judgment on Wednesday 20 November 1985 and, near the end, announced the words “Second Plaintiff is declared to be a Muslim”, those who heard these words, including myself, were overcome by an undescribable ecstasy and sense of gratitude to Almighty Allah. In the post 1974 and 1984 atmosphere, it made life worth living just to hear these words.

To read full details of that court case, please follow this link.

My prayer is that may Allah now pronounce the same judgment on Mr Peck, and admit him into His mercy and forgiveness, ameen.

A hadith about women

Submitted by “A”.

(Note: “A” is not an anonymous poster. I know her and have talked to her.)

>>Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle ?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.”

Volume 2, Book 24, Number 541:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri

On ‘Id ul Fitr or ‘Id ul Adha Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) went out to the Musalla. After finishing the prayer, he delivered the sermon and ordered the people to give alms. He said, “O people! Give alms.” Then he went towards the women and said. “O women! Give alms, for I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-Fire were you (women).” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is the reason for it?” He replied, “O women! You curse frequently, and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. O women, some of you can lead a cautious wise man astray.” Then he left. And when he reached his house, Zainab, the wife of Ibn Masud, came and asked permission to enter It was said, “O Allah’s Apostle! It is Zainab.” He asked, ‘Which Zainab?” The reply was that she was the wife of Ibn Mas’ub. He said, “Yes, allow her to enter.” And she was admitted. Then she said, “O Prophet of Allah! Today you ordered people to give alms and I had an ornament and intended to give it as alms, but Ibn Masud said that he and his children deserved it more than anybody else.” The Prophet replied, “Ibn Masud had spoken the truth. Your husband and your children had more right to it than anybody else.”

>>

it can’t be acceptable that prophet had uttered such words “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?”

There is no such injuction in Quran.

What is jamaat’ stance on it or translation?

Bangladesh bans books by Maulana Maudoodi

Please see this news item.

BOOK: ISLAM IN INTER-WAR PERIOD by Nathalie Clayer & Eric Germain

Submitted by Ikram.

CHAPTER: THE FIRST MUSLIM MISSIONS ON A EUROPEAN SCALE: AHMADI-LAHORI NETWORKS IN THE INTER-WAR PERIOD – Eric Germain [Pages 89-118]

The above chapter is an unequivocal salute to role of Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore in spread of Islam in Europe. Read excerpt below:

SECTION: HOW AN INDIAN MOVEMENT BECAME THE VOICE OF ISLAM IN EUROPE

The movement founded by Mirza Ghulam Abmad (c. 1836—1908) was registered by the Government of India in the 1901 Census as a “distinct Mohammedan sect”. Soon after the death of its founder, the Ahmadiyya community split in two antagonistic groups. The majority of its members joined the Qadian Party which proclaimed the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whereas a minority group based in Lahore spoke of the “Promised Mahdi and Messiah” as a mujaddid (a renewer of his century as known in Sunni orthodoxy). In 1914 the latter group founded the Ahmadiyya Anjumau-i-Isha’at-i-Islam (Ahmadiyya Society for the Propagation of Islam, Urdu acronym AAII) under the leadership of Maulana Muhammad All (1874—1951). When Khwaja Kamaluddin decided to join the Lahore Party, the mission he had just founded in England became the spearhead of an Islamo-Christian dialogue/controversy that soon developed into a distinctive feature of this branch of the Ahmadiyya engaging Christian Churches in an assumed polemical argument.

Indian Muslims studying at British universities showed interest in the historical interaction between Europe and Islam. Such curiosity is illustrated by the translation made by the young barrister Haroon Khan Sherwani of the classic French book on the incursions of Saracens into France and Switzerland, a text published as a serial story in the Indian Muslim press. In launching a European Muslim mission, Khwaja Kamaluddin placed his action within a resolute historical perspective, claiming that “the fate of the Moors in Spain awaits us everywhere, and our annihilation is only a question of time.” He claimed that it was Christian missionary propaganda that made possible the atrocities currently suffered by Muslims in the Balkan wars, In order to “counteract the poison thus created’, Khwaja Kamaluddin called upon his Indian brethren to collect the means to allow the free circulation of his Islamic Review among Members of Parliament and within the Church as well as the numerous clubs and libraries of Great Britain. More than simple lobbying work, he expressed the ambition to undertake “the dissemination of Islam in Western lands” saying that “the trend of modern philosophy, ethics and socialism is towards Islam”. Such a self-confident attitude was shared by a growing number of intellectual, including one who lamented in a Lahore paper of 1907 that “in Muslim countries, governments as individuals have abandoned all idea of proselytism’’.

