The True Succession

Founding of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement

Preserving the original Ahmadiyya Mission of reform, propagation of Islam,

and inter-Muslim unity and tolerance

by

Zahid Aziz

Ahmadiyya Anjuman Lahore Publications, U.K.

2014

A LAHORE AHMADIYYA PUBLICATION

Published 2014

Copyright © 2014 by Ahmadiyya Anjuman Lahore Publications, U.K.

15 Stanley Avenue, Wembley, U.K., HA0 4JQ

Websites:

www.aaiil.org

www.ahmadiyya.org

e-mails:

aaiil.uk@gmail.com

info@ahmadiyya.org

This book is available on the Internet at www.ahmadiyya.org.

Cover photo: One of the minarets at the Ahmadiyya Buildings Mosque, Lahore, the location where the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore was founded in 1914.

ISBN: 978-1-906109-30-1

Dedication

This book is dedicated to all the pioneers
who, with toil and sacrifice, helped to build and sustain
the world-wide Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore
on foundations so firm that it reached its centenary.

“Hundreds of worthy people have spent their lives on constructing this building …

Those people are countless who sacrificed their daily bread or sold their possessions to spend on this construction…

Earnest pleas before the Almighty have come from the hearts, and tears shed during prayers which would fill a river…

Hands luminous with Divine light laid the foundation, builders possessing the highest skills carried out the construction, and honest, sincere labourers working purely for Allah’s pleasure helped to build it.”

— Maulana Muhammad Ali

Preface

This book is an account of the founding, in 1914, of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam at Lahore (then in India, now Pakistan), and covers the background, the events and the issues in relation to the creation, objectives and work of this organization. It aims to show that this body was created to save the mission of propagation of Islam started by the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and to preserve his teachings and beliefs, in the face of the grave threat that arose within the Movement to undermine its true character.

In this book, I have compiled material from existing Lahore Ahmadiyya publications, and have edited it as necessary and verified references within it by checking against the original sources. I have also added many further details by consulting the original sources directly, in particular Ahmadiyya Movement publications before and around the year 1914. Developments of much later times are also covered, particularly in chapter 7.

This book is being published to mark the centenary of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore. Time has vindicated its interpretation of the teachings of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in two ways. Firstly, today that interpretation is showing the light to the Muslim world as to how to resolve its intractable problems; but that topic is beyond the scope of this book. Secondly, the Lahore Ahmadiyya view of his claims and beliefs has triumphed over the erroneous standpoint of the group which believes him to be a prophet and treats all other Muslims as outside the fold of Islam. As we show in chapter 7, that group has been retreating from its un-Islamic doctrines of 1914 ever since.

Zahid Aziz, Dr

February 2014

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said:

“Among the most sincere friends in our community is Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A. … I am sure that by the grace of God he will prove to be so firm in righteousness and love of religion that he will set an example worthy to be followed by his peers.” (1899)

“I wish that such people could be produced who would do the kind of work that Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib is doing. There is no certainty of life, and he is all alone. We cannot see anyone who can assist him or take his place.” (1905)

Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din declared:

“[Maulvi Muhammad Ali] is a friend of mine and my arm, at whose sincerity I am amazed and I envy it also.” (1909)

“The people of Lahore are sincere. They love Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] sahib. … the works which they have performed, you should also try to do the same.” (1912)

“Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din does not work out of hypocrisy. He works only for Allah. This is my belief about him. Of course, he can make mistakes. I am happy with his works. There is blessing in them. Those who spread mistrust about him are the hypocrites. … He is engaged in a good work. None of you can compete with him. … Can any of you do the work which Kamal-ud-Din is doing?” (1913)

Maulana Muhammad Ali

(1874–1951)

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din

(1870–1932)

1. Introduction

The name Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam means ‘The Ahmadiyya Association for the Propagation of Islam’.1 The terms Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement and Jama‘at Ahmadiyya Lahore are often used to refer to it, and its members are also generally known as ‘Lahori Ahmadis’. The term Qadiani Jama‘at is often used, as in this book, to refer to the section of the Ahmadiyya Movement which remained based in Qadian, later shifting its base to Rabwah in Pakistan, and has been headed by a series of khalifas who, since 1984, live in the U.K.

As to the reason for the creation of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam at Lahore, Maulana Muhammad Ali has explained it in the preface to his English booklet, The Ahmadiyya Movement — IV: The Split, published in 1918, as follows:

“…a great misconception prevails as to the true reasons of the split which is due, not to a desire to work separately, but to far-reaching differences on the cardinal principles of the religion of Islam. M. Mahmud [Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad], a son of the founder of the movement, who is the present head of the Qadian section of the community, began to drift away from the basic principles of the Islamic faith about three years after the death of the Promised Messiah [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad], going so far as to declare plainly that the hundreds of millions of Muslims, living in the world, should be no more treated as Muslims.… A large number of the educated members of the community, who had the moral courage to dissent openly from the erroneous doctrines taught by him, perceived the great danger to the whole community, when after the death of the late Maulvi Nur-ud-Din a particular clique in the community succeeded in raising M. Mahmud to headship at Qadian without any general consultation. They at once rallied round the true doctrines of the Promised Messiah, and after in vain trying for over a month and a half to keep up the unity of the movement, formed themselves into a separate Society, known as the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at-i-Islam, on 2nd May 1914, which is now earnestly working for the propagation of Islam.”

It is often alleged that the Lahore Ahmadiyya founding members wanted to modify the original creed of the Ahmadiyya Movement to make it accord more with mainstream Muslim beliefs. If that were true, they would not have continued to retain and preach the key Ahmadiyya belief that Jesus is dead and the Messiah promised to arise among the Muslims is Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad; they would not have created an organization bearing the name Ahmadiyya which would admit members to its fold by means of the same pledge of allegiance (bai‘at) to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad which he had himself instituted; nor would they have adopted for this organization the same objectives which he had set for the Ahmadiyya Movement. In fact, as we show in this book, they continued the same work from Lahore in 1914 which they had been doing since they joined the Movement in the lifetime of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

There have been several phases of severe opposition to the Ahmadiyya Movement in its homeland, directed by the so-called orthodox Muslim religious leaders, in particular in 1932–36, 1953 and 1974. These were the occasions, rather than 1914, on which the Lahore Ahmadiyya Anjuman would have earned the greatest approval of the general Muslims by amending its beliefs to become closer to them. However, it remained resolutely loyal to the beliefs that it had always proclaimed, and did not move from them in the least, even under the most intense and hostile pressure and scrutiny.

Contrast this with the Qadiani Jama‘at of the Ahmadiyya Movement led by their khalifas. Whenever it has been subjected to such pressure, in situations where mainstream Muslims hold the reins of power, it has been backtracking on its doctrines and interpretations of the teachings of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to bring them closer to the Lahore point of view.

Another common allegation is that Maulana Muhammad Ali aspired to succeed Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din as Head of the Movement, and as he failed to do so, he left and formed his own group with modified beliefs. However, it would have been impossible, suddenly within a few days, to construct a complete, well-developed and cogently-reasoned case for a modified creed, yet this was the kind of unassailable case for their beliefs that the Lahore Ahmadiyya founders presented from the very beginning of the split in 1914. This case was so robust that the founders of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore and their successors have been able to adhere to it, and successfully defend it, for a hundred years now.

In this book we first show, in chapter 2, that Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, the chief Lahore Ahmadiyya leaders, always declared that their life’s work constituted the fulfilment of the aims, vision and mission of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Then in chapters 3 and 4 we trace the unique contribution of these two stalwarts to the work of the Ahmadiyya Movement during the time of the Founder and under the subsequent headship of Maulana Nur-ud-Din. There we also highlight, in both of these periods, the close relationship of love, respect and trust that existed between the Leader of the Movement and these two top-most disciples. Events leading up to the split and the formation of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam at Lahore are dealt with chronologically in chapters 5 and 6. Chapter 7 is a record of how the Qadiani Jama‘at has, over the years, been evasively retracting its controversial and unpalatable beliefs which brought about the split in 1914.

Notes in connection with a chapter are marked in the text by sequential numbers, and placed at the end of that chapter.

1 Due to legal restrictions imposed by the government of Pakistan on Ahmadis in 1984, the name of the organization within Pakistan has since been reduced to Ahmadiyya Anjuman, Lahore.

2. Fulfilling the aims of the Founder of the Movement

Spreading knowledge of Islam in the West

The foundations of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore can be said to have been laid down when Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, very shortly after starting to establish his Movement, wrote in 1891 of his objective to present Islam to the West, in order to counter the mass of criticism directed at it both by Christian missionaries and modern thought. Appealing to the general Muslim community to render him help and assistance, he wrote in his book Izala Auham:

“… so far as it lies in my power I intend to broadcast, in all the countries of Europe and Asia, the knowledge and blessings which the Holy Spirit of God has granted me. I have been asked what should be done to spread the teachings of Islam in America and Europe, and whether it is appropriate that some English-speaking Muslims should go there and impart knowledge of Islam to those people by means of preaching. I would not agree with this in general. I do not consider it appropriate at all that such persons as are not fully conversant with Islamic teaching, are entirely unknowing of its higher virtues, have not mastered replying properly to the objections of the present age, nor learnt from the Holy Spirit, should go as our advocates. … It is undoubtedly true that Europe and America have a large collection of objections against Islam, inculcated through those engaged in [Christian] Mission work, and that their philosophy and natural sciences give rise to another sort of criticism. … To meet these objections, a chosen man is needed who should have a river of knowledge flowing in his vast breast and whose knowledge should have been specially broadened and deepened by Divine inspiration. This work cannot be done by those who do not possess comprehensive vision … In fact, it is possible that their ignorant replies may be counter-productive, and even the little interest that has arisen in the hearts of some fair-minded people of America and Europe would evaporate.

I would advise that, instead of these preachers, writings of an excellent and high standard should be sent into these countries. If my people help me heart and soul I wish to prepare a commentary of the Quran which should be sent to them after it has been rendered into the English language. I cannot refrain from stating clearly that this is my work, and that definitely no one else can do it as I can, or as he can who is an offshoot of mine and thus is included in me.”1

It is the work described here which inspired the elders of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Anjuman, the work of taking the knowledge of Islam and the Quran bestowed by God upon Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and presenting it to Western countries whose people entertained a vast number of objections to the teachings of Islam. Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a booklet in Urdu in 1949, near the end of his life, summing up his entire life’s work and the direction he set for the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore as its Head. It was entitled Jama‘at-i Qadian aur har ayk musalmaan kay li’ay lamha fikariyya, or ‘Time of reflection for the Qadiani Jama‘at and for every Muslim’. In it, he attributes his own vast literary contribution, of producing invaluable books on Islam, to the inspiration and guidance he received from the company of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad:

“All I can say about myself is that if Almighty God had not guided me towards this work, I would, like my fellow-students, have become at best a successful lawyer or judge. But the man who directed me to this work, then set me on this path, and guided me aright is the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. At a time when I had gone into a worldly path, he not only pulled me out of the mire of this world but also created within me a light of faith that has stayed with me throughout this struggle. I declare it openly that if the Imam and Mujaddid of this age had not guided me, I was not capable of doing this work. I received a spark of the light which filled his breast.

The nineteenth century of the Christian era had drawn to a close. In exactly the year 1900, when I was on my way to Gurdaspur to start my law practice, with all arrangements completed, the premises rented, and my belongings and books moved there, my Guide took me by the hand and said: You have other work to do, I want to start an English periodical for the propagation of Islam to the West, you will edit it. What great fortune that, on hearing this voice, I did not hesitate for a moment as to whether I should start this work or the work for which I had prepared myself.

This periodical was issued on 1 January 1902 under the title Review of Religions. In 1909 I began the English translation of the Holy Quran. When I look back today, after half a century, I fall before God in gratitude that He gave me such long respite and enabled me to do so much work.

In reality, this is not my work. It is the work of the one who took my hand and set me on this road. And not only myself, but whoever went to him he put a spark of the fire of the love of God in the heart of that disciple. Just like me, the late Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din too, by sitting at the feet of the Imam of the age, was blessed with opening the first Islamic mission to Europe at Woking, shedding such light on the teachings of Islam and the life of the Holy Prophet Muhammad that the entire attitude of Europeans towards Islam changed. Not only this, but that Mujaddid also produced thousands of people whose hearts ached with the urge to spread Islam, and who gave their lives and wealth to spread the Divine faith in the world.

To those people who harbour ill-feeling against the honoured Mujaddid, or who fail to give him the respect and love due to such a servant of the faith, I say: Has there ever been in the world a liar and imposter who filled the hearts of his followers with such an urge for the propagation of Islam, and to whom Almighty Allah gave so much help as to continue fulfilling his dreams and aspirations long after his death?

In the beginning [before joining the Movement] we did not have the longing that Islam should spread in the world. It was the yearning of the Imam of the age who set us on this work, and set us on it so firmly that the longing which was in his heart was disseminated to thousands of other hearts. He expressed this yearning in his first book after his claim [to be Promised Messiah], Izala Auham, in the following words, at a time when in this land fatwas of being a kafir were being issued against him from every direction:

‘I would advise that, instead of these preachers, writings of an excellent and high standard should be sent into these countries. If my people help me heart and soul I wish to prepare a commentary of the Quran which should be sent to them after it has been rendered into the English language. I cannot refrain from stating clearly that this is my work, and that definitely no one else can do it as I can, or as he can who is an offshoot of mine and thus is included in me.’— Izala Auham, p. 773

Whatever work of the propagation of Islam we have done up to today, whether it is little or much, it is all the outcome of his inner urge which Allah had strengthened with the power of His own Will. And Allah caused the foundations of the propagation of Islam in English-speaking countries to be laid by the hands of a man who himself was a complete stranger to the English language.”2

In a Friday khutba Maulana Muhammad Ali declared:

“From the powerful inner sentiments of the Promised Messiah, different people who sat in his company absorbed different aspects. My dead heart was raised to life by his passion for the propagation of Islam. It is one of the rays of the light emanating from his heart that has left an impression on my heart and infused a fervent desire in me to try to spread the Quran in the world.”3

In a speech on 25 December 1950 at the Lahore Ahmadiyya annual gathering, the last such gathering of his life, he said:

“It is more than fifty years today that the Imam of the Age selected me and my late friend Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. It was proverbially like dust being chosen by an alchemist. Just as other persons benefitted from his Divine revealed teaching, so did the two of us. My friend left to meet his Maker in 1932, and I cannot sufficiently express my gratitude for the favours of Allah the Most High upon me in allowing me to serve His religion till now.”4

In a speech the next day, he said:

“I was convinced of the truth of the Promised Messiah from 1891 when I first heard of his claim. I took the bai‘at (pledge) in 1897, and this was the bai‘at that made me visit Qadian, if not once a week, then at least once every two weeks. I used to spend the summer vacations in his company. From 1900 till his death I lived with him. He had entrusted all the administrative affairs to me. I lived in a room in his house. There must be very few people who attained as much company and fellowship of the Imam of the Age as I did.”5

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, in his Urdu book about the causes of the split in the Ahmadiyya Movement, published in December 1914, wrote:

“It is my belief and conviction that my master, Hazrat Mirza sahib, came only for the reform of the Muslims and the support and propagation of Islam. If Islam were to be broadcast in the world in its real sense and Muslims adopt a truly Islamic way of life, then I believe that the mission of Hazrat sahib would be complete. …

He was that holy one through whom I was rescued from Christianity, to which I was getting nearer day by day, and in 1892 I became a Muslim anew. Not only did I become a Muslim, but through his guidance and prayers I was able to make amends for the sin which had been taking me towards Christianity by showing Christians the right path today. It was the most auspicious and blessed day of my life in 1893 when I took the pledge, at the hand of the Messiah sent by God, to hold religion above the world. I would give anything for those times which I spent in the company and service of this spiritually perfect man, which enabled me to fulfil my pledge as best as I could. How can I forget those favours and that love which he bestowed on me, especially on me! Even if I spent my whole life working for the aims and objects of the Divine mission of this Muslim Messiah, it would be little recompense for the continuous prayers he said for me.”6

In another Urdu book, Mujaddid-i Kamil, which Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote in 1930 towards the end of his life, he says:

“Along with the revelation of the Quran, that time was about to begin when miracles would no longer be considered sufficient to prove the truth of a religion and there would be demand for rational evidence from every direction. Today we have seen that time reach its height. If today there is any religion which can satisfy the criterion of being rational, it is Islam only. … In brief, I found rational arguments in the literature of the Mujaddid of the age. Based on this, I produced comprehensive literature in the English language which has today established Islam as dominant. Any observer will see that the writings of the Khwaja follow the same outlook as the writings of Mirza sahib. I have no reluctance in admitting this, and more than that I am proud that in this aspect I fulfilled my duty of discipleship.”7

Translations of the Holy Quran

In the extract from Izala Auham quoted at the beginning of this chapter, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad expressed his deep desire to have an English commentary of the Quran prepared and sent to Western countries, stating clearly and forcefully that “this is my work, and that definitely no one else can do it as I can, or as he can who is an offshoot of mine and thus is included in me”. Maulana Muhammad Ali, by producing such a work shortly after the Promised Messiah’s death, which was first published in 1917 and became highly acclaimed throughout the world, proved that he was that offshoot of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. The Maulana repeatedly ascribed this translation, as well as his later Urdu translation, to the knowledge and inspiration he received from him. In the Preface to his English translation of the Quran, Maulana Muhammad Ali writes at the close of his acknowledgements:

“And lastly, the greatest religious leader of the present time, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, has inspired me with all that is best in this work. I have drunk deep at the fountain of knowledge which this great Reformer — Mujaddid of the present century and founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement — has made to flow. There is one more person whose name I must mention in this connection, the late Maulawi Hakim Nur-ud-Din, who in his last long illness patiently went through much the greater part of the explanatory notes and made many valuable suggestions.”

In 1923, on completion of his Urdu translation and commentary of the Quran, Bayan-ul-Quran, Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote about this monumental work in an article as follows:

“I am sure it is not only numerous friends of mine who feel the same spiritual pleasure today as I do, but the departed souls of Hazrat Maulvi [Nur-ud-Din] sahib and also of that holy man who, by writing that the English translation and commentary would be done by him or by one ‘who is an offshoot of mine and thus is included in me’, plainly declared me as his son — their souls today will surely be happy at this work. May Allah shower His greatest blessings on these two who set me on this path and made me capable of doing this work.”8

In the Preface to this vast Urdu commentary, he wrote:

“Finally, it is important to mention that… the man who in my life inspired me with the love of the Holy Quran and the desire to serve it was the Mujaddid of this century, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. Then the man who enabled me to understand the Quran was my revered teacher Hazrat Maulvi Nur-ud-Din. If anyone benefits from my work and prays for me, he must also include these two righteous men in his prayer. I am but dust; any fragrance anyone perceives in this work is the spirit breathed by these others.”

In 1949, when Maulana Muhammad Ali completed the revision of his English translation of the Quran, some thirty years after the first edition was published, he delivered a khutba which was published under the following headings:

The second important occasion of happiness in my life — Completion of the Revision of the English
Translation of the Quran

We acquired knowledge of the Quran by sitting at the feet of the Promised Messiah

He said:

“In my life… this is the second occasion of special happiness. The first occasion was when I completed the English translation of the Holy Quran [in 1916], and today it is the second when I have completed the revision of the translation. …

The true knowledge of the Holy Quran has in this age been disclosed distinctively to your Jama‘at, and this blessing is in reality due to that man at whose feet we gained this knowledge. He set us on the right path. To gain true knowledge, a balanced mind is required, and it is the blessing of God that this Jama‘at has maintained its mental equilibrium. This is the reason why Hazrat Mirza sahib’s intellectual heritage continues in this small Jama‘at.”9

Book ‘The Religion of Islam’

After his translations of the Quran with commentary, Maulana Muhammad Ali’s next most important work is the comprehensive English book The Religion of Islam, first published in 1936. In regard to this book, he once said in a khutba:

“Now I come to a second wish of the Promised Messiah. … He says:

‘I want to write a book on Islam and Maulvi Muhammad Ali should translate it. It will consist of three parts: firstly, what are our duties to Allah, secondly what are our duties towards our own souls, and thirdly what are the rights of our fellow human beings upon us.’10

Now think about how the book The Religion of Islam, which I wrote and which is highly popular, is fulfilling this longing of the Promised Messiah. In this book the foundation of jurisprudence has been laid which has been accepted as the basis for developing a new Islamic jurisprudence. All the issues on which the world today needs guidance have been discussed so comprehensively that many eminent men have described this book as an encyclopaedia of Islamic teachings.”11

On an earlier occasion, Maulana Muhammad Ali had told his Friday congregation:

“There was a time when the renowned English convert to Islam Mr. Pickthall came here [to India]. He had been indoctrinated so much against us [Ahmadis] that he could not even bear to mention our name in any gathering. He stayed in Hyderabad Deccan for a long time. When he was leaving, he somehow came across my book The Religion of Islam, and [shortly] before his death he wrote such a glowing review of it that any book could hardly have ever received. He wrote:

‘Probably no man living has done longer or more valuable service for the cause of Islamic revival than Maulana Muhammad Ali of Lahore.’

I am not mentioning this to claim that it is my achievement or an honour conferred upon me. I am mentioning it because it is the achievement of my Master [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad], and an acknowledgment of his services to Islam … because whatever knowledge there is in the book The Religion of Islam I acquired it from him or because of him…”12

“Sunrise from the west” prophecy

In his book Izala Auham, Hazrat Mirza sahib had also referred to a prophecy of the Holy Prophet Muhammad according to which a sign of the latter days is that the sun would rise from the west.13 Applying its fulfilment to his time and work, he writes:

“…what has been shown to me in a vision is this — that the rising of the sun from the west signifies that the Western world which has been involved of old in the darkness of unbelief and error shall be made to shine with the sun of Truth, and those people shall have their share of Islam. I saw that I was standing on a pulpit in the city of London and explaining the truth of Islam in a strongly-argued speech in the English language; and, after this, I caught a large number of birds that were sitting on small trees, and in colour they were white, and their size was probably the size of the partridge. So I interpreted this dream as meaning that, though I may not personally go there, yet my writings would spread among those people and many righteous Englishmen would accept the truth. In reality, the Western countries have, up to this time, shown very little aptitude for religious truths, as if spiritual wisdom had in its entirety been granted to Asia, and material wisdom to Europe and America … now Almighty God intends to cast on them the look of mercy.”14

It was due to their belief in the truth of this vision, about the interpretation of the “rising of the sun from the west”, that the Lahore Ahmadiyya founders exerted themselves to fulfill it by spreading Islamic literature in the West and by creating and supporting the Woking Muslim Mission. Just as producing the English translation of the Quran was the premier work of Maulana Muhammad Ali, the establishment of the Woking Muslim Mission at the Woking Mosque, Surrey, England, was the premier work of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. He first went to England in September 1912, and established his mission in 1913. From the very beginning he regarded this mission as a fulfilment of the vision of Hazrat Mirza sahib related above, of “catching birds” in London after making a speech on Islam.

In fact, this was also recognised by those who later became leading figures in the Qadiani Jama‘at. In October 1912, before Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din had even started his missionary activities in England, the editor of the Ahmadiyya community newspaper Badr quoted this vision and commented as follows:

“This was first published in Izala Auham in Jumadi-ul-awwal 1308 A.H., that is, 22 years ago. God from Himself created the means for the Khwaja sahib to go to London, and as believers are commanded to do, he added to his journey a religious purpose also, that is, to see how the propagation of Islam can be done there. It may be that, due to being a servant of the Hazoor [Hazrat Mirza sahib], he may attain the blessing that this vision be fulfilled in its apparent sense and be a sign to the world. It can happen sometimes that the master sees a vision and it is fulfilled by the hand of his follower.”15

The first British person to accept Islam through Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in London was one Mrs Violet Ebrahim. He sent news of this to the Ahmadiyya newspaper Badr in Qadian, in which his reports from England used to be published regularly during 1912 and 1913. He ended this report as follows:

“This should not be considered as a complete fulfilment of the prophecy. God the Most High will, shortly, fulfil that dream of the late Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad]. However, by way of a good omen I mention the following strange thing.

This is the first European woman who said Friday prayers behind me. Her dress today, by a happy coincidence, was a khaki satin. Could this not be the first of those white birds whose wings, that is to say dress, the Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] saw as khaki in his vision? The wings of a bird are its dress as they cover its body. Congratulations, congratulations, congratulations!”16

Here Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has described his very first conversion as the beginning of the fulfilment of the vision of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of “catching birds”. In response to this news, Maulana Nur-ud-Din congratulated him in the following message, which was published in the next issue of Badr:

“I want to give you good news, and it is such a congratulation that, at least in my view, no one would have given you. And it is that when the Holy Prophet, may peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him, was called to his mission the first person to accept Islam on his hand was a woman. On your hand too, in London, it is a woman who is the first to accept Islam. This is tremendous good news. You must prostrate before Allah the Most High, and I do so too. The second happiness and congratulation I convey to you is that the people of England worship the son of a woman, and it is a woman whom you have made a Muslim there first of all.”17

As the scale of his work increased, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote in a letter to Badr:

“The time is approaching that the vision of the late Imam be fulfilled. The seed is being sown. It is necessary to water it.”18

It was recognized in the pre-split Ahmadiyya Movement in 1913 that, in his propagation work to non-Muslims, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was presenting the basic tenets of Islam and not introducing points of controversy between Ahmadis and other Muslims. Just as he was about to settle in the Woking Mosque, the editor of Badr wrote:

“His latest letter shows that he is about to set up at the Woking Mosque. His propagation work is constantly progressing. He is the Head Missionary of Islam in Europe. … His work is very important, and requires an army of workers to help him. He wants to proclaim tauhid (belief in the oneness of God) in Europe. Non-Ahmadis should leave aside any bias and help him with funds. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din is not raising issues of religious disagreement between us, but is sounding aloud the Kalima, ‘There is no god but Allah’, and breaking down belief in Trinity. … It is the duty of those who are called ‘followers of Islam’ to help him with funds in order that Islam may triumph and unbelief be defeated.”19

Thus Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was still regarded as bringing about the fulfilment of the vision of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad even though he was proclaiming the basic beliefs of Islam among non-Muslims without introducing matters specific to the Ahmadiyya Movement.

In November 1913, Lord Headley, after extensive contact with Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, announced that he had become a Muslim. This was hailed by Muslims in India as a great triumph of Islam. In Lahore a public meeting of the general Muslim community was held on 23 November, addressed by, among others, Dr (later Sir) Muhammad Iqbal. In a speech, Dr Iqbal said:

“The biggest cause of the decline of the Muslims is the neglect of the task of the propagation of Islam. Thank God that the man who first recognised this shortcoming is Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, who has sacrificed all worldly interests to take this great work upon himself. It is, therefore, our duty not to neglect to help him in any way, and we must not let the issue of Ahmadiyyat and non-Ahmadiyyat stand in the way of this noble work, for our God, our Prophet and our Scripture is the same.”20

The first two resolutions passed at this meeting were as follows:

“A telegram of congratulations should be sent on behalf of the Muslims of Lahore to the Right Honourable Lord Headley, through Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din of the Woking Mosque, England, on his acceptance of Islam. This resolution was passed unanimously by all present.”

“This meeting of the Muslims of Lahore expresses its gratitude to Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din for his excellent efforts he is making for the service of Islam and passes its vote of confidence in him.”21

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, in his book about the causes of the split in the Ahmadiyya Movement, published in December 1914, wrote:

“Then came the time when Allah made my efforts bear fruit. Lord Headley accepted Islam and its news reached India. I called it the fulfilment of the prophecy and vision of Hazrat Mirza sahib when he saw himself catching birds in London, and at that time I wrote a poem about it. This was not only my judgment, but many leading men of the Movement stated the same.”22

At this point in his book Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din goes on to quote, over the next three pages, an article written by Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (later to become the Qadiani Jama‘at Head in March 1914) in his own magazine Al-Fazl, of 17 December 1913, in which he had hailed Lord Headley’s conversion to Islam as a great triumph for the Ahmadiyya Movement. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote:

“Now, due to the efforts and hard work of the second Messiah [i.e., Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad], hundreds of thousands of champions rose up for the service of Islam with their lives. … God made many great promises through His Messiah for the success of these people. Hence He foretold that the same Europe which, so hope the opponents of Islam, will destroy and ruin Islam, shall one day repent of its sins at the hands of this Messiah and join the servants of Islam, and it shall work not for the destruction but for the establishment of Islam. By the grace of God this promise was fulfilled, and by the hands of the servants of this Messiah Europe has begun to turn towards Islam.

Thus God has enabled the honourable, respected Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din sahib, who has gone to England for the propagation of Islam at the cost of making many sacrifices, to bring many British people into the fold of Islam. The best indication of his success is that his achievement is quite unlike that of the Christian missionaries whose call has only been answered by the ignorant sections of the population of India, … But those in England responding to the call of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din are educated people, and an aristocrat belonging to an exalted family, Lord Headley, has declared his acceptance of Islam. He has thus fulfilled the word of God which He sent to us a long time ago through His appointed one, giving the news of the spread of Islam in Europe.”23

As can be seen, even those who, only a few months later, were to become the leaders of the Qadiani Jama‘at, declared that the Islamic propagation work of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din at the Woking Mission was a fulfilment of the vision of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in which he saw himself as preaching Islam in London and gaining converts. After quoting the article by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad from Al-Fazl, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din writes:

“This was in the editorial columns and the Mian sahib [i.e., Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] himself was the editor. I myself sent a speech for the December 1913 annual gathering from England, in which it was clearly stated that the prophecy of Hazrat Mirza sahib had been fulfilled. That article was read out in the presence of the Mian sahib and Hazrat Hakim sahib [i.e., Maulana Nur-ud-Din] during the gathering and was printed in the newspapers. At that time, no one wrote to me or informed me to say that my conclusion was wrong. In short, the entire Ahmadiyya Movement declared the new mission in England to be a fulfilment of the prophetic vision of Hazrat Mirza sahib. … Allah the Most High, purely out of His grace and favour, made my efforts fruitful, and the whole of the Movement was at one with me.”24

In his speech mentioned in the above quotation, which was read out to the December 1913 annual gathering of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Qadian, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote:

“Look, there is a Mujaddid of Islam who prophesied some thirty years ago that one of his disciples would go to London and preach Islam there, and some British people would accept Islam. Has this prophecy been fulfilled or not? Who is the one who is in London? Who is preaching Islam from pulpits in London? Who is the one at whose hand some British people have become Muslims? He is a servant of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, a servant of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. … He is an Ahmadi. It had to happen that, according to the prophecy of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, the sun must rise from the West, and that before the rising of that sun of truth the morning star must rise on the western horizon. O Muslims, Congratulations to you! O Ahmadi community, Double congratulations to you! Who is that morning star? It is Lord Headley.

Lord Headley had been coming closer to Islam for the past thirty to thirty-five years along an unknown path. Was it in my control that he did not enter Islam until this disciple of Ahmad came to London? Was it in the control of my Mirza that when the time approached for the Lord to declare his acceptance of Islam, the time known only to God, one of his disciples should reach that juncture to make that vision of thirty years ago a reality?”25

Not only in the beginning in 1913 and 1914, but in the end also, in his book Mujaddid-i Kamil published in December 1930, he refers to his work at Woking in terms of this vision:

“The mission for the propagation of Islam in England was founded under the express will of God. Some twenty-five years before it came into existence, Allah informed the Mujaddid of the time about it, and promised its success.”26

“The religion of the church is almost dead. … Events of the previous fifty or a hundred years had been at work behind the scenes to make the doctrines of the church hollow from within. But God’s will had appointed that time for the collapse of this building when a burooz (spiritual image) of the Mujaddid would go to London and capture white birds.”27

Other Muslims collaborating with Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din also recognized that he owed his inspiration to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. One such scholar, Shaikh Mushir Hosain Kidwai, in his booklet Islam in England, published in 1929, wrote:

“I am far from being a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, but I cannot but give him credit for having fired English educated Muslims with a missionary zeal for Islam. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din is one of those men who were, so to say, reclaimed to Islam by the Mirza sahib, and that to this extent that he gave up his flourishing practice at the Bar and voluntarily accepted to be an exile and came to England with the sole object of preaching Islam.”28

Marmaduke Pickthall, well known British convert to Islam, had also collaborated with Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in the work of the Woking Mission. When Maulana Muhammad Ali’s book The Religion of Islam was published in 1936, Pickthall reviewed it in the journal Islamic Culture, of which he was editor. He opened his review as follows:

“Probably no man living has done longer or more valuable service for the cause of Islamic revival than Maulana Muhammad Ali of Lahore. His literary works, with those of the late Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, have given fame and distinction to the Ahmadiyya Movement.”29

This shows that the work of Maulana Muhammad Ali and of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was publicly recognized as being done on behalf of the Ahmadiyya Movement and bringing great credit to this movement.

Notes to this chapter:

1 Izala Auham, p. 771–773.

2 Jama‘at-i Qadian aur har ayk musalmaan kay li’ay lamha fikariyya, p. 8–10.

3 Friday Khutba, 16 August 1946. Paigham Sulh, 28 August 1946, p. 5.

4 Paigham Sulh, 14 February 1951, p. 8–9.

5 Paigham Sulh, 28 February 1951, p. 8.

6 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 4.

7 Mujaddid-i Kamil, December 1930, p. 22, 24.

8 Paigham Sulh, 7 April 1923, p. 2.

9 Friday Khutba, 19 August 1949. Paigham Sulh,7 September 1949, p. 5, 6.

10 Statement dated 10 December 1899. See Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 1, p. 260 (1984 edition, v. 1, p. 392).

11 Friday Khutba, 16 December 1949. Paigham Sulh, 21 December 1949, p. 12.

12 Friday Khutba, 11 October 1940. Paigham Sulh, 4 November 1940, p. 6–7.

13 Sahih Bukhari: (1) Kitab al-Tafsir, under Surah 6, (2) Kitab al-Riqaq, ch. 40, (3) Kitan al-Fitan, ch. 26. In the Muhsin Khan translation of Bukhari, these three narrations are at: Book 60, Number 159; Book 76, Number 513; and Book 88, Number 237.

14 Izala Auham, p. 515–516.

15 Badr, 31 October 1912, p. 5.

16 Badr, 6 March 1913, p. 5.

17 Badr, 13 March 1913, p. 2.

18 Badr, 19 June 1913, p. 3.

19 Badr, 21 August 1913, p. 2.

20 Paigham Sulh, 25 November 1913, p. 3.

21 Ibid.

22 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 59–60.

23 Ibid., p. 62–63. See Al-Fazl, 17 December 1913, p. 3.

24 Ibid., p. 63–64.

25 Paigham Sulh, 1 January 1914, p. 3, col. 1.

26 Mujaddid-i Kamil, December 1930, p. 91.

27 Ibid., p. 96.

28 Islam in England, by Shaikh Mushir Hosain Kidwai, Lucknow, 1929, p. 7.

29 Islamic Culture, quarterly review published from Hyderabad Deccan, India, October 1936, p. 659.

3. Services during the life of the Founder of the Movement

Maulana Muhammad Ali joins Movement

Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a lengthy account of the events of his first meeting with Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his joining the Ahmadiyya Movement, which was published in a special issue of Paigham Sulh in 1933. In it, he said:

“After passing my B.A. examination in 1894 … I became a professor of mathematics in Islamia College and it was then that I met my dear friend Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din who was also doing his M.A. and was a professor at Islamia College. The Khwaja sahib had already taken the pledge, though I had not. …

About two years or so after I had befriended Khwaja sahib, he asked me to accompany him to Qadian and meet Hazrat Mirza sahib. So in March 1897 I went to Qadian with him (some other friends were also with us). Our stay of only a few days unfolded a new spiritual world before our eyes. Although the writings of Hazrat Mirza sahib showed his fervour and passion for the advancement of Islam… but what we discovered in his company was that he had absolutely no other interest or occupation, day or night. After the fajr prayer he would sit and talk about the propagation of Islam. A little later when he would go for a walk, all the way the topic would be the same. On his return, while sitting and eating with his friends, the same thing would be under discussion; and similarly when he would sit in the mosque after the maghrib prayer till the isha prayer. The discussions would be about how no other religion can stand against the truth of Islam, how Islam can be propagated in the West, the need to meet the challenge of the Arya Samaj in India, how to create a connection with God, how to derive enjoyment from prayers, and the necessity to make the Holy Quran our guide. In short, this was the only pastime, which is not found in any worldly gatherings. … I stayed there probably for seven or eight days, and in the end through Khwaja sahib I myself expressed the desire to take the pledge of this holy man and entered into his bai‘at.”1

As can be seen, what deeply impressed the Maulana and led him to join the Ahmadiyya Movement was the “fervour and passion”, and the whole-hearted devotion to the exclusion of all else, shown by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad for the propagation and advancement of Islam in the world. This, then, was the work which Maulana Muhammad Ali, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, and other founding members of the Lahore Ahmadiyya, took up and continued till the last day of their lives.