As a religious minority, Indian Muslims felt particularly threatened by the Christian missionary propaganda conducted since the beginning of the nineteenth century. Mission schools were ironically instrumental in forming the new Western educated elite that engaged itself in “counter-missionary” work. Such was the case of Khwaja Kamaluddin who, during his studies at the Forman Christian College of Lahore acquired a fairly good knowledge of the Bible. In England, the eloquent barrister was particularly willing to engage in Islamo-Christian debates. On several occasions he was requested to address Christian audiences about Islam and in July 1913 he traveled to Paris to speak at an Interfaith Congress convened by liberal Christians. After the war, the founder of the Woking Mission adopted an increasingly polemical discourse targeting evangelists like Samuel Zwemer who was accused of engineering “slanders against Islam” On the one hand, Lahori missionaries questioned the validity of the Christian scriptures by raising contradictions and variations in the accounts of the four Evangelists or mocking some doctrines like the Trinity or the virgin birth of Jesus. The defence of Islam, on the other hand, focused mainly on questions such as the authenticity of the Quranic revelation, holy war, slavery, polygamy and the position of women.

On Kamaluddin’s rhetorical talents, it is interesting to quote the opinion of William (Muhammad) Marmaduke Pickthall. The famous British convert stated that “he had a gift for summing up a train of arguments in striking form” and unlike much polemical writing it is not devoid of literary grace”. Khwaja Kamaluddin showed a true ability to reach an audience having little or no knowledge of Islam, a quality chat, according to Pickthall, was lacking in most Muslim missionary publications of the time. Even within the same movement, there was a noticeable difference between publications from Woking and the ones issued in Lahore. Commenting on a book by Maulana Muhammad Ali, the same Pickthall stressed that its argument and style were the ones fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), which “differ from that of Christian polemics and can only he appreciated in the West by the few who have already made some study of Islâm”. Muslim missions in Europe brought a true added value to the worldwide effort of Islamic propaganda by publishing a popular kind of literature rather like those question/answer dialogues and compilations containing favourable references to Islam from famous Western writers.

keep reading – covering role of Woking Mission, Lord Headley, Saddaruddin, SM Abdullah, Berlin Mission, Muhammad Ali, AAIIL, Mirza Hashim Ispahani, Boras, Memons, Muslim Princesses, Muslim women and many more…

The “Why”

Submitted by Ikram. Discussion of old topic from a different point of view.

Recently I had been exchanging emails with a friend from Rabwah Jamaat where the latter by using various links from aaiil magazines is emphasizing this question: “It appears that the top leadership of Jama’at Lahore (including Maulana Muhammad Ali sb and Khawaja Kamal-ud-Din sb) were clearly of the view up until December 1913 that HMGA was a prophet (Nabi) appointed by God…The belief subsequently changed. Why?”

In summary such line of questions have been answered at: http://www.ahmadiyya.org/qadis/reply.htm

Irrespective of the garb of discussion the underlying obsequiousness of the question is hidden in “Why?”

My general understanding is that Rabwah (Qadiani) Jamaat attributes the split of Ahmadiyya Jamaat into Qadiani and Lahori (aaiil) factions based on selfish desire of Muhammad Ali who could not find himself a leadership role after death of Nooruddin, the successor of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Hence he separated to form Lahori faction and became its head.

It is the “Why” which ultimately is at the core of the current topic of discussion. It is this “Why” which maliciously implies the perks and privileges that others “won” and pity on Muhammad Ali, who lost. Now think for a moment, the Rabwah Jamaat members have to self reflect that there are certain persons in their Jamaat who have a generational claim on perks and privileges that none can enjoy except the famous Khandan. I am surprised how willingly their Jamaat historically relents whereas the real deal Khalifa Umar (king of Muslim Empire) had to answer for a yard of extra cloth on his tall body when challenged by a woman of newly converted Arabia, a millennium and a half ago. This religious khandan business is unique in Islamic history whose only claim to fame and right to the throne is “pidram sultan bood” (i.e. my dad was a Sultan). But the irony is that “Sultan” never claimed a “Sultanate” or “Sultanhood” for himself:

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/noclaim/state1.htm

Interestingly, I came across the following, which is complete opposite of what my Rabwah friend claims – actually Mirza Mahmud [the subsequent first head of Qadiani faction] who for sure believed in absolute finality of Muhammad PBUH in 1910 when he wrote:

“In this verse [33:40] God has said that the Holy Prophet Muhammad is the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, and none shall come after him who may be raised to the status of prophethood, and who may abrogate his teachings and establish a new law. Nay, however many saints (auliya) there are, and righteous and pious persons, they will get all that they get through service to him. Thus God has said that the Holy Prophet’s prophethood was meant not only for his times, but that in future too no prophet would come… [Tashhiz-ul-Azhan, April 1910, vol. v, no. 4 – ]

Now the very question from my Rabwah friend becomes a question to him:

“It appears that the top leadership of Jama’at Qadian (including Mirza Mahmud sb) were clearly of the view up until April 1910 that HMGA was NOT a prophet (Nabi) appointed by God…The belief subsequently changed. Why?”

Again it is this “Why” which has the answer to the entire Qadian-Lahore rift. To find the answer, just follow the power grab and money trail right from its inception. It will lead one into the deep niches of minds that acquired it all for themselves at no matter what the cost, even declaring the hundreds of millions Muslims Kafir, and with one stroke of selfishness tried to undo almost fourteen hundred years of work of Muhammad PBUH.

Lord Headley’s view about AAIIL

Submitted by Ikram.

Lord Headley’s view about Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat-I-Islam, Lahore (AAIIL) –

as expressed by him in his address to the annual gathering of AAIIL in Lahore, 1927.

His address below may be read in context of his views about Qadianis.

MR. PRESIDENT AND BRETHERN IN ISLAM,

Permit me to thank you most sincerely for the kind expressions and references you have made in your Address to me. I am afraid I may not perhaps meet all your expectations but in my zeal for the propagation of our Faith I stand second to none.

You have kindly alluded to my humble quota in the service of Islam. I must confess that I have only done my duty and I wish I could do more. You have also kindly alluded to some of the hardships I had to face since my formal declaration in the Faith in 1913. My hardships may be many and who knows many more may be in store, but Allah be glorified who enables me to bear all this in a humble Muslim spirit. It has been due to my strong faith in Islam which has enabled me to bear these. Every adversity that befell me made my faith in Islam still stronger. In this connection I must mention the moral support I have always received from my dearest brother Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din – the first Missionary of Islam in Europe. His untiring energy, his Muslim sacrificial spirit and his unassuming character coupled with his undaunted courage have been a constant source of strength to me and are among the chief causes of spread of Islam in West. In his preachings as a Muslim he has not only stood above sectarian differences but has always proved conclusively that there are no sects in Islam.

As you have rightly remarked, in Islam there are different schools of thought only, and no sects, and I, therefore, in the very beginning wish to disassociate myself from all such so-called sects of Islam. I belong to none of them and especially deprecate the ways of those who denounce other Muslims as being out of the pale of Islam simply because they differ from them in certain matters. I am a Muslim pure and simple and follow the Quran and Sunnah (the words and ways of the Holy Prophet). I believe in the finality of the Divine Messengership in the holy person of Muhammad. I believe in Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers (with Muhammad the last of them), the Hereafter and the Pre-measurement of good and evil by God and the Resurrection after death. I need no more. I am, therefore, glad to realize that in your propagation of Islam you have taken the same attitude and directed your activities above sectarian differences.

Gentlemen, it gives me real pleasure to hear about all you have said about your activities in the propagation of our dear Faith in different ways in different places. How happy I feel to find you, Indian Brethren, engaged in a most sacred cause so essential to the very life of Islam, and my personal gratitude to your efforts becomes enhanced when I find a sort of indifference to this sacred cause prevailing in other quarters. The Woking Mission has met a marvelous success and I may say unprecedented in some way, and I hope the day is very near when your efforts will be crowned with success in other quarters. Your means may be limited but I hope your enthusiasm, sincerity and honesty of purpose, combined with your full trust in God, will compensate all this and you will achieve success….

—
An Address of The Right Hon’ble Al-Haj Lord Headley (El-Farooq) Delivered on the 28th of December 1927 at the Annual Gathering of The Ahmadiyya Anjuman-i-Ishaat-i-Islam, Lahore, pages 1-2. [link]