Promised Messiah’s first assessments of the Maulana

Maulana Muhammad Ali went to Qadian in May 1899 to stay with Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, intending to remain there for a few months. Before his arrival, Hazrat Mirza sahib wrote to him in a letter:

“I hold an extremely good opinion about you and believe that during this time you will make great progress. It has long been my intention to divide my community into two groups: one group consisting of those who are partly for this world and partly for religion, and are not able to withstand great trials, nor can they render any important services to religion; and the other group consisting of those who enter through this door with full sincerity and faithfulness and in reality sell themselves in this path. I wish that God would include you in the latter group.”2

In that initial period, Hazrat Mirza sahib published the following opinions about him:

“Among the most sincere friends in our community is Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., who, besides his other qualifications, has also just now passed his law examination. For the past few months, at much loss to his own work, he has been staying with me in Qadian to perform a service to religion by translating some of my writings into English. …

During this period in which he has been with me, I have been observing him, both openly and discreetly, to assess his moral character, observance of religion and goodness of behaviour. So, thanks be to God, that I have found him to be a most excellent man as regards religion and good behaviour in all ways. He is unassuming, modest, of a righteous nature, and pious. He is to be envied for many qualities. … It is obvious that such promising young men possessing these qualities, who are able and honourable, cannot be found by searching.”3

“I am very happy that another good young man, having found the grace of God, has joined our community, that is, Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., Pleader. I have very good expectations of him. For a long time he has borne a worldly loss in order to stay in Qadian to serve the religion, and is learning the deep knowledge of the Holy Quran from Hazrat Maulvi Hakim Nur-ud-Din.

I am sure that my foresight will not go wrong in this, that this young man will make progress in the path of God, and I am sure that by the grace of God he will prove to be so firm in righteousness and love of religion that he will set an example worthy to be followed by his peers. O God, let it be so! Amen, again amen.”4

In the above announcement, he adds in a footnote:

“All those books of mine which are published after translation into English are translated by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A.”

In a letter to Maulana Muhammad Ali, he wrote:

“I hold an extremely favourable opinion about you. This is why I have a special love for you. If your nature had not been pure in the sight of God, I could not possibly have thought so well of you, never. I love you fervently from the bottom of my heart, and often pray for you in the five daily prayers. I hope that at some future time these prayers will show their effect. … I am busy praying, with heart-felt passion, for your welfare in this world and the hereafter, and for your body and soul, and I am awaiting the effects and results of the prayer.”5

The magazine Review of Religions

Maulana Muhammad Ali’s stay in Qadian was intended to be for a few months only, but the Promised Messiah proposed to start a monthly magazine in English to be edited by the Maulana. So at his direction he decided to settle there permanently for the service of the Movement. In the proposal to start the magazine, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote:

“It was always a matter of sadness and anxiety for me that all those truths, the spiritual knowledge, the sound arguments in support of the religion of Islam, and the teachings giving satisfaction to the human soul, which have been disclosed to me and are still being made known to me, have not yet benefited the English-educated people of this country or the seekers-after-truth of Europe. This pain was so intense that it was no longer bearable. But God Almighty intends that before I pass away from this temporary abode all my aims should be fulfilled so that my last journey is not one of disappointment. So to fulfil this object, which is the real purpose of my life, there is a suggestion that … a magazine in English be published for the fulfilment of the objectives mentioned above.”6

It should be noted that what he has called above as the real purpose of my life, he appointed the Maulana for its fulfilment. This magazine started publication from January 1902 as a monthly under the editorship of Maulana Muhammad Ali, and its Urdu translation was also issued as a magazine.

A few months later, an English convert to Islam, Khalid Snow, wrote a letter expressing surprise at the high standard of the English language of the magazine, which was not expected from an Indian. When this was read out before the Promised Messiah, he said:

“Maulvi [Muhammad Ali] sahib’s writing such excellent English is nothing but a miracle, so even the English people think that we have employed a European who writes for the magazine.”7

Similarly, some years later it was reported in the talks of the Promised Messiah:

“The Review of Religions was being mentioned. A man praised it and said that its articles were of high standard. [The Promised Messiah] said: Its editor Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib is an able and learned man. He has the M.A. degree, and along with it a religious bent of mind. He always passed with top marks and his name had gone forward for E.A.C. But leaving all this he has settled here. This is why God the Most High has blessed his writing.”8

The plague incident

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had prophesied the appearance of the terrible epidemic of the plague in his time and country. He also announced that, as a sign of his truth, he had been informed through Divine revelation of the protection that would be granted to his true followers from this deadly disease. One such revelation was as follows: I will safeguard everyone who is in this house except those who are rebellious and arrogant.9 So the Promised Messiah declared that, while there may be plague all around in the Punjab, and some cases even in his home village of Qadian, yet those living inside his house would be safe from it. In those days an incident took place which is recounted by him in his own words as follows:

“Sign number 103. Once, during the days when the plague was raging and it was even in Qadian, Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., got a high temperature and he thought that it was the plague. So he made his last will like a dying man … and he was living within my house, with regard to which there is the revelation of God: I will safeguard everyone who is in this house. Then I went to see him and finding him worried and anxious I said to him: If you have got the plague then I am a liar and my claim to receive Divine revelation is wrong. Having said this, I felt his pulse and saw this wonder of Divine power that his body cooled down so that there was no sign or trace of high temperature.”10

This shows not only the perfect faith that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had in his revelation being from God, but also his complete conviction that Maulana Muhammad Ali was a true follower of his, without any rebelliousness or arrogance in him. The revelation contained an exception which excluded, from the promise of protection, those who may be rebellious or arrogant. But he did not say to the Maulana: If you have got the plague then you must be rebellious and arrogant, for such people are excluded from the promise of being safeguarded! No, he was absolutely certain that Maulana Muhammad Ali was a true and sincere follower of his, and therefore if he did have the plague it would falsify the revelation itself. Thus the Promised Messiah staked the truth of his claim, of being from God, on the righteousness of Maulana Muhammad Ali.

It is to be regretted that members of the Qadiani Jama‘at have raised the allegation that the fact that Maulana Muhammad Ali thought he had contracted plague means that he did not believe in the revelation of the Promised Messiah and was therefore weak of faith. This objection is due to their ignorance of the relationship between a prophecy and real life. Ten companions of the Holy Prophet Muhammad were given glad tidings by him that they were promised entry into paradise. Due to this prophecy they are known in Islamic history as the ‘ashra mubashshara. Yet all of these ten companions, throughout their lives, continued to fear God’s punishment if they did wrong. This is particularly recorded of Hazrat Umar, who was once overheard saying to himself: “O Umar! What are you as compared to the high rank of the chief of the Muslims? Fear God or He will punish you severely.” Even when dying, Hazrat Umar expressed no certainty of going to paradise.11 Does the Qadiani Jama‘at also consider such companions of the Holy Prophet to be weak of faith?

We may also note that the Promised Messiah has, like the above sign about Maulana Muhammad Ali, recorded a sign about one of his own relatives by marriage, his wife’s brother Mir Muhammad Ishaq (who was later a prominent Qadiani leader) actually catching the plague. This, writes the Promised Messiah, was due to weakness of faith in the family of his father-in-law, Mir Nasir Nawab, and he told them to repent, while he himself engaged in special prayers so that he may not be falsified in the world because of someone dying of plague in his house.12

The complete contrast with the incident involving Maulana Muhammad Ali is that the Promised Messiah did not say to the Maulana: if you have got plague, it means that there must be some weakness of faith in you, so you must repent of your sins while I will say special prayers to prevent disgrace befalling my name! Entirely the contrary, he was absolutely certain with no doubt whatsoever that it could not be plague because the Maulana was a true and sincere follower of his.

High estimation of the Maulana’s knowledge and sacrifice

The Promised Messiah had so much confidence in Maulana Muhammad Ali with regard to having a correct and true understanding of his teachings, beliefs and claims that he issued the following instructions to the editors of the Ahmadiyya community newspapers Al-Hakam and Al-Badr:

“Hazrat Aqdas [Mirza sahib] called in the editors of Al-Hakam and Al-Badr and emphasized to them that they must be very careful in writing down his speeches and articles, in case something got misreported by mistake, which would then be used by the critics in their support. … So [added Hazrat Mirza sahib] ‘it is proper that before publishing such articles in your newspapers you should show them to Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A. You will benefit by this, and also people will be saved from error’.”13

On another occasion, referring to the aims of the Talim-ul-Islam school which he established in Qadian, the Promised Messiah said:

“The problem is that whoever gets even a little education goes after material gains. I wish that such people could be produced who would do the kind of work that Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib is doing. There is no certainty of life, and he is all alone. We cannot see anyone who can assist him or take his place.”14

Appointed Secretary of Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya

In December 1905, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad published his will in a booklet under the title Al-Wasiyyat, and in January 1906 he published an appendix to it. By this document he created a body or ‘Anjuman’ to manage the financial and administrative affairs of the Ahmadiyya Movement, framed its basic rules, and decreed it as his “successor”. Its first meeting was held on 29 January 1906, as the ‘Council of Trustees (majlis-i mu’timidin) of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya’. In February 1906 more detailed rules and regulations were published in the Ahmadiyya newspaper Badr. All the property and income of the Ahmadiyya Movement was to be in the name of this Council of Trustees.15

As he had already stated in his will, the Anjuman was “entrusted to spend, as it determines fit, the funds thus collected from time to time, on proclaiming the teachings of Islam and spreading the message of the oneness of God.” It thus had complete authority over the finances of the Movement. He appointed fourteen members to this Council, of whom three were office holders: Maulana Nur-ud-Din, President; Maulana Muhammad Ali, Secretary; and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Legal Advisor. It can be seen that the Promised Messiah himself appointed Maulana Muhammad Ali to the key position of Secretary, i.e., chief administrative officer, of a body whose role was to manage the Ahmadiyya Movement and which he designated as his “successor”.

For the remaining two and a half years of his life Hazrat Mirza sahib allowed this Anjuman to run according to the system and rules mentioned above. It so happened that in 1907, in connection with the extension of the Mubarak Mosque, Mir Nasir Nawab, father-in-law of the Promised Messiah, wanted to impose his own judgment as against that of the Anjuman. On a complaint about this made by the Anjuman, the Promised Messiah personally came to a meeting of the Anjuman and wrote a note, the English translation of which is as follows:16

“My view is that when the Anjuman reaches a decision in any matter, doing so by majority of opinion, that must be considered as right, and as absolute and binding. I would, however, like to add that in certain religious matters, which are connected with the particular objects of my advent, I should be kept informed. I am sure that this Anjuman would never act against my wishes, but this is written only by way of precaution, in case there is a matter in which God the Most High has some special purpose. This proviso applies only during my life. After that, the decision of the Anjuman in any matter shall be final.

Was-salaam. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, 27 October 1907.”

It was decided by this document that after the Promised Messiah’s death the Anjuman would have complete authority. There would be no individual ruling over the Anjuman, and all the administration would be in the hands of the Anjuman. This, then, was the supreme status of the body to which he appointed Maulana Muhammad Ali as Secretary.

Gives pen to Maulana in dream

In November 1906, a dream was related by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, in which Maulvi Abdul Karim, one of his top-most followers who had died a year earlier, gave him a gift of a device which was connected to a pen by a big tube, making the pen work very easily without effort. Relating this dream he writes:

“I said: ‘I did not send for this pen’. Maulvi [Abdul Karim] sahib replied: ‘Maulvi Muhammad Ali must have sent for it’. I said: ‘I will give it to him’. Then I woke up. Interpretation: … The pen seems to mean that Allah will give Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib such power of intellect that he will write forceful articles to combat the opponents.”17

This pen came as a gift from heaven, as it was brought by a great disciple of the Promised Messiah who had recently died, and he passed it on to Maulana Muhammad Ali. This signifies that the Promised Messiah passed on to the Maulana the religious knowledge that he received from God and handed to him the task of broadcasting it to the world. His saying, “I did not send for this pen”, signifies that he would not be wielding this pen himself. And so it was that Maulana Muhammad Ali wielded this pen to produce his legendary writings. The feature of the pen mentioned in the dream, that it could write very easily without effort, was also clearly fulfilled as Maulana Muhammad Ali was a prolific writer who produced an enormous amount of literature to present the true picture of Islam to the world.

Directs the Maulana to write book on Islam

It is recorded that on 13 February 1907 Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sent for Maulana Muhammad Ali and said to him:

“I want to fulfil the duty of the propagation of Islam to the Western people by having an English book written, and this is your work. The reason why Islam today is not spreading in those countries, and if someone does become a Muslim he is very weak, is that those people do not know the truth about Islam, nor has it been presented to them. It is their right that they should be shown the true Islam which God has made manifest to me. … All those arguments that God has taught me to prove Islam to be true should be collected together in one place. If a comprehensive book along these lines is compiled it is hoped that people would benefit from it greatly.”18

The Maulana eventually performed the great service of writing such a book in the form of The Religion of Islam, first published in 1936. We have already mentioned this book in the last chapter. In the preface to this book he mentions that Hazrat Mirza sahib had asked him to write such a book:

“…on the 13th of February 1907 to be exact, the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, had charged me with the writing of an English book which should contain all that was necessary for a Muslim, or a non-Muslim, to know about the religion of Islam, and to give a true picture of the religion which was largely misrepresented.”

This book was received with acclaim by many famous Islamic scholars and reviewers. As mentioned earlier, Marmaduke Pickthall opened his review with the words: “Probably no man living has done longer or more valuable service for the cause of Islamic revival than Maulana Muhammad Ali of Lahore”. Further on in this review, Pickthall wrote:

“Such a book is greatly needed at the present day when in many Muslim countries we see persons eager for the reformation and revival of Islam, making mistakes through lack of just this knowledge.”

This is independent confirmation that the Maulana’s book corrected the generally prevailing misconceptions about Islam, which was a chief objective laid down by Hazrat Mirza sahib when he directed the Maulana to write such a book.

It can be seen that Hazrat Mirza sahib handed to Maulana Muhammad Ali one of the most important duties of his mission — the presentation of Islam to the West in English in one comprehensive book — telling him “this is your work,” and the Maulana was able to fulfil this duty to the highest standard.

The Maulana to be with Promised Messiah in after-life

In the life to come, also, the position of Maulana Muhammad Ali is alongside Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, as the latter has described in a vision related by him as follows:

“Saw Maulvi Muhammad Ali in a dream. You also were righteous and sincere. Come and sit by me.”19

This vision refers to the companionship promised in the Holy Quran (4:69) to those who obey Allah and the Messenger: that they shall be in the company of the righteous of the highest grade (i.e., the saints and the prophets) in the next life.

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was one of the earliest followers of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, having taken the bai‘at in November 1893. In his book, already mentioned, about the causes of the split in the Movement, he writes:

“Having discussed almost all the points of controversy, I will now add something about myself. I entered into the bai‘at on 22 November 1893 and pledged at the hand of the holy Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] to hold religion above the world. I made the utmost efforts to fulfil this promise. The holy Hazrat bestowed special favours upon me. He was affectionate to me as one is to a dear child. He prayed for me, and said quite unique prayers. Purely through the grace of God and the kindness of Hazrat Mirza sahib towards me, I was able to be of service to him in difficult times, as few in the Movement had the chance to do. Accursed is the man who makes a show of his services. I was his adviser in the most delicate matters, which no one knows about but me. He sought my advice regarding the future of the members of his family and what would happen after him, and he acted on my recommendations. On my insistence, he prayed to God in certain matters, and informed me of God’s decision. I conclude this by asking you [Qadiani Jama‘at members]: Leaving aside those few persons whose ambitions have been thwarted by me, what was the opinion of thousands of you about me? Say honestly, in what regard did you hold me, and how you saw with your own eyes the special favours bestowed upon me by the holy Hazrat, that Imam who was accepted by God?”20

The Khwaja was known in the Promised Messiah’s time as his ladla mureed, meaning his most beloved disciple. This was confirmed by the editor of Badr in October 1912 when a poem by someone was printed in praise of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din who had gone to England the previous month. The poem opens with verses which may be translated as follows:

“My Khwaja! so far it was India which was devoted to you, but now the whole world is your admirer;

The Mahdi, the guide, knew your rank from the day, when he received revelation from God about you: husn-i bayan.”

We note here, in passing, that husn-i bayan, meaning ‘eloquence of expression’, was a revelation which the Promised Messiah said he had received about Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. The truth of this revelation was confirmed by the lectures on Islam which he started delivering after the Promised Messiah’s death, first in India and then in the countries outside India where he preached, especially England.

The last two verses of this poem may be translated as follows:

“Becoming an armed soldier through the prayer of the Nur of the Din of the Holy Prophet, into the arena has marched your gladiator, O Messiah,

May the help of God pour down upon him like rain, as your ladla (most beloved) is like a graceful cypress tree in a foreign land.”

(Note: The words “Nur of the Din” refer to Maulana Nur-ud-Din, and are used in this way to point to their literal meaning of “light of the religion”.) The poem writer, addressing the Promised Messiah, has called Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in the last line as “your ladla” or the most beloved one. The editor of Badr has added a footnote on the word ladla in the poem to say:

“Why shouldn’t it be so? He is the ladla mureed of our leader.”21

This comment dates from less than eighteen months before the split. It shows the utter falsity of the later Qadiani Jama‘at version of events, according to which Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and Maulana Muhammad Ali had been rebelling against the headship of the Ahmadiyya Movement since 1909 and were being reprimanded and warned again and again by Maulana Nur-ud-Din for opposing the so-called khilafat.

Services during the 1904 court case hearings

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s services to, and sacrifices for, the Promised Messiah were seen at their height during the court case instituted against him by one Maulvi Karam Din for defamation (carrying a criminal penalty), the hearings being held at Gurdaspur during 1903 and 1904. In those days, he had a flourishing legal practice in Peshawar and his family lived there. For this case he was the senior counsel for Hazrat Mirza sahib, and as the hearings in Gurdaspur were being prolonged in the summer of 1904, he moved there temporarily to pursue the case, leaving behind his legal practice and his family in Peshawar. Devoting his fullest attention to the defence of Hazrat Mirza sahib, he worked long hours in preparing submissions, once working from 5 a.m. on 25 August 1904 to 10 a.m. on 26 August without sleeping or resting. All this he did for Allah and the Divine cause, without any recompense. In Peshawar the income from his legal practice stopped and his family had to sell some possessions to support themselves. Yet he would not mention their suffering to Hazrat Mirza sahib. When Hazrat Mirza sahib found out from someone else, he helped the Khwaja with a little money, but more importantly with his prayers. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din said that, as a result of the prayers, he started getting some legal business in Gurdaspur itself. While his financial position improved, one of his children fell ill and the family wrote to him again and again to return, but he advised them to consult the best doctors, as he could not leave the case. Then a telegram came that the condition was critical, and he replied: Get treatment. Then the telegram came: The child is dead, come at once. He replied: Go ahead with the funeral, I cannot leave this case!

Writing some eight years later, when his wife died, he paid her the following tribute:

“In 1903, once I had to attend a hearing in Gurdaspur. The late Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] had written to me saying, You must come. His letter came on a Saturday and the hearing was on the following Monday. My son Nazir Ahmad, who was about five years old at the time, contracted pneumonia that very day and it took a serious turn. I showed my late wife the order of the Hazrat, and the reply she gave was: ‘The child is in the care of God, the order of the Hazrat takes precedence, you must go’. I left the child in a critical condition and went. My wife bade me farewell with great patience and perseverance. During my stay in Gurdaspur, another one of my children fell ill and died in my absence, but my wife only asked me to send someone to Peshawar.”22

Revelation husn-i bayan

During May 1904, while at Gurdaspur, the Promised Messiah received a revelation husn-i bayan, meaning ‘eloquence of expression’.23 This revelation has been mentioned earlier. The background to it is that, during the time when he was observing these sacrifices of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, he called him one day and told him that he had received this revelation about him, that ‘excellence of expression’ would be bestowed upon him from Allah, and it would not be limited to making submissions in the court room but would be witnessed and acclaimed by the whole world. This revelation was amply fulfilled when Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din later delivered lectures on Islam in India and outside. Here are some tributes from eye-witnesses.

Mrs Violet Ebrahim, his first convert to Islam, has been mentioned earlier. She wrote:

“The Islamic Review has done wonders. It has been my text-book, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has a great talent for writing which must be a gift from God.”24 (italics ours)

Marmaduke Pickthall, who needs no introduction, being a famous translator of the Quran into English, wrote a letter of condolences on the death of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din to his son, Khwaja Nazir Ahmad. In it he writes:

“I have had a very clear remembrance of your father in these days as I saw him first in England in his prime, and of the impression which he made upon all who had the pleasure of meeting him. …

And now, looking back upon his life-work, I think that there is no one living who has done such splendid and enduring service to Islam. The work in England is the least part of it. Not until I came to India did I realise the immense good that his writings have done in spreading knowledge of religion and reviving the Islamic spirit in lethargic Muslims; not only here, but wherever there are Muslims in the world his writings penetrated, and have aroused new zeal and energy and hope. It is a wonderful record of work, which could have been planned and carried out only by a man of high intelligence inspired by faith and great sincerity of purpose.”25 (italics ours)

Last month of life of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

As is well known, the Promised Messiah spent the last month of his life in Lahore. He arrived in this city on 29 April 1908 and passed away on 26 May. He stayed in the locality known as Ahmadiyya Buildings, which consisted of land and houses owned by prominent members of the Ahmadiyya Movement. It was here that, at the split in 1914, the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore was founded. He first stayed at the house of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. In his book about the causes of the split, the Khwaja answers the objection that the Lahore Ahmadiyya founders left Qadian and established their headquarters somewhere else, and writes:

“Moreover, to where did these people go, who have left? They went to Lahore, about which the Promised Messiah had received the revelation: ‘Our righteous members are in Lahore’. They went to that very place in Lahore where the Messiah sent by God died. This city was described as ‘Madinah’ in the revelation of the Promised Messiah: ‘I will die in Makkah or in Madinah’. … In short, when it became impossible for those people to continue residence in ‘Makkah’, they sought refuge in ‘Madinah’ according to the example of the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

They started their work there, selecting for it the place where the house of the Promised Messiah’s servant, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, is located, about which house the great Hazrat had this revelation: ‘I will safeguard all those who are in this house’. I hope Hazrat Mian sahib [Qadiani leader Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] will not deny this revelation which the Promised Messiah received on the 2nd or 3rd day of his stay in Lahore in my presence in the courtyard of my house. Mir Nasir Nawab [father-in-law of Promised Messiah] had created an anxiety and the Hazrat was in a mood of uncertainty. It was after the Asr prayers. He was lying on the bed and I was sitting near him. He became drowsy, and after a while he opened his eyes and said: I have just received this revelation, and it is good news for you because it is about your house; now I will not follow the doubt created by Mir sahib.”26

The receiving of the revelation, “I will safeguard all those who are in this house”, during his stay in Lahore was noted in the Ahmadiyya community newspapers Al-Hakam and Badr at the time.27 In Al-Hakam, immediately after reporting this revelation, the following news is published:

“Hazrat Aqdas [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] has gone to Lahore, where he is continuing the work of preaching. He is staying at the house of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din sahib, B.A., Pleader, Chief Court, located on the Kaylayaan-wali road.”

After a few days, he moved to the house of Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, who was, later, another of the chief founding members of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at.

The Promised Messiah was desirous of addressing the leaders of the Muslims of Lahore to convey to them his message and mission personally. So Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din invited as many prominent Muslims of Lahore as he could to lunch on 17 May. When the guests arrived he introduced them to the Promised Messiah, and then the Promised Messiah made a famous speech which was later published under the title Al-Balagh al-Mubin. In Badr, it is stated in the editor’s introductory note to this speech:

“I will remember till the end of my life the captivating scene of 17 May 1908 when the Messiah appointed by God was making a speech before the honourable and prominent Muslims of Lahore. … May Allah bless the noble efforts of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Pleader, Chief Court, who arranged this occasion for his friends, as a lunch, in order that they may pay their respects to the Huzoor [Promised Messiah] and listen to his speech.”28

In Al-Hakam, it was reported:

“On the morning of 17 May 1908 Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din sahib had invited some respected, educated, leading persons of Lahore to a meal and had requested Hazrat Aqdas [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] to make a speech on this occasion. Hazrat Aqdas had accepted this. On the night of the 16th, he felt unwell and became very weak due to diarrhoea. When he woke on the morning of the 17th, he received the revelation: ‘I am with the messenger, standing’ [i.e., standing by him]. Finding strength from this Divine promise he made a powerful speech of almost two and a half hours on his feet.”29

The holding and arrangement of this meeting shows how keen and eager Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was to present the message of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad before the public.

Lecture Paigham Sulh (‘Message of Peace’)

The Promised Messiah died a few days later, on 26 May 1908, in the house of Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah. He had been writing a lecture, entitled Paigham Sulh, addressing Hindus, appealing to them to come to an agreement with Muslims whereby Muslims, on the basis of the teaching of the Quran that prophets appeared among all nations, would recognise the great Hindu religious figures, Rama and Krishna, as true prophets, and Hindus would reciprocate by recognizing the Holy Prophet Muhammad as a prophet. This lecture was to have been delivered on 31 May. Following the death of the Promised Messiah, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din consulted the leading Muslims of Lahore about the delivery of this message. They were already deeply impressed by the speech of Hazrat Mirza sahib of the 17th, and it was agreed that his Message of Peace should be conveyed to the Hindu public. Thus an announcement was issued on behalf of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and some other Ahmadis and some leaders of the general Muslim community, including Mian Muhammad Shafi and Mian Fazl-i Husain,30 that this lecture would be read at University Hall, Lahore, on 21 June 1908 at 7 a.m.

The meeting was a grand affair, attended by several thousands of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. The president of the meeting was Justice Sir Pratul Chandra Chatterji, judge of the Chief Court, Punjab. The lecture was read by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. The report of the proceedings published in Al-Hakam is quite ecstatic. There is an introduction, by the newspaper, of ten paragraphs, each of which begins with the words ‘The day of 21st June’ in bold, and then mentions some aspect which proved the truth of the Ahmadiyya Movement. It says that the day of 21st June showed that the Promised Messiah, after his death, is spiritually alive and his prayers for his Movement are working more powerfully than ever before; that this day will be written in history in golden letters as a memorial for that “peace loving man”; that this day will testify forever that he was the only pure-hearted man who loved the chosen ones of God so much that he proposed a way of stopping insults being hurled against them; that it was one of the blessed days promised to his followers by the founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement in his Will, the day when a brief, initial glimpse of the Qudrat Saniyya (i.e., the promised Divine help which would come to the Movement after his death) was manifested.

In the last of these introductory paragraphs, it is stated:

“The day of 21st June is that holy and sacred day… when that great discourse which Hazrat Aqdas wrote as ‘Message of Peace’ in his last days, due to his love for the prophets and it being unbearable for him to listen to insults against them … and to lift the dark stain of defamation and slander against their lives, and to establish the honour of their names, and to urge communities to live in love and harmony, and to benefit from their good fruits, that article was read out at University Hall, Lahore, in front of some four thousand respected and educated persons belonging to all religions who had come from afar, by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in a magnificent and glorious way, and the function was completed in a peaceable and excellent manner.”31

Regarding the reading of the speech by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, the report says:

“Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din read out the published paper very fervently and in a loud voice. At some points, the audience, being impressed, applauded enthusiastically, as is done traditionally, to show their praise and commendation, and their pleasure was evident from the happy expression on their faces. Despite the large gathering and the big venue, the paper could be heard clearly, and no one complained that the voice did not reach them. Just when the paper was being read so ardently and forcefully, Divine mercy started descending from heaven and the rain continued till the meeting ended.”32

This report acknowledges that an instance of the Divine help which was promised to the Movement to come after the time of the Founder, known as Qudrat Saniyya, was manifested at the holding of this meeting. As Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was the primary person motivated to arrange this meeting, it was therefore his action, in support of which this Divine help was sent.

The lecture Paigham Sulh (‘Message of Peace’) was also translated into English and published in the Review of Religions, July 1908. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din also published an appeal to the Ahmadiyya community to help in the printing of further copies for distribution:

“I wish to have a further 5000 copies of this message printed and distributed free among Hindus. The Lahore Jama‘at has already reprinted 2000 copies, of which only a few hundred remain, about a half of these 2000 having been distributed free. I have written to some twenty to twenty-five friends of mine asking each of them to send the expenses for printing 100 copies. … Today it occurred to me to include other friends in this noble work. I think our friends should buy copies costing at least 1 Rupee and present them to Hindus living in their towns.”33

In arranging this successful public meeting, having the treatise Paigham Sulh printed, reading it out with such fervour, and appealing for wider distribution of more copies, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din showed his great concern and eagerness to present this last message of the Promised Messiah to the Hindus and other people of India.

There were many other works done by Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din for the Ahmadiyya Movement during the life of the Promised Messiah, but we have dealt above with those which show in particular the closeness of their relations with him, his regarding them through his insight and Divine guidance as the right men to fulfil his mission, and the passion and devotion they showed to him and his cause.

Notes to this chapter:

1 Paigham Sulh, 7 November 1933, p. 8.

2 Letter dated 8 May 1899; facsimile published in Mujahid-i Kabir, p. 32, and in A Mighty Striving, second edition, p. 17.

3 Announcement dated 9 August 1899; Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, 1986 edition, v. 3, p. 137–138, number 206.

4 Announcement dated 4 October 1899; Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, 1986 edition, v. 3, p. 157–158, number 208.

5 Facsimile published in Mujahid-i Kabir, p. 50, and in A Mighty Striving, second edition, p. 20.

6 Announcement dated 15 January 1901; Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, 1986 edition, v. 3, p. 393–394, number 234.

7 Talk dated 22 October 1902; Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 2, p. 443 (1984 edition, v. 4, p. 114–115).

8 Talk dated 7 November 1906; Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 5, p. 80 (1984 edition, v. 9, p. 90).

9 See the Promised Messiah’s books Nuzul-ul-Masih, p. 23 and Tazkirat-ush-Shahadatain, p. 4 (Arabic) and p. 7 (Urdu).

10 Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, p. 253 (original edition page numbering).

11 See Tarikh-ul-Khulafa by Jalal-ud-Din Suyuti in chapters on Umar.

12 The Promised Messiah writes under Sign number 143 in Haqiqat-ul-Wahy: “It so happened that I saw frightening dreams many times, clearly telling of some tribulation to befall regarding the family of my father-in-law Mir Nasir Nawab.”

One of these dreams was that Mir Nasir Nawab’s wife had invited an enemy of the Promised Messiah into his house. He writes:

“The interpretation of inviting [an enemy] is that the inviter, due only to certain weaknesses of faith which are known to God, invites disaster into his house.” (italics ours)

Then Mir Nasir Nawab’s son Mir Muhammad Ishaq fell ill, and the Promised Messiah continues:

“It was certain that it was plague … Then I realized that this was the fulfilment of the dreams mentioned above, and I became desperately worried. I told the family of Mir Nasir Nawab that although I was praying, they must repent greatly and seek forgiveness of God because I had seen in a dream that they had invited an enemy into the house and this pointed to some failing on their part. …it occurred to me that if someone died of plague in my house then the biggest storm would arise in my falsification… because I have written scores of times, and published it and told it to thousands of people, that all the residents of my house will be safe from death by plague. I cannot describe the state of my heart at that time. So I immediately had recourse to prayer…”

He then writes that the boy recovered as a result of this prayer. See Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, p. 327–329.

In the same book, he has also written of an incident when his son Mirza Sharif Ahmad fell seriously ill during the plague epidemic. If he had died the opponents would be able to claim that the revelation promising protection for those in his house was false. In that case also, Hazrat Mirza sahib writes that he resorted to special prayers (Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, p. 84–85, footnote).

Contrast both these incidents with the one involving Maulana Muhammad Ali. The Promised Messiah did not need to resort to any prayer to save his own reputation, but rather, he plainly declared that Muhammad Ali could not possibly have plague since the protection he had under that revelation was not taken away due to any weakness of faith.

13 Report dated 2 November 1902; Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 2, p. 479 (1984 edition, v. 4, page 159).

14 Talk dated 29 November 1905; Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 4, p. 573 (1984 edition, v. 8, p. 269–270).

15 Badr, 16 February 1906, page 5, and 23 February 1906, p. 8.

16 The image of the original note has been published in several books; for example, Mujahid-i Kabir, p. 62–63, and A Mighty Striving, p. 53.

17 Al-Hakam, 17 November 1906, p. 1.

18 Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 5, p. 150–151, footnote (1984 edition, v. 9, p. 191–192).

19 Al-Badr, 1 August 1904, p. 4, 3rd column. Date of vision is June 1904.

20 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 58–59.

21 Badr, 31 October 1912, p. 6.

22 Badr, 13 June 1912, p. 4–5. (This issue is erroneously dated on its front page as 14 June.)

23 The revelation is listed as number 2 in a list of revelations in Al-Hakam, 24 May 1904, foot of page 2, below all the columns.

24 Review of Religions, December 1913, p. 520.

25 The Islamic Review, April–May 1933, p. 140–141.

26 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 32–33.

27 Al-Hakam, 6 May 1908, front page, and Badr, 7 May 1908, p. 5, col. 1.

28 Badr, 25 June 1908, p. 3.

29 Al-Hakam, 30 May 1908, front page. See also Al-Hakam, 14 July 1908, front page.

30 Mian Sir Muhammad Shafi (d. 1932) and Mian Sir Fazl-i Husain (d. 1936) were both eminent Muslim lawyers and politicians involved in the founding of the All-India Muslim League.

31 Al-Hakam, 10 July 1908, p. 2. The whole report runs from p. 1 to 3.

32 Al-Hakam, 10 July 1908, p. 2.

33 Badr, 9 July 1908, p. 7. Al-Hakam, 10 July 1908, p. 7–8.

4. Services during the time of
Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din

After the death of the Promised Messiah, under the headship of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din in the period May 1908 to March 1914, Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din continued their work for the Ahmadiyya Movement, but on an even greater scale. Maulana Muhammad Ali, apart from his work as secretary of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and editor of the Review of Religions, was in charge of the Anjuman’s works relating to education, publication and buildings, and had also to deal with other affairs. His work of the greatest and most lasting importance was the commencement of the translation of the Holy Quran into English under the guidance of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, during this period, gave lectures on Islam in various places in India until 1912, and in the September of that year he went to England where he preached Islam, under the advice and guidance of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, and there he founded the Woking Muslim Mission at the mosque in the town of Woking, Surrey, in 1913.

This chapter deals with the chief works of Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, in particular to demonstrate their close relationship with Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din and his keen, personal interest in advising and guiding them, and to show that Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din regarded the work they did as fulfilling the mission entrusted by the Promised Messiah to his followers, which they carried out with the utmost devotion. As Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote in his book about the split:

“Then came the time of the Hakim sahib [Maulana Nur-ud-Din]. I had a very special relationship with him. What he said about me in his lectures and sermons, you have yourself heard and read. And then came the time when I went to England [in September 1912]. … I obeyed Hazrat Hakim sahib till the end of his life. I followed the manner of preaching Islam that he suggested. I sought his guidance on the smallest of matters and adhered to it till he passed away and left his testimonial of being happy with me. Then I ask you: what was your opinion about me before his death?”1

As a preliminary, we may quote the following two opinions about Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din expressed just a few months after the death of the Promised Messiah, which show the high regard in which they were held. In a speech, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din described Maulana Muhammad Ali as:

“a friend of mine and my arm, at whose sincerity I am amazed and I envy it also.”2

In the same issue of Badr, there is an article at the start of which the writer says: “After the death of the Promised Messiah I see that there has been a change in some leaders of the community. By change I mean that they are working with greater zeal. The first among these is our present Amir, Allama Nur-ud-Din”.3 Then he mentions the second such example as follows:

“Then, when I think over my honoured benefactor Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din sahib, Pleader, Chief Court, I am struck by the fact that, after the death of the Messiah, he has made it his foremost duty to spend his life and money on propagating the message of the Jama‘at of the Mahdi. To publish nearly ten thousand copies of Paigham Sulh and Krishan Avtar for free distribution is no small sacrifice. After that, he is writing another useful book which will deal a blow to the doctrines of the Cross. From his talks and his company, I have become certain that this blessed personage possesses an urge for the propagation of the religion of Ahmad. May God create the same spirit in all of us.”4

English translation of the Holy Quran

Although it was not until after the death of the Promised Messiah that Maulana Muhammad Ali started working on his English translation of the Quran, but it was during his lifetime that the editor of the Ahmadiyya community newspaper Al-Hakam wrote an article on the qualities required of a translator of the Quran and argued that these were to be found in Maulana Muhammad Ali. His article was prompted by a proposal by two well-known Muslim figures living in the U.S.A., Mr Barkatullah of Bhopal and Alexander Russell Webb, that they would translate the Quran into English if Muslims of India could raise the funds for them to do so. The editor writes:

“Leaving aside the question whether Muslims of India will raise funds or not, the most important question about the translation of the Quran is whether those who are putting themselves forward to translate the Quran into English possess the capability of doing so or not.”

Doubting the ability of these two persons to do so, he wrote as follows:

“I do not see any option but to accept that an English translation of the Quran is a dire necessity but to do this work a scholar is required who, on the one hand, if not a thorough master of the entire breadth of the Arabic language, can at least be called a specialist of Arabic, and along with this he should have full command over the English language and complete mastery in writing it. Besides this, he should have a bond of attachment and love with God the Most High; moreover, his heart should be full of fervour for the propagation of Islam and pain at its present condition… In addition, he should be thoroughly acquainted with the needs of the time and be fully aware of all the objections against Islam that are put forward by heretics, atheists, philosophers, Arya Hindus, Christians, scientists and others, so that in regard to those places in the Quran where these people have stumbled, he should show the light of guidance.”

He then goes on to write:

“If at this point I mention the name of an esteemed man, it may perhaps be called ‘selling a friend’, but it is a fact, which, if people do not realise it now, they will do so at a future time, that this revered person is the worthy young man Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A. By writing in defence of Islam and expounding its truth through the Review of Religions he has established the reputation of his pen in Asia and Europe so firmly that figures like Russell Webb and philosophers like Tolstoy acknowledge that the concepts of Islam presented in this magazine give satisfaction to the soul. In Europe and America, articles of this magazine have been read with great interest and valued very highly. They are not ordinary articles but deal with such important topics as hell and heaven, slavery, polygamy, jihad, preservation of the Quran, and compilation of Hadith reports, etc., that not everyone can write about. Any truthful person can see from the issues of this magazine how magnificently the philosophy of Islam has been presented. …

I have not put forward Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib’s name so that Muslims of India may choose him for this purpose or send him subscriptions. He neither needs this nor desires it. He has been working for years, sincerely and enthusiastically, serving Islam under the man sent by God. He is neither motivated by any greed nor can any difficulty or problem stop him. If God allows, he will do this work quietly and the world will find out how zeal for the service of Islam and support of the Muslim nation is made manifest.”5

Starts work on translation

It was in 1909 that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din instructed Maulana Muhammad Ali to start work on the English translation and commentary of the Holy Quran. Maulana Muhammad Ali put forward a proposal to the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and outlined some details of the project. In June 1909 the Anjuman passed the resolution that he should do this work. He continued his duties as Secretary of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and editor of the Review of Religions. He was also in charge of the Anjuman’s educational, literary and construction work. The magnificent building of the Talim-ul-Islam High School and Boarding House was constructed entirely by his efforts and under his supervision. His work on the translation of the Quran was not a part of his duties. He carried it on in his own way and according to his own judgment. He worked at home by candle light at night, with piles of books on the table, and he continued on this work when on leave.

Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din took great interest in the translation. Maulana Muhammad Ali used to read to him the translation that he was doing and take guidance and amendments from him. Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s love for the Quran and his interest in this translation had reached such a height that when in January 1914, following the annual gathering of 1913, he fell critically ill and was so weak that even speaking exhausted him, so that on medical advice he discontinued his teaching of the Quran, even then, in a state of the most serious illness, he would still send for Maulana Muhammad Ali daily to listen to his translation and notes and give advice. Once, many years later, speaking of those last days Maulana Muhammad Ali said:

“It was my good fortune that I had the opportunity to learn the Quran from him even in those days when he was on his death bed. I used to read out to him notes from my English translation of the Holy Quran. He was seriously ill, but even in that state he used to be waiting for when Muhammad Ali would come. And when I came to his presence, that same critically ailing Nur-ud-Din would turn into a young man. The service of the Quran that I have done is just the result of his love for the Holy Quran.”6

The last days of the life of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din were chronicled by Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig who was staying in Qadian in those days to treat him. This diary used to be published at that time, in February and March 1914, in every issue of the newspaper Paigham Sulh. Parts of it were re-published in Paigham Sulh in 1935. Here are some extracts:

“9 February 1914 — … He said: ‘Ask Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib about my knowledge of the Quran. Having worked very hard Maulvi sahib comes with hundreds of pages and I abridge them. He sometimes says that my opinion is better than all research.’

Then he said: ‘Maulvi sahib has pleased me very much, I am so happy. What wonderful research he has done on Gog and Magog, Companions of the cave and Dhu-l-Qarnain! He has searched through encyclopaedias. How clearly he has solved this problem! Marvellous!’”7

“Qadian, 11 February 1914 — When Hazrat Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib arrived to read to him the translation of the Holy Quran he said to him: ‘Come that I may live!’”8

“14 February 1914 — Hazrat sahib is still in a critical condition. His diarrhoea is better but he is getting weaker by the day. May Allah have mercy on him. He listens to Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib’s translation of the Quran daily. … His courage and determination is very great and his love for the Quran is unequalled. He says: ‘It is the Quran which is the source of my soul and life’.”9

“16 February 1914 — … When Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib comes to read the notes of the Holy Quran to him, sometimes even before he begins Hazrat sahib gives a discourse about the topic of the translation of the day and says that throughout the night he had been consulting books and thinking about it. (He does not mean that he actually reads books; what he means is that he keeps running over in his mind what is written in commentaries of the Quran and books of Hadith.) Sometimes he quotes from books of Hadith or the Bible, and does it perfectly accurately. He says again and again that his mind is fully healthy and it never stops working on the Quran.”10

“18 February 1914 — While he was in a state of extreme weakness, showing few signs of life except pulse and breathing, and his body was cold, Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib came as usual to read out notes from the Holy Quran. … [While instructing him regarding certain verses of the Quran] he spoke with pauses, sometimes of a minute or two. …

Then he addressed Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib and said: ‘Seeing you every day is also food for my soul’.

Then he added: ‘Maulvi sahib, you are very dear to me. I found one useful weapon (meaning Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib), full of knowledge, it is God’s grace to you’.

Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib replied: ‘It is my good fortune that I can expound your ideas’.

Hazrat sahib said: ‘It is all the grace of God. What has happened is by His grace and what will happen will be by His grace’. … Then he added: ‘This translation will inshallah be beneficial in Europe, Africa, America, China, Japan and Australia’.”11

“21 February 1914 — Hazrat sahib called in Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib for a discourse of the Quran. At that time Abdul Hayy’s mother [wife of Maulana Nur-ud-Din] was also present. After the discourse Hazrat sahib got hold of Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib’s hand and slowly took it towards himself and kissed it.

At night, while listening to the manuscript [of the translation and notes of the Quran] from Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib, he remained silent. … After listening to it, he asked Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib: ‘Do you like it?’ He said: ‘Hazrat, I like it’. He said: ‘Very well, also add to it the hadith from Muslim’.”12

“22 February 1914 — He was very cheerful today. … When told that Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib had come to read to him the [translation and notes of the] Quran, he said: ‘He is most welcome. Let him read it. Does my brain ever get tired of it?’ Then he pointed towards his bed and said: ‘Let Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib come near me’. Then added: ‘He is very dear to me’.”13

These incidents show Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s love for Maulana Muhammad Ali and his interest in the translation of the Quran. During the time when the English translation was in progress, once Mir Nasir Nawab, father-in-law of the Promised Messiah, wanted to get work started on an Urdu translation and commentary of the Holy Quran and even collected some funds for it. But Maulana Nur-ud-Din stopped him and said that the Urdu translation on behalf of the Movement would also be done by Maulana Muhammad Ali, after he had completed the English translation. Maulana Muhammad Ali stated that he was in Murree due to his ill health in the summer of 1913 when Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote to him saying that as he has also to translate the Quran in Urdu after completing his English translation, he should start doing it along with the English. Hence, according to these instructions, he started doing the Urdu translation as well, little by little, and almost six parts were seen by Maulana Nur-ud-Din.

An announcement dated 3 March 1914, that is, ten days before the death of Maulana Nur-ud-Din, regarding the English translation of the Quran, was published as an appendix to the Review of Religions, February 1914 issue. On the first page there is a statement by Maulana Nur-ud-Din in which he says:

“Up to today I have listened to the notes of twenty-three parts, which is more than three-quarters of the work, and have also seen the Urdu translation of six parts. I hope by the grace of Allah that I will complete the rest. Even during my illness I have been listening to the notes and dictating as well. I have spent all my life, from childhood to old age, studying the Holy Quran and pondering over it, and Allah the Most High has given me the kind of understanding of His Holy Word that very few other people have. …

Now I want to draw the attention of friends to the expenses of publishing the English translation, and after it the Urdu translation. I hope for grace from Allah that He will not let go to waste my efforts in the service of His Word. I am also sure that those people who have a connection with me and who love me have also been granted the zeal to serve the Quran. … This translation will inshallah prove to be beneficial in Europe, Africa, America, China, Japan, Australia, etc.”

After this announcement there follows a statement by Maulana Muhammad Ali in which, among other things, he says:

“…my hopes rest on the fact that all the important explanations given in this translation have come from a man who has devoted his entire life, from childhood to the age of 80 years, to the study and service of the Holy Quran, and has read thousands of books only to gain insight into the meanings of some verse or other, who is familiar with classical and modern thought and the old and the new sciences, and has studied all these branches of knowledge to bring them into the service of the Quran, who is not only the leader of the Ahmadiyya Movement but is one of those rare personalities who, because of their vast study and extensive knowledge, are entitled to be leaders of communities. He is a unique individual as regards his knowledge, learning, uprightness and faith in Allah.”

Underneath this announcement there are two notes as follows:

By the time this announcement was printed, the footnotes of 26 parts had been completed.

On 4 March Hazrat [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] said: ‘Our English translation has been accepted by Allah. This good news has come by Divine revelation’.

The good news (basharat) mentioned in this quotation was revealed to a holy man of the Ahmadiyya community, Mir Abid Ali Shah, who had in a vision, while praying, heard this glad tiding. He told it to Maulana Nur-ud-Din during his last illness in the presence of Maulana Muhammad Ali and a large number of other Ahmadis. Hearing this, Maulana Nur-ud-Din, Maulana Muhammad Ali and everyone else who was present at once fell in prostration in thanksgiving (sajda shukr). In the diary from which extracts have been quoted above, it was reported that on 4 March Maulana Nur-ud-Din said in reference to this good news:

“This is a matter of much gratitude to God. Now if people raise even thousands of objections [against this translation], I do not care.”14

On 13 March 1914 Maulana Nur-ud-Din died. Following the events of the split, Maulana Muhammad Ali migrated to Lahore in late April and continued there his work on the English translation of the Quran. It was completed in 1916, and the first edition printed and published in England from Woking in 1917.

Calcutta Convention of Religions

In the time of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din there were some religious debates and conferences in which Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din represented the Ahmadiyya Movement.

The first such occasion was a major conference of religions in Calcutta in April 1909, the Indian Convention of Religions. In compliance with Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s instructions, Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a comprehensive paper in English on Islam, and went to Calcutta with Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din who was to deliver this paper as a speech. When his turn came to read the paper on the second day, it was late in the afternoon and two speakers on Islam had preceded him. The audience were tired and there were only a handful of Muslims among them. So they were not expected to pay much attention. As soon as Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din started speaking, the audience was captivated and there was complete silence in that same hall where, during other lectures, there had been constant noise of people talking. At times the audience cheered their approval. Witnessing this scene, those Ahmadis from Calcutta who were among the audience rose from their seats and fell in prostration of thanksgiving there and then, in the hall.

A newspaper, the Observer, in its issue of 28 April, wrote:

“A very interesting and learned thesis on Islam was read by our esteemed fellow-citizen, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, B.A., Pleader. The paper was greatly appreciated by the entire audience. A correspondent, commenting upon the proceedings, says that, electrified and spell-bound, the audience fixed their eager gaze on the speaker in a profound listening mood, while a deep sense of appreciation and interest could be conspicuously read on their faces. So deep was the impression on the minds of the audience that after this lecture no other speaker could that day secure a hearing. When the paper was finished, the President as well as the delegates congratulated the Khwaja on the surpassing excellence and high merit, as also the chaste diction, of his thesis — a courtesy which fell to the lot of the Khwaja alone. Struck with the high style and spirit of the thesis, the members of the Vivekananda Society, who were the promoters of the Convention, requested Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and M. Muhammad Ali, M.A., the writer of the thesis, to deliver at Calcutta a series of lectures on Islam.”15

Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a detailed report about the proceedings of the entire Convention, including summaries of the speeches of other representatives. In conclusion he wrote:

“The success that Allah the Most High granted to the Movement in this convention was like the success at the Dharm Mahutasu conference.16 Although the paper read at this convention was not the work of that saintly heart which was the fount of the revelation of God, but rather a summary of some of his ideas compiled by a humble servant of his in his own words, nor at the time of its reading was that Imam, who was helped by God, in existence to pray for it, nor was there anyone to prophesy its success, … yet because Allah wishes to establish this Movement, He did not withhold His aid and support even though our dear Imam had been taken from us. The Divine hand granted recognition to this paper so that His servants, witnessing the help and support from God, may devote themselves to their work with even more energy and fervour. The clear success in the Mahutasu conference [of 1896] and then in this convention is an evidence of the truth of the Promised Messiah.”17

Thus Maulana Muhammad Ali regarded the success which Allah granted to him and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as being part of, and continuation of, the success which Allah bestowed upon the Promised Messiah during his life.

Debate at Rampur

In June 1909 the Nawab of Rampur arranged a major debate between Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis. The debator representing the non-Ahmadis was Maulvi Sanaullah of Amritsar. The Ahmadi delegation was led by Maulana Syed Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha, and included, among others, Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. A detailed report of the proceedings of this debate was written by Maulana Muhammad Ali and published in the Ahmadiyya community newspaper Badr dated 24 June 1909, and Maulana Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha wrote a book about it. In the beginning of his report, Maulana Muhammad Ali writes:

“In the days when this Movement was taking part in the Convention of Religions in Calcutta, a letter was received by Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] that the Nawab sahib wanted some Ahmadi scholars to explain in front of him arguments relating to the truth of the Ahmadiyya Movement, and likewise opponents of the Ahmadiyya Movement to put forward their arguments. The Ahmadiyya Movement does not approve of such debates in general, and consequently, it was long ago that the Promised Messiah put an end to them. In fact, such debates, in which, instead of seeking the truth, what is in mind is victory and defeat, and the two parties, or one of them, want to please the public, can never lead to a useful result. However, as on this occasion the request was from the sovereign ruler of a state, and it appeared that he did not want the usual kind of debate, but that he wanted to listen to the arguments of the two parties to learn the truth … so Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih gave permission for it.”18

This comment shows that the Ahmadiyya Movement was not interested in point-scoring in debates or receiving cheap applause from the public, but in serious discussions enabling the audience to determine the truth. Unfortunately, during the debate the Nawab broke his promise of remaining impartial and openly supported Maulvi Sanaullah. So the Ahmadi delegation had to discontinue the debate.

Religious convention at Allahabad

In January 1911 a multi-religious convention was held at Allahabad. The organisers invited Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din went to participate but Maulana Muhammad Ali could not go because he was extremely busy with the English translation of the Quran and other duties, so he sent a lecture in English which was read out by Maulana Sadr-ud-Din.

On 8 January, the day before the convention opened, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din gave a lecture at the Muslim Club, Allahabad, on the topic ‘The Living and Perfect Prophet’. The President on this occasion was Maulvi Rahmatullah Khan, advocate of the High Court, Allahabad. He was not an Ahmadi but he introduced the Ahmadi delegation in glowing terms as follows:

“We cannot sufficiently thank these esteemed gentlemen for undertaking such a long journey to save our honour when, in this field of battle of religions, we were disappointed by our own ulama. Had they not come to Allahabad, we would have faced great embarrassment and humiliation against other religions. What to speak of Allahabad, the power of their pen has been acknowledged in Europe and America. In this age of knowledge and science when rational and philosophically minded people ridicule religion, they have written articles full of wisdom which established the honour of Islam all over the world, and this was a dire necessity which we Muslims ignored. It is God’s favour that at such a critical time He has roused these gentlemen. Their zeal and fervour for the propagation of the religion is testimony to their truth.

The respected gentleman who will speak today is not unknown to us for his religious services. Although we have not personally had the opportunity to hear the Khwaja sahib speak, but what we have heard constantly during the past year has not only created respect for him in our eyes but established respect for that Jama‘at which produced the Khwaja sahib.”19

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din then delivered his lecture about the Holy Prophet Muhammad. The report of this occasion in Badr, from which we translated the President’s remarks above, says of the lecture:

“People were so interested that they all listened with rapt attention. … Just when the audience were in the highest state of exhilaration and engrossment, the Khwaja sahib began a comparison of Jesus of the Gospels with the Holy Prophet, and in this context he made the following statement.”

That statement by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din is as below:

“Friends! I received education in a Christian Mission college, and I developed a close connection with the reverend professors there. All the attractions of Christianity, natural and artificial, had influenced me. May God bless my guide and leader, Hazrat Mirza sahib. If he had not guided me, probably today you would be hearing me in some church hall in Allahabad proclaiming “Jesus is our Lord” and making speeches in support of the doctrines of the Cross, but today you are seeing me speaking in support of Islam and its founder. God had granted me the skill of public speaking. It would have been employed for one purpose or another: either I would be your lecturer or a preacher of Christianity. At exactly the critical juncture when the attractions of Christianity had brought me fully under their spell, my guide rescued me from this European enchantment.”20

Having reproduced this statement, the report says:

“The Khwaja sahib uttered these words in such a manner, and so aptly to the occasion and time, that the faces of the audience, instead of showing any surprise, were indicating love and respect which they were certainly feeling about Mirza sahib at that time. They saw that this man of such entrancing speech, who was proving the greatness of Islam with superb eloquence and rational principles, had been prevented from employing his abilities and skills against Islam and in favour of Christianity only by that venerable man whom the ulama had declared as kafir.”21

On 9 January, the first day of the convention, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din delivered his lecture. He began with a recitation of the Kalimah Shahadah followed by the Darood in the loudest possible voice, making the walls of the building resound. Then he said that before reading his paper he should say who he was, and he made the following statement:

“I belong to the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam — a sect founded by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian in the last decade of the 19th century. The sect does not differ from other Islamic sects in any cardinal principle of Muhammadanism but in one thing. Our Holy Prophet Muhammad promised us a Messiah who was to come to revive religion in the days to come, and we accept the fulfilment of these prophetic words in the person of our Master, the founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.”22

His lecture was published in the Review of Religions, February 1911, and later on in book form in Four Lectures by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din.23

On the second day, the lecture sent by Maulana Muhammad Ali was read out. It explained that Islam is the true religion which is in accordance with human nature, and it has brought the earlier religions to completion and perfection. It was published in the Review of Religions, January 1911, and in book form in 1912 by the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian, under the title Islam, The Natural Religion of Man (in English), and its Urdu translation was published as Usul-i Islam.

The well-known Muslim Urdu daily newspaper, Paisa Akhbar, published a review of this convention. Its comments were reproduced in the Ahmadiyya newspaper Badr in its reporting mentioned above. The Paisa Akhbar wrote:

“The most regrettable aspect of this Conference was the apathy and indifference of our Muslim brothers. … After all, this religious conference was in India, a country in which the Ulama have written volumes upon volumes in calling one another kafir and false, and to degrade one another, but none of them made an appearance on this occasion to prove the truth of Islam. … Very few Muslims were to be seen at the convention. On the benches and chairs in the hall mostly Hindus and Christians were to be seen. Perhaps no more than one-twentieth of the audience were Muslims. …

It was a blessing of God that there were two papers by Muslims read out at this occasion, and by good fortune those two papers were acknowledged as the inspiring ones of the convention. One was by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, M.A., editor of the Review of Religions, Qadian, which was in eloquent English. The European people among the audience, having heard it, gave the opinion that there was probably no other paper of this standard. It explained the philosophy of Islam and its pillars, and condensed a vast amount of knowledge within a few pages. This paper was read on the second day of the conference, and it was the only one listened to with intense attention and pleasure by all present, regardless of their religion, and praised by everyone, whereas the other papers were listened to with ordinary attention.

On the first day there were papers on behalf of two different sects of the Hindu religion, and for the Jews the paper by Mr Isaac was worthy of praise. However, the paper which created such a general delight among the audience that every few minutes the hall echoed with “cheers” was the last paper [by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din]. It was delivered at a time when everyone was tired from the exertions of the day. In the paper, it was shown that the true religion of Islam, which is in consonance with human nature, has been taught from the beginning of time by various sacred personages and messengers in different countries; and when the time came that all parts of the world were to form a common bond, this religion reached its complete form in the teachings of the Holy Prophet Muhammad and the religion brought by him. The author of this paper was Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, lawyer of the Chief Court, Punjab. … This paper was highly valued, and proved to be the one which fulfilled the objectives of the convention of religions. The organizers of the convention accepted the value of these two papers on Islam with much generosity. After the Khwaja sahib finished delivering his paper, the President of the Convention, Maharajah Bahadur Warbhanga, rose from his chair to shake his hand. Justice Sarwacharan Matar and other Hindus congratulated him. The Justice also said that not even twenty conferences of Hindus and Muslims could do as much useful work as this one paper.

A correspondent of a respected American newspaper,24 who had come to take part in this conference, so much liked these two Muslim papers that he intends to print photographs of the authors. Praise be to Allah, it is a matter of the greatest pleasure that Islam was victorious in this convention, no matter by the hands of which person.”25

It would be informative to quote some extracts from this speech of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din from the Review of Religions, February 1911 issue. Referring to the Holy Prophet, he said:

“Hence the great Divine Wisdom was pleased to raise the last of its prophets in a place which occupied a central position in the known world.” (p. 49)

“Among prophets similarly, he alone can claim, as Muhammad did, to be the last of the sacred race, who shows you the way to that spiritual perfection which means the receiving of Divine revelation.” (p. 52)

He went on to say:

“In short, we believe Muhammad to be the last of the prophets, not only because he gave us a complete code of guidance in life here, but because he also enabled us to claim heritage of Prophets. He says: Ulama ummati ka-anbiya bani Israil — ‘The divine scholars amongst my followers will be like the Prophets of Israelites.’ He also promised us an inspired Reformer at the head of each century, who is called ‘Mujaddid’ in the Muslim terminology. And we find the fulfilment of these prophetic words in the annals of Muhammadan history. … no century has passed on Islam that has been without men receiving revelation from God. For instance, Omar bin Abdul Aziz; Ba-Yazid of Bustam; Junaid of Baghdad; Mohy-ud-Din Ibn Arabi of Spain; Sh. Abdul Qadir of Gilan; and in India Moin-ud-Din Chishti, Sheikh Ahmad Mujaddid Alif Sani, Nizam-ud-Din Aulia, Bawa Farid Shakar Ganj, Data Ganj Bakhsh, Shah Wali-ul-Lah and Sayed Ahmad Bareilvi, may be counted amongst men who were blessed with the word of God.” (p. 53–54)

“…revelation would have become a myth pure and simple, as it is at present in Europe, if the head of our century had not seen its promised Mujaddid. God raised Ahmad in the Punjab, who presented his own pattern to his fellow-beings. He showed that his implicit obedience to the Quranic laws and his faithful observance of the holy practices of the Prophet, had secured him the highest grace, the revelation. He declared that the door is not closed, but is open to him who knocks at it.” (p. 54)

It can be seen that in this public speech, delivered some three years before the split, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din has clearly declared three times that the Holy Prophet Muhammad was the last of the prophets, and that after him divine scholars, mujaddids and recipients of revelation arise among Muslims, the recent being Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He has also given a list of names of some previous saints among Muslims to indicate that the Promised Messiah belonged to this category of saints.

Devotion to cause even at wife’s death

A Muslim organization of Agra, Anjuman Hidayat-i Islam, requested Ahmadi speakers to address their annual conference held in May 1912. At Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s suggestion, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din gave permission for a delegation of five persons to be sent: the Khwaja himself, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, Maulana Sadr-ud-Din and Mufti Muhammad Sadiq. In the report of this journey to Agra published in Badr, Mufti Muhammad Sadiq writes: “The reason for this suggestion was mainly the popular and inspirational lecture given by the Khwaja sahib in Agra last year at this time”.26 It may be added here that Mufti Muhammad Sadiq was, after the split, a leading missionary of the Qadiani Jama‘at. The others named above were to be in the Lahore Jama‘at.

However, just as Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was about to leave Lahore for Agra, accompanied by Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig and Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, his wife Afeefa died.27 As a result of this bereavement, he could not go. Mufti Muhammad Sadiq writes in his report:

“Because of this, the Khwaja sahib could not come. However, he insisted that his companions depart, and he sent his lecture after them by post so that the programme of the Anjuman at Agra would not be affected.”

He goes on in this report to quote a letter which Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote to him in reply to his message of condolence. Before quoting the letter, he writes:

“This letter shows that the influence of the company of the Imam [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] has made the Khwaja sahib to be so absorbed in the services of the religion that no tragedy is a tragedy for him. This is not only in words, but his state of mind and his actions on this occasion were proving his faith. Others were shedding tears while he was reminding them to show patience. Only shortly after his wife’s death, he resumed work on completing his reply to an Arya Samaj pamphlet which he had started writing earlier, so that it could be read in Agra. Only a couple of hours had passed over his wife’s death that he despatched it to Agra to his dear friends, who are his neighbours and true sympathisers, to avoid causing any loss to the service of the religion.”28

In the letter referred to, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote:

“Allah knows best how the passion for the propagation and service of Islam has penetrated my very bone and fibre, for which I thank God and thank my spiritual training at the hands of my mentor [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad]. As a result, within about twenty minutes of the death of my wife, I had recovered enough composure to be able to write the answers to the questions of Swami Darshnanand for reading out at the convention in Agra. I was astonished that what was a painful event in worldly terms, instead of disabling me with shock and grief, led me as my first task to write a reply to an opponent of Islam.”29

He goes on to say:

“My late wife’s strong connection with the Ahmadiyya Movement was the main reason that I was able to go all over India so frequently without any worry. If, as according to some, I was the ladla mureed (most beloved disciple) of the Promised Messiah, he also granted her the favour of his kindness.”

We have already mentioned that, during the life of the Promised Messiah, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was called by many people in the Ahmadiyya Jama‘at as his ladla mureed or most beloved disciple; see earlier.

Lectures in Bangalore

The last series of lectures by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in India during the life of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din was during the visit by an Ahmadiyya delegation to Bangalore, Deccan and Poona in July-August 1912, ending in Bombay. They had been invited to address a large Muslim conference in Bangalore, at which many prominent Muslim leaders were present including Syed Sulaiman Nadawi and Maulana Shaukat Ali. During this tour too, his speeches proved very popular. Brief news items in Badr in August stated:

“The telegrams received from Bangalore show that our delegation has achieved much honour by the grace of God. There was some opposition in the beginning, but this was removed by the very first lecture of the Khwaja sahib, so much so that the Khwaja sahib was asked to preside over the conference.”30

“The delegation, after achieving success in Deccan, Bangalore and Poona, has reached Bombay. Everywhere the lectures of the Khwaja sahib made a prominent impact.”31

A detailed report on the conference in Bangalore by one of the Ahmadiyya delegation, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, written on 31 July, appeared in Badr in September.32 It tells us:

“The organizers of the conference had invited Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and succeeded in getting him to come. They had given him a welcome on a large scale [on arrival, the day before the conference opened]. This fanned the fire of hostility in the city and it was widely said that if the Qadiani were to be on the stage there would be a riot. The organizers were deeply worried and kept on asking us, in different ways, if there would be anything provocative in the Khwaja sahib’s speech, which would cause a riot. … Some of them began to regret inviting us. However, they did not know, nor did we know, what the curtain of the unseen future would reveal and how it would happen that our presence would prove to be a blessing for the conference and the people of the city. As I will explain later, the credit for the success of the conference, as openly admitted by Justice Abdur Rahim of the Madras High Court33 and other organizers, belonged to the ‘Qadiani’ group.”34

The report goes on to say that, on the opening day, 27 July, Justice Abdur Rahim gave his presidential address in English, a language which the vast majority of the audience could not understand:

“So the conference organizers asked the Khwaja sahib to translate it into Urdu. The translation was, we need not say, extempore to some extent, but its standard was admitted by the English-knowing audience themselves who said that it made the Justice’s speech shine all the more brilliantly. Justice Abdur Rahim especially expressed his thanks. This impromptu translation made the people feel friendly towards us to some extent.”

That evening Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din gave a lecture entitled Islam and Education. The report says: “As usual this speech turned [people’s] hostility and anger into familiarity and love … It made us feel that there would be more successes”.35

The following is what happened on the second day of the conference:

“Justice Abdur Rahim was delayed and as the conference had much to get through, its leaders proposed that the Khwaja sahib be the president. His speeches of the previous day had created such interest among the audience that upon this motion there arose cries of approval from all directions. The Khwaja sahib was made president of the conference for that day and the proceedings began. During the meeting Justice Abdur Rahim arrived, but despite insistence from the Khwaja sahib he preferred that the day’s proceedings should be completed under the presidency of the Khwaja sahib.”

The next speaker said that he had brought a message from Nawab Waqar-ul-Mulk. He was one of the founders of the All-India Muslim League and a fervent follower of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. The message was to the effect that Muslims of all sects must unite, give up mutual animosity, and instead fight the critics of Islam. After this message was delivered, the report relates:

“The Khwaja sahib made a detailed speech regarding the message of Nawab Waqar-ul-Mulk. He said in it that to unite in the face of the opponents of Islam and to use our weapons together does not at all mean that the various sects should give up their own distinctive characteristics because it is due to maintaining those particular features that the organizations can continue to exist. No doubt you should preach your beliefs to one another with love, friendship and calmness, but when someone arises to attack Islam you must unite to quell the attack. … This speech was not without effect, and it proved very useful at least in dispelling the opposition which had been working against us since the past few years until a couple of days ago.

On this second day too, speeches were in English and the Khwaja sahib had to do much impromptu translation. The fact is that the original speeches were not as clear as his translations, and it was this which the speakers acknowledged with much gratitude.”36

What happened in the aftermath of this conference is related as follows in this report:

“The conference concluded and special thanks were expressed towards us. It was acknowledged by announcement that the credit for the success of the conference belonged to the Ahmadiyya Movement delegation. Although the conference was over, at the insistence of the residents of the city another meeting was arranged for the evening.”37

At the meeting in the evening, when Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s evening speech ended he was mobbed by the audience. These scenes are described as follows:

“At the end of his speech there were strange scenes. An old man from among the dignitaries of the city came to the stage and placed a dupatta from Banaras38 upon the Khwaja sahib and kissed his hand. He then proceeded to kiss his feet. The Khwaja sahib strongly urged him to refrain from this, but he did not listen. There was a fervour and sincere love which knew no bounds. What a wonderful scene! It was the same city where two days earlier there was the most severe opposition, it was the same stage from which making a speech was feared to cause a riot, and to prevent such a disturbance plain clothes policemen were said to be present in numbers, yet on the same stage a servant of the Promised Messiah is standing and people are expressing their genuine love and respect with the utmost humility and submissiveness imaginable.

Justice the Honourable Abdur Rahim invited us to deliver a series of lectures in Madras. The leading merchant of Madras, Seth Haji Muhammad Ismail Khan Bahadur, asked us most respectfully to promise that in Madras we would stay as his guests. Requests are pouring in from places such as Mysore, Vaanam, Baari and Kolar, and elsewhere, that we should go there for at least one day. Yesterday a telegram came from the honourable Rafi-ud-Din Ahmad in Poona asking us to visit on 6 August, about which we have not yet decided. The same Ahmadi Jama‘at which was looked upon with revulsion and hatred is today not treated like that. All day yesterday dignitaries from various areas were coming to see us and enquiring about the Movement. As far as God granted us, we presented different aspects of the Movement and spoke to them about the mission of the Promised Messiah and the death of Jesus.”39

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din goes to England

It was shortly after the tour mentioned above that Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din left for England. We have earlier referred in some detail to his work from Woking, to point out that it was regarded by him as well as by others in the Ahmadiyya Jama‘at as the fulfilment of the vision of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in which he saw himself preaching in London and capturing “birds”. (This vision itself was connected by him with the prophecy of the Holy Prophet Muhammad that the sun would rise from the west in the latter days.) Here we will deal with the great interest that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din took in the Khwaja’s work in England, and the close contact between the two of them by frequent letters which show the bond of love, affection and respect between them. Most of these letters were published in the Ahmadiyya community newspapers at the time.

1. Before his departure from Qadian, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was given some advice by Maulana Nur-ud-Din:

“After the Zuhr dars Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] addressed Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and said:

‘Let me mention some things to you as well. You are going to England. Don’t show pride at any of your qualities. Very great works are achieved in England. There are very great trials and tribulations there and also conveniences and facilities. There are some terribly evil people there, but there are also some very upright people. I believe that it is a place where there are some very good and righteous people. If it did not contain some good people, it would cease to exist. Safeguard yourself from alcohol, swine flesh and bad company. I have many claims over you, so take heed of my advice. Definitely serve your religion there according to your capacity. Make progress in your profession there as well.40 A letter takes one week to reach here. So write to me one letter a week, and if that is not possible then a postcard.’

After praying for him, the Khwaja sahib was bid farewell.”41

2. When ready to board the ship in Bombay, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote to Maulana Nur-ud-Din as follows:

“Today at 12 noon, after medical examination, I am boarding the ship. ‘In the name of Allah be its sailing and its anchoring. Surely my Lord is Forgiving, Merciful.’ [Quran, 11:41]. I need your prayers, sir. I will write a second letter from Aden. Humble servant, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Saturday, 7th September 1912.”42

3. Shortly afterwards, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote to Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as follows:

“Respected, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu-hu!

Listen Khwaja, if you have too many expectations, always remember the holy words [of the Quran]: ‘let their false hopes beguile them’ [15:3]; and it clearly says in the Holy Quran: ‘No soul knows what it will earn on the morrow’ [31:34].

Then, adhere firmly to seeking Divine protection and dua [supplicatory prayer]. Today dua is ridiculed, but my dear you should engage in it very much. The best prayer is Surah al-hamd. It contains ‘You do we serve and You do we ask for help’, both referring to progress. I had heard that there is a mosque in London43 and it is in Woking. Dr Leitner had collected donations for the mosque.

London is undoubtedly a testing place. But there is a saying in Arabic: After a test, man either rises in dignity or falls in degradation. Do get admission in a college, this is important.

Nur-ud-Din, 22 October 1912.”44

4. In January 1913, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote a letter which he begins by addressing Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as ba kamal din or ‘one perfect of faith’. He then writes in it:

“Continue to pray from the bottom of your heart: ‘O Allah, grant me a pure companion’. Whenever you return back to London after leaving it, as soon as you sight the city, say the following prayer: …

Let the weapon of prayers be with you there. Meet people, and Allah may grant you some invaluable jewel of a man who would be a servant of the faith. I will pray here, may the Lord be with you, amen. Meet also the Muslim and Hindu boys who are there. Present the Holy Quran. For any needs that arise, after two raka‘s of prayer and the recital of the names and praise of God, ask much for forgiveness. Say: ‘There is no God but You, glory be to You! Surely I am from among the wrong-doers’ [the Quran, 21:87], and then pray that God may guide you to a fruitful, blessed end. Do not waste your time on those who are bad-natured, hypocritical, worldly, deniers of God, who either do not pray or have no faith in prayer, miserly and lazy. This is important. Plenty of good people are there also. Meet them. …

The Holy Quran is the word of the Creator, the Most High, and is full of truth and wisdom. Invite people towards it. May Allah the Most High be with you, amen.

Nur-ud-Din, 5 January 1913.”45

5. During the same month, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote back to Maulana Nur-ud-Din as follows:

“My master, my leader, my beloved, my mentor! May Allah keep you safe, may prayers and peace be upon you! May Allah grant you health, keep you over us for years and years, and give you much physical strength. The favours you have done me are so much that I am unable to recount them. I cannot find words in gratitude for that day when you guided me towards the late Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad], whose care and teaching planted a small, spiritual tree in my heart and mind, which was then watered and nourished by your hand.

It was the absurd talk and claims of a famous Christian clergyman and doctor of divinity that brought me here [to Cambridge], and God the Most High made him humiliated at my hands. The scene of ‘so he who disbelieved was confounded’ [Holy Quran, 2:258] that I witnessed taking place today is unique in its own right. I have sent its full detail to Mufti [Muhammad Sadiq] sahib, and you can hear it.

My beloved, it is absolutely essential that work be done here with determination and perseverance. To preach by lectures here is useless, although I will do that as well. I am preparing a proposal which will reach you in two weeks.

Prayer [is required], prayer, prayer, prayer!

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Lawyer, Cambridge, 30 January 1913

P.S. Your honour, I received the letter you wrote in your own hand. God willing, I will remain engaged in prayer as you instructed.”46

6. Below we quote only the opening and ending of a letter by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, between which there is a detailed report of his work:

“My leader, my lord, my mentor! May Allah keep you safe. In the last post I did not receive any invigorating message from my master and beloved in his own hand. …

The instruction you gave me about going to Cambridge, I will bear it in mind.”47

7. When Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din proposed to start a monthly magazine in England, The Islamic Review, he addressed an appeal in this connection to the Ahmadiyya community which was published in Badr under a title consisting of words from the Quran: ‘Who will be my helpers in the way of Allah?’ (61:14). He appealed to members of the Movement to subscribe to copies which could then be distributed free in the West. At the head of this article, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din added a note as follows:

“Our members and Muslims generally should ponder over this letter, which is a heart-felt plea by its author. You should read it with deep sympathy. I pray to Allah that you give it your full attention. Three thousand is not much for a magazine. You can be a subscriber or you can provide financial assistance, as you wish. Whatever you do, provide encouragement for the Khwaja sahib. ‘And surely Allah will help him who helps Him’ [the Quran, 22:40].

Wassalam, Nur-ud-Din, 26 February 1913.”48

8. We have earlier quoted Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s letter in which he congratulated Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din on the acceptance of Islam by Mrs Violet Ebrahim, the first person to become a Muslim at his hand.

9. After establishing his mission at the Woking Mosque in August 1913, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote a letter to Maulana Nur-ud-Din, dated 22 August, from which we quote the beginning and the end:

“My master and leader, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu-hu! Today after one month I received the affectionate note written by your hand, my beloved master. I need not elaborate on what effect it had on my anguished heart. …

Today is the second Friday when we are going to pray in this mosque. At present there are only three of us. May Allah soon increase the congregation. Sir, please pray for this.

Around the mosque and my house there is a large, pleasant garden, and greenery all around. Perhaps not even a very wealthy millionaire would have such an extensive garden. This is all due to the grace of God and your prayers, sir.”49

10. Maulana Nur-ud-Din wrote a short letter to Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, dated 19 December 1913, which he began with the words:

“Respected and honoured Khwaja sahib, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu-hu! May Allah bless your efforts.”

He went on to say in it:

“Each and every hair of my body is pleased with you and is engaged in prayer for you.”50

11. In his report dated 24 December 1913, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din relates the great progress being made in his propagation work. His letter begins excitedly as follows:

“The prayers of my master [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] are working. The heart-felt desires of my Mirza, which he expressed morning and night, are bearing fruit. The soul of our beloved Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him, is aroused.”51

In the report he includes the news of the acceptance of Islam at Woking at his hand by the Christian, Russian husband of an Egyptian princess, and their Islamic marriage conducted by him. The couple were Princess Saliha Hilmi (1878–1953) and Serge Yorketvitch, a Russian count and diplomat from St. Petersburg.

Maulana Nur-ud-Din, from his sick bed, replied as follows in a letter dated 14 January 1914:

“Congratulations on the coming to Islam of the Egyptian princess and the Russian count. I congratulate you most heartily on this. It says in the Holy Quran: ‘If you are thankful, I will give you more’ [14:7]. Give much thanks to God about Woking and don’t leave it to pursue some possibility. Continue praying to God. The money of Muslims was spent in Woking [this refers to Dr Leitner receiving funds from Muslims in India to build the mosque]. Africa certainly requires our sympathy. A European is required for there [as missionary of Islam]. Send The Islamic Review to them. Egyptian, Iranian and Turkish young men may appear to have no connection with Islam but the influence of La ilaha ill-Allah [‘There is no god but Allah’] must be upon them. The Muslim students who are there [in England], no matter what kind of people they may be, they are after all our own people. …

Regarding propagation of Islam, it says in Hadith that first invite people to La ilaha ill-Allah. Prayer is the real identity of Muslims which sets them apart from others: ‘And We did not make that which you would have to be the qiblah but that We might distinguish him who follows the Messenger from him who turns back upon his heels’ [the Quran, 2:143]. When they accept prayer, then the turn of zakat comes.

And I am sure that those who become Muslims at your hand will believe in the death of Jesus, and similarly they will believe that a physically dead person cannot return to the world. The real mission of Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] sahib was to reform practical behaviour. So you must draw the attention of our friends to improving their practical condition.”52

12. In one letter to Maulana Nur-ud-Din at this time, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din wrote:

“It is a wonder of Allah that the Woking mosque is now famous all over the world and how lively it is. Every two or three weeks there is a considerable gathering here. It is a wonder of Allah that you, sir, have such a sharp sight. When a friend here advised me not to go to the Woking mosque, you wrote to me saying: You must pray for it and you must go to the mosque. The doors of all grace and blessings were opened by going to the Woking mosque and opening it. The khutba of the nikah of the Russian count and the Egyptian princess made a special impact on non-Muslim women.”53

13. The following may have been Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s last letter to Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din:

“Qadian, 21 January 1914.

Respected and honoured Khwaja sahib, assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu-hu. I am now old and have lived long. Whenever I placed reliance on people, I suffered. I don’t need to explain the details to you. When you have the money, only then expand the magazine. Do not start some venture based on hope, and then find yourself ridiculed. God has many assistants. When someone does worthwhile work, it will be a sincere person who does it. Those who do it for payment don’t work successfully. All those who worked for the Holy Prophet Muhammad were honorary. That is how the work was done. As soon as honorary work was replaced by paid work, everything perished. Do not work beyond your strength. … There are very few who are willing to sacrifice themselves. These days I don’t order anyone. Self-sacrifice is a very great quality, which a person only possesses through the grace of God.”54

Maulana Nur-ud-Din died on 13 March 1914 while Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was in England. We close this chapter with an extract from Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s book about the split, published at the end of 1914, in which he addresses members of the Qadiani Jama‘at as follows:

“I am, after all, the same person that I was at the death of Hazrat Hakim [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] sahib. My way of working and preaching now is the same as it was during the time of Hazrat Hakim sahib. … As long as Hazrat Hakim sahib was alive, you people regarded my work as right and correct, and you even had revelations to that effect. You wrote poems in my praise. You regarded it as a blessing to serve me by cleaning my shoes and cooking food for me. Then Hazrat Hakim sahib died, and I had a difference of opinion with your leader [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] which is an entirely sincere difference. So today you call me a hypocrite and declare all my work as wrong.”55

Notes to this chapter:

1 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 59.

2 Badr, 14 January 1909, p. 15, col. 3.

3 Ibid., p. 7, col. 1.

4 Ibid., p. 7, col. 2.

5 Al-Hakam, 17 August 1907, p. 7.

6 Paigham Sulh, 28 April 1943, p. 3.

7 Paigham Sulh, 15 February 1914, p. 1, col. 2.

8 Paigham Sulh, 26 February 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

9 Paigham Sulh, 17 February 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

10 Paigham Sulh, 19 February 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

11 Paigham Sulh, 3 November 1935, p. 2, cols. 2 and 3.

12 Paigham Sulh, 15 November 1935, p. 2, col. 2.

13 Paigham Sulh, 15 November 1935, p. 2, col. 3.

14 Paigham Sulh, 10 March 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

15 Quoted in the Review of Religions, May 1909, p. 196.

16 This was the conference of great religions (dharm mahutasu) held in Lahore in December 1896. Representatives of different religions presented papers in support of their faiths. The Promised Messiah’s paper on behalf of Islam was read by his respected follower Maulvi Abdul Karim. The Promised Messiah had published a revelation prophesying that his paper would excel all others, and this was fulfilled as the paper was generally declared as the best, surpassing all others. It was later published in book form under the title Islami Usul ki Philosophy, and translated into English by Maulana Muhammad Ali and published as the well-known book The Teachings of Islam.

17 Badr, 22 April 1909, p. 12, col. 2–3.

18 Badr, 24 June 1909, appendix, p. 1, cols. 1–2.

19 Badr, 26 January 1911, p. 6, cols. 1–2.

20 Ibid., p. 6, cols. 2–3.

21 Ibid., p. 6, cols. 3.

22 Badr, 2 February 1911, p. 5, col. 1. This statement also appears in the Review of Religions, February 1911 issue, in a footnote at the beginning of his speech, from which we have quoted it here.

23 The three other lectures included in this book were delivered by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din as follows: The Heretic Club at the University of Cambridge, England, April 1913; 6th Congress of Religions at Paris, July 1913; and at Steinway Hall, London, November 1916.

24 His name is given in the Ahmadiyya report as Professor Stanley Hunter who is said to be “associated with a famous American magazine” (Badr, 2 February 1911, p. 6, col. 1).

25 Badr, 2 February 1911, p. 6, col. 2–3.

26 Badr, 13 June 1912, p. 3, col. 1. (This issue is erroneously dated as 14 June on the front page, but is dated 13 June on the inside pages.)

27 Badr, 30 May 1912, p. 2, col. 1.

28 Badr, 13 June 1912, p. 3, cols. 1–2.

29 Ibid., p. 3, col. 2.

30 Badr, 8 August 1912, p. 2, col. 1.

31 Badr, 15 August 1912, p. 1, col. 1.

32 Badr, 5 September 1912, p. 11–13.

33 Later Sir Abdur Rahim (d. 1952), he was a judge and politician, and leading member of the Muslim League. He was author of the book The Principles of Muhammadan Jurisprudence.

34 . Badr, 5 September 1912, p. 11, cols. 1–2.

35 Ibid., p. 11, col. 3.

36 Ibid., p. 12, cols. 1–2.

37 Ibid., p. 12, col. 2.

38 A dupatta is a long scarf. Dupattas from the city of Banaras are regarded as the finest, being made of silk.

39 Badr, 5 September 1912, p. 12–13.

40 Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din had gone to England to pursue a court case for a client in India. It was not yet known that he would, after that, devote himself entirely to the propagation of Islam, as he did do shortly afterwards. Hence the words here: “Definitely serve your religion there according to your capacity. Make progress in your profession there as well.”

41 Badr, 3 October 1912, p. 3.

42 Badr, 19 September 1912, p. 2.

43 By “London” he means England. The people of the Indian subcontinent often called England as London.

44 Badr, 31 October 1912, p. 3.

45 Badr, 13 January 1913, p. 2.

46 Badr, 6 March 1913, p. 3.

47 Badr, 17 April 1913, p. 1–2.

48 Badr, 6 March 1913, p. 1.

49 Badr, 4–11 September 1913, p. 3.

50 The text of this letter was first published in Paigham Sulh, 5 February 1914, front page. Its image was published later in Paigham Sulh, 21 January 1920.

51 Paigham Sulh, 13 January 1914, p. 3.

52 Paigham Sulh, 18 January 1914, p. 3.

53 Paigham Sulh, 22 January 1914, p. 1.

54 Paigham Sulh, 3 March 1914, p. 1.

55 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 65.

5. Events of the Split1

The foundations of the split were laid during the life of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, but to understand it one has to go back to 1905–1906 when the Promised Messiah wrote the booklet Al-Wasiyyat and established the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya. He created the administrative system of his community on the broad Islamic principles of democracy, thus putting before the world a magnificent achievement of the revival of true Islam. During his own lifetime he set that system into operation and ran the Movement according to those principles, by setting up the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Qadian in 1906 and handing over to it all the management of the Movement. He declared that after his lifetime the decisions of this Anjuman would be final and binding.

Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, son of the Promised Messiah, inwardly resented this, and began to entertain feelings of jealousy and animosity particularly towards Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din. He devoted much time to devising ways of rendering the Anjuman powerless.

Death of Promised Messiah and bai‘at of Maulana Nur-ud-Din

After the death of the Promised Messiah on 26 May 1908, when his body reached Qadian for burial, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din said to Maulana Muhammad Ali in the cemetery garden that it had been proposed that Maulana Nur-ud-Din should succeed the Promised Messiah. He replied that he fully agreed with the proposal. Then the Khwaja sahib added that it was also proposed that all Ahmadis should take the pledge (bai‘at) on Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s hand. Maulana Muhammad Ali replied that there was no need for that because only new entrants to the Movement need take the pledge and that this was the purport of Al-Wasiyyat. The Khwaja sahib said that it was a delicate time and any difference of opinion may cause division in the community, and there was no harm in Ahmadis taking the pledge again. At this, Maulana Muhammad Ali agreed and the pledge was taken at Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s hand. A few prominent Ahmadis, one being Maulana Ghulam Hasan Khan, did not take the bai‘at on his hand on principle. Maulana Nur-ud-Din did not criticise or expel them, but, in fact, continued to treat them with respect.

Maulana Nur-ud-Din and Maulana Muhammad Ali were very close to one another. Maulana Nur-ud-Din consulted Maulana Muhammad Ali about all the matters in hand, and whatever announcement he had to issue he would get it drafted by Maulana Muhammad Ali. This close bond further intensified the jealousy that some others felt towards Maulana Muhammad Ali and they decided to undermine this relationship between the two. Maulana Muhammad Ali considered the khilafat after the Promised Messiah to be only in the sense of ‘successorship’, and he held that the Divinely-ordained khilafat, whose establishment is mentioned in the khilafat verse of the Holy Quran (24:55), was promised to the Holy Prophet Muhammad only, and not to Hazrat Mirza sahib. The persons bearing a grudge against him misrepresented this by telling Maulana Nur-ud-Din at every opportunity that Maulana Muhammad Ali did not accept him as khalifa. For some time they succeeded in misleading him.

Mischief-making questions about Anjuman versus khalifa

In the annual report for 1908, prepared by Maulana Muhammad Ali and read out by him on 26 December 1908 at the annual gathering, the first such gathering since the death of the Promised Messiah, the creation of the Anjuman by Hazrat Mirza sahib was mentioned and it was stated that the running of the Movement after him had been placed by him in the hands of the Anjuman. The Maulana also read out the note by Hazrat Mirza sahib about the powers of the Anjuman after his lifetime, which we have already quoted. In the news of the gathering in Badr it is stated:

“A hand written note of the Promised Messiah was read, the summary of which is that after him all decisions of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya will be final.”2

Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din also mentioned in his speech at this gathering that Hazrat Mirza sahib had appointed the Anjuman as his successor. He was reported in Badr as saying:

“Around 22 December 1905 the Promised Messiah received a revelation that very few days remained [of his life]. Upon this, he immediately wrote and published his Will, and separated himself almost entirely from the management of the Movement, handing over all the work to the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, as if he was ready to meet his Maker at any moment. … he sowed a crop entirely by his own labour with the help of God. But when the time came to reap the crop and eat the fruit, he gave it not to his offspring nor to his relatives, but to a man who had come from outside [Maulana Nur-ud-Din]. … Anyhow, this Imam has appointed this Anjuman as his successor.”3

This gave an opportunity to the mischief makers, so that Mir Muhammad Ishaq, maternal uncle of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, composed a set of seven questions: (1) Is the Anjuman subservient to the Khalifa (Maulana Nur-ud-Din) or vice versa? (2) Can the Anjuman dismiss the Khalifa or vice versa? (3) How far can the Khalifa interfere in the affairs of the Anjuman?, the remaining four questions being along the same lines.

These they sent to Maulana Nur-ud-Din and told him that Maulana Muhammad Ali, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and their associates did not really accept him as khalifa. Maulana Nur-ud-Din sent those seven questions to Maulana Muhammad Ali to give a reply to. When he received his reply, he sent it to the questioner. But they did not rest at that, and sent further questions to Maulana Nur-ud-Din. The answers which Maulana Muhammad Ali gave are quoted in full by him in his book Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf.4 In brief he repeated that Hazrat Mirza sahib had made the Anjuman as his successor but everyone unanimously accepted Maulana Nur-ud-Din as their leader. There was no dispute between him and the Anjuman so all these questions were hypothetical and premature, and an attempt to break up the Anjuman. He added that the Anjuman should answer these questions. On receiving this reply Maulana Nur-ud-Din directed that these questions be sent to forty people for their views, he should be informed of their opinions and they should all assemble in Qadian on 31 January 1909.

At the gathering on 31 January, Maulana Nur-ud-Din expressed his views. Though he did state that a khalifa had other duties and functions than merely to lead the prayers, he did not clarify any further and in the end he repeated what Maulana Muhammad Ali had already said, that these questions were irrelevant at that stage and it was wrong to dwell on them. His final decision was that, as both the parties had confidence in him, these questions must not be raised in his lifetime.

After his speech he made Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and Mir Nasir Nawab, father-in-law of the Promised Messiah, to promise that they would obey him, and then he took the pledge from Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din on one side and from Shaikh Yaqub Ali and Mir Muhammad Ishaq on the other. The purpose of this was to affirm that they would obey him during his life, as both sides had already acknowledged that they obeyed him. This was all that happened, but afterwards this incident was misrepresented with embellishments by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his followers. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din clarifies this event as follows:

“It is said that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din made me take the bai‘at again. This is perfectly true. But what was the bai‘at about? It was the bai‘at of obedience (bai‘at-i irshad) to him. Can you honestly say that he made me retake the bai‘at of repentance? Now go and read the histories of the Sufis and see from which disciple they take the bai‘at of obedience. …

It is the height of injustice and fabrication that it has been spread about that we were opposed to him and he made us renew our bai‘at. … It was this very bai‘at of obedience that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din took from Hazrat Mian sahib [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] and [Mir Nasir] Nawab sahib verbally in my presence at that time.”5

He goes on to write:

“In 1908 the Promised Messiah left this world. Immediately after the close of 1908, some questions are raised about the Anjuman and the khalifa, with the aim of giving absolute power to the khalifa. These are sent to certain people. I write my reply to them and send it to Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din. I state plainly that I give preference to your decision over my opinion and the opinion of the Anjuman only because, due to your personal qualities, I believe that I should follow your instructions, otherwise I do not consider the khalifa to be a ruler over the Anjuman. I said this to him verbally as well. At that time there were two groups which differed over the issues raised in these questions. On the one side was Hazrat Mian sahib [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] and [Mir Nasir] Nawab sahib, and on the other side was Hazrat Maulvi Muhammad Ali and other friends. As both sides regarded the instructions of Hazrat Hakim sahib as above all, and I too said to him that I accept his orders, so he took from me the bai‘at of obedience in the manner of the righteous ones of the past. Before doing this, he asked the Mian sahib if he would obey him. The Mian sahib replied that he would, and that he would also obey khalifas after him. As far as I remember, he took the same promise from the Nawab sahib. This is the bai‘at which has been unjustly called as the renewal of my bai‘at.”6

It may be noted here that Maulana Nur-ud-Din never made people acknowledge him as the kind of autocratic khalifa with absolute and dictatorial powers that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad became in 1914, nor did he ever override any decision of the Anjuman. Above all, the rules and regulations of the Anjuman remained the same during his period of headship as they had been framed by the Promised Messiah, but Mirza Mahmud Ahmad started altering them as soon as he became khalifa.

As Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his supporters did not succeed in achieving their real aim, they continued trying to revive the dissension. They tried their level best to impress again and again upon Maulana Nur-ud-Din that these people were inwardly opposed to him. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was the main instigator of this, as is proved by a letter he wrote to Maulana Nur-ud-Din which was published later on by Maulana Muhammad Ali in his book Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf. In it Mirza Mahmud Ahmad did his best to provoke Maulana Nur-ud-Din to expel Maulana Muhammad Ali and his associates from the community. He wrote:

“A boil full of pus gets worse the longer it is left. … I have come to the conclusion that now is the time that this ill condition should be remedied. … it is best to nip it in the bud before it becomes a firm tree.”7

As Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his party continued their propaganda, and attempted to influence Maulana Nur-ud-Din, he said that he would make an announcement on the coming Eid day in October 1909. The mischief-makers expected him to announce that he would take away power from the Anjuman. As it turned out, the day before Eid Maulana Nur-ud-Din accepted assurances from the Lahore members that this was all false propaganda against them, and he did not make any announcement on Eid day. However, during the course of his Eid khutba, on 16 October 1909, he reiterated the position and the powers given to the Anjuman by the Promised Messiah. Referring to the Promised Messiah’s Will, he said:

“In the writing of Hazrat sahib [Al-Wasiyyat by the Promised Messiah] there is a point of deep knowledge which I will explain to you fully. He left it up to God as to who was going to be the khalifa. On the other hand, he said to fourteen men: You are collectively the Khalifat-ul-Masih, your decisions are final and binding, and the government authorities too consider them as absolute. Then all those fourteen men became united in taking the bai‘at at the hand of one man, accepting him as their khalifa, and thus you were united. And then not only fourteen, but the whole community agreed upon my khilafat. …

I have read Al-Wasiyyat very thoroughly. It is indeed true that he has made fourteen men the Khalifat-ul-Masih, and written that their decision arrived at by majority opinion is final and binding. Now observe that these God-fearing men, whom Hazrat sahib chose for his khilafat, have by their righteous opinion, by their unanimous opinion, appointed one man as their Khalifa and Amir. And then not only themselves, but they made thousands upon thousands of people to embark in the same boat in which they had themselves embarked.”8

Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s 1912 visit to Lahore — exonerates Lahore members

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad continued his most strenuous efforts to create mistrust in Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s mind against Maulana Muhammad Ali, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and other prominent persons who later founded the Lahore Jama‘at. The Ansarullah party, a group created by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, continued their false propaganda especially against Maulana Muhammad Ali and Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din.

However, when Maulana Nur-ud-Din visited Lahore in June 1912 he exonerated them of the charges against them. He paid this visit to lay the foundation stone of a building belonging to Shaikh Rahmatullah, a member of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya appointed by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who later became a founding member of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at. According to the Qadiani Jama‘at version of the split, Shaikh Rahmatullah was among the rebels against the so-called khilafat. Yet Maulana Nur-ud-Din said in his speech at the foundation stone laying:

“My leader and my benefactor, the Promised Messiah, had promised Shaikh Rahmatullah that he would lay the foundation stone of his building with his own hands. It was the will of God that his promise should be carried out by a servant of his. The Shaikh sahib asked me to come. I am ill and in discomfort because of pain in various parts of the body, but there is an urge in my heart that I must fulfil the word of my beloved.”9

In a report of his visit to Lahore, published at the time in Badr, it is stated:

“Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] stayed at the residence of Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, which is situated within its [Ahmadiyya Buildings’] bounds…

After arriving in Lahore, the first thing which pleased Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih was the Ahmadiyya mosque, built in the middle of Ahmadiyya Buildings. He was the first to enter the mosque. After saying two nafal of salat, he said many prayers for the founders of the mosque, for their children, and for their future generations. He prayed so deeply that he said: ‘I am sure these prayers of mine reached the arsh (throne of Allah).’

We congratulate the Jama‘at of Lahore on this good fortune. In the construction of this mosque, the entire Jama‘at of Lahore has participated, each according to his means. However, when it was being built we saw that the man who more than anyone else took pains over its construction and displayed the greatest zeal was our honoured friend Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah. May Allah the Most High reward them all. After his return to Qadian, Hazrat [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] also expressed his pleasure over the mosque in his first talk on the Quran.”10

Here two founding members of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement are mentioned, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig and Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, who were, according to the Qadiani Jama‘at propaganda, rebellious against Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din and whom he was castigating at this very time. But the reality is clear from this report, that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din was highly pleased with them. His own words from his speech at Ahmadiyya Buildings were reported in the next issue of Badr as follows:

“This is the mosque which has pleased my heart very greatly. I have prayed much for its founders and those who assisted in its building, and I am sure that my prayers have reached the arsh (throne of Allah).”11

He ended this speech on the same note:

“Look at your differences. Will they lead you to meet God? If not, then accept what I say and live in harmony, and live in such a way that, when I see you, it would please me just as I was pleased to see this mosque.”12

This is the mosque where the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement established its headquarters two years later in 1914, after the split.

In this speech Maulana Nur-ud-Din referred to the allegations being made against the Lahore members. He said:

“The third thing is that some persons, who are known as my friends and are my friends, hold the view and say that the people from Lahore are an obstacle in the affairs of the khilafat. …

It is said in the Holy Quran: ‘O you who believe, avoid much of suspicion, surely suspicion is in many cases a sin’ [49:12], and the Holy Prophet has said suspicion is the worst kind of lie. Allah has given the teaching to refrain from thinking ill of others, as it will turn you into evil doers. The Holy Prophet has said that he who indulges in thinking ill of others is a great liar, so keep away from this. Even now I have a slip of paper in my hand on which someone writes that the Lahore Jama‘at is an obstacle in the way of the khilafat. I say to such critics, you are thinking ill of others, give it up. You should first of all try to make yourselves sincere as they are. The people of Lahore are sincere. They love Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] sahib. Human beings make mistakes and they too can make mistakes, but the works which they have performed, you should also try to do the same.

I say at the top of my voice that whoever thinks ill of the people from Lahore, saying that they are an obstacle in the way of the khilafat, he should remember that the Holy Prophet has referred to those who indulge in ill-thinking by calling it ‘the biggest lie’, and Allah says: ‘avoid much of suspicion, surely suspicion is in many cases a sin’, so it is called a sin by Allah. Thinking ill of others then leads to back-biting, and about that Allah says: ‘Do not backbite one another’ [49:12]. You mistrust the sincere ones and hurt me. Fear God. I pray for you, so do not deprive yourselves of my prayers.

If you say that the people from Lahore are an obstacle in the khilafat, this is to think ill of my sincere friends. Give it up. …

Remember what I have said and give up thinking ill of others and causing discord. Whatever decision Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] sahib has given in any matter, do not speak or act against it, otherwise you will not remain Ahmadis. Give up the notion that the people from Lahore are an obstacle in the affairs of the khilafat. If you do not, then God will make your case like that of Musailima.”13

As is obvious from these statements of Maulana Nur-ud-Din, it had become fully clear to him that this was just mischief created by certain persons, and there were no grounds for the allegations against Maulana Muhammad Ali and his associates. He got so exasperated with the insidious propaganda that he wrote a letter to Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, dated 13 May 1913, who was then in England, expressing his heartfelt feelings, one sentence of which is translated below:

“Nawab,14 Mir Nasir and Mahmud are useless people, fanatical for no good reason. This trouble is still afflicting us. O Allah, deliver us from it. Amen!”

A facsimile of this letter was published in Paigham Sulh, dated 26 November 1937.

Defends Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din in khutbas

In 1913, in two of his last Friday khutbas that Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din delivered before his death, he defended Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din against the allegations of the supporters of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din was in Woking, England at the time, establishing the Woking Muslim Mission. In the khutba delivered on 17 October 1913, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din said:

“You think ill of others. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din does not work out of hypocrisy. He works only for Allah. This is my belief about him. Of course, he can make mistakes. I am happy with his works. There is blessing in them. Those who spread mistrust about him are the hypocrites.”15

In the khutba delivered on 7 November 1913, only four months before his death, Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din said:

“Kamal-ud-Din is a good man. He is doing religious work. If he makes a mistake, [remember that] only God is pure, none besides Him, the only One free from all defects and weaknesses, and possessor of all perfect attributes. He is engaged in a good work. None of you can compete with him. Ignore mistakes, and look at goodness. He calls me his master again and again. …

Kamal-ud-Din has not gone there [to England] for personal ends. He has not cared even for his family. Someone wrote that Kamal-ud-Din has shaved his beard [in England]. The other day I saw his photo. The beard is there. I think that even if he had shaved his beard, I would still say about the work for which he has gone there, that it is good. If there is some fault, I myself overlook it. There is no one who is free from faults.”16

The report of the above khutba ends as follows:

“(After this, the Huzoor sat down. He felt weak. He then rose and said:) Can any of you do the work which Kamal-ud-Din is doing? If he commits a fault, what does it matter? He is a man who used to earn thousands. I teach the Quran. Many new points of understanding have occurred to me. How can it be known that I did not teach it insincerely? I taught it with sincerity before and do so now as well.”17

This report shows that although Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din felt so physically weak that he had to sit down during the khutba, yet he rose again merely to continue defending Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din and concluded his khutba at that point. In his final comment, the Maulana has indicated that just as some people question Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s sincerity, they might as well question his own sincerity. He has thus placed the proof of Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din’s sincerity on an equal level with proof of his own sincerity.

After the annual gathering of December 1913, an article by Maulana Nur-ud-Din appeared in Al-Fazl entitled ‘Thanks’, in which he rendered thanks to Allah for the success of the gathering and the failure of his critics and he asked the Jama‘at to give thanks as well. He added at the very end of this article:

“Also, the work being done in the West to proclaim La ilaha ill-Allah, Muhammad-ur Rasul-ullah, that is also no less a matter for giving thanks. Therefore I give thanks for that as well.”18

The scandal of calling Muslims as kafir and the establishment of the Ansarullah party

As already mentioned in detail in the last chapter, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din used to lecture in different cities of India and his fame had spread throughout the land. When, during a public meeting, he declared that Ahmadis consider all those who profess the Kalima of Islam (‘There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’) as Muslims, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad contradicted this in an article published in his magazine Tashhiz-ul-Azhan for April 1911 and declared that each and every Muslim in the whole world who has not formally taken the bai‘at (pledge) of the Promised Messiah is a kafir and outside the pale of Islam, even if that person has never heard of the Promised Messiah or even if he believes the Promised Messiah to be true.19 It was this article that struck at the very foundations of the Ahmadiyya Movement and split it into two in 1914.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad at the same time founded a party called the Ansarullah, with himself as its leader. Its members actively propagated Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s viewpoints as well as canvassed for him to succeed Maulana Nur-ud-Din as the next khalifa, while the Maulana was on his death bed. This Ansarullah was the party that had been brought into Qadian just before the death of Maulana Nur-ud-Din to help in taking over the succession after him. Thus one of the letters written to the Ansarullah party in various towns and cities, which was reproduced in Paigham Sulh, stated that Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s life was now only a matter of hours, not of days, so they must immediately assemble in Qadian.20

The propagation of the wrong belief that other Muslims are kafir went so far that Maulana Nur-ud-Din, from his sickbed, on 15 February 1914, said in the presence of a large number of people that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had failed to comprehend the doctrine of Kufr (unbelief) and Islam, and he asked Maulana Muhammad Ali to clarify this issue.21

Maulana Muhammad Ali writes tracts to clarify beliefs

Accordingly, Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a tract which was published in Qadian on 13 March 1914, in which he refuted Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s wrong belief. In it the Maulana writes:

“After writing this article I read it to Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din]. As he was ill in those days, his son Abdul Hayy, thinking that he perhaps could not listen with full attention, asked him: Sir, are you listening? He replied: I am well able to listen to it, if I disagreed with anything I would say so. When the article ended, he directed that a hadith report from Sahih Muslim be added at the close. That has been done.”22

At the same time Maulana Muhammad Ali also wrote and issued a tract entitled Ayk Nihayat Zaroori I‘lan (‘A very important announcement’)23 in which he impressed the following five points upon the Ahmadiyya community:

It is not the case that an Ahmadi upon whom forty members have agreed becomes khalifa. Rather, what the Promised Messiah has instructed is that such a man can take the bai‘at (pledge) from new entrants to admit them into the Movement.

The Promised Messiah has not given any instruction that existing Ahmadis have to renew their bai‘at upon another person’s hand.

The executive committee of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Qadian is the real and true successor of the Promised Messiah.

Be very careful and fearful of God in the matter of ‘unbelief and Islam’, and follow the belief of the Promised Messiah who never declared as kafir those Muslims who did not accept his claims.

Settle the successorship to Maulana Nur-ud-Din with thought and deliberation by consulting the entire community.

Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s death and subsequent events

On 13 March 1914, while saying his Friday prayers despite great weakness, Maulana Nur-ud-Din breathed his last (may his soul rest in peace). Later that day Maulana Muhammad Ali went to see Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and had a discussion with him which he relates in his book Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf as below:

“I said to him that as the community is openly split into two on the question of Kufr (unbelief) and Islam, so we have to think about the future and devise some way of keeping the community united. His answer was that we should elect a khalifa at whose hand both parties should take the bai‘at, and obey him; only thus could we remain united. I replied that the very problem was that both parties could not take the pledge of the same man. At least I could not accept a man as spiritual guide who calls Muslims as kafir, and by the same token the other party cannot take bai‘at on the hand of a man who according to them is in error on such an important issue.

I suggested two possible solutions to him. One was to choose a leader now and not make the bai‘at obligatory: whoever wished could take the bai‘at but those who did not so wish need not do it. Then after some time had passed over this, each side should put forward its arguments on the question of unbelief and Islam. This would make it possible that, seeing which side had the stronger case, the entire community would unite upon that as its creed. To this he answered that anyone who does not take the bai‘at of the khalifa cannot remain in the community, so this cannot work. My other suggestion was that no leader be elected at this time for at least fourteen days, and in this interim a representative gathering of the community be called to find a solution to the problem. But his answer was that there could not be such a wait because unless the next khalifa was elected, the previous khalifa could not be buried. The result was that no solution could be achieved.”

Continuing this account, what happened the following day is described thus by Maulana Muhammad Ali:

“At last, after the Asr prayer a meeting took place. The Nawab sahib [Muhammad Ali of Malerkotla] read out the will of Maulana Nur-ud-Din. Maulana Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha proposed the name of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad for khilafat. I rose up to mention the discussion that had taken place between me and Mirza Mahmud Ahmad but some men began to shout that they would not listen, and there arose cries of: Takht-i khilafat mubarak (congratulations on the throne of khilafat)! The Mian sahib listened to all this silently and did not even ask the people to let me speak. So we left from there.”24

In the issue of Paigham Sulh dated 17 March 1914, three days after this, there is a letter by Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah giving his eye-witness account of what happened:

“Asr prayers were said in the Nur Mosque. Afterwards, the Nawab sahib stood up and read the will of Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih, and then said that a successor should be chosen, and it was up to us to choose whomsoever we wished. As had been prearranged, voices were raised from different directions calling out ‘Mian sahib’ [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad]. After that Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan also proposed the Mian sahib, but when Maulana Muhammad Ali stood up to say something, Shaikh Yaqub Ali, Hafiz Roshan Ali and some others shouted ‘sit down, sit down’ and did not let him speak. … The Mian sahib himself also instructed that, after Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan, no one should be allowed to speak. Thus the instruction in the will of Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih, that his successor should treat the older members with tolerance, forbearance and kindness, was violated and it was ignored in the euphoria of acquiring the khilafat.

After this, although the body of Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih lay unburied, yet slogans of congratulations to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad on becoming khalifa were being raised and loud shouting broke out like that of a common mob. … After that, some supporters of the khilafat took up position at the arrival port in the town while others started roaming around the town, forcing people to sign [to accept him as khalifa].”25

Many members of the community who were present in the mosque on this occasion wrote letters at that time expressing regret and dismay about what had happened. Many of these letters were published in Paigham Sulh. What they deeply regretted above all was that, in the very presence of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, people who had no stature or standing as compared to Maulana Muhammad Ali told the Maulana insolently to sit down and keep quiet, but Mirza Mahmud Ahmad watched all this in silence even though the will of Maulana Nur-ud-Din had just been read out exhorting that his successor must treat all the old and new friends of the Promised Messiah with kindness. All these letters were written in the month of March when Maulana Muhammad Ali was still in Qadian.

Maulana Muhammad Ali’s emigration from Qadian

After these events Maulana Muhammad Ali continued to stay in Qadian for a while. He made an announcement published in Paigham Sulh to the following effect. In matters of faith and religion, decisions must not be made in haste. However, our Movement cannot unite on regarding other Muslims as unbelievers. Hazrat Mirza sahib had never declared that those who did not accept him were kafir because of denying his claims. Maulana Nur-ud-Din held the same belief and in his last days he had plainly told Mirza Mahmud Ahmad that he did not correctly understand this issue and had appointed him (Maulana Muhammad Ali) to publish a clarification of this matter. So we cannot take the bai‘at at the hand of a man who calls Muslims as kafir, although we do wish to stay together for the sake of the work of the Movement.26 In the next issue, dated two days later, he wrote:

“If I am seeking and desiring any personal gain, creating discord under the guise of upholding the truth, then I am the most accursed person. But I have an urge in my heart that compels me to speak out even if I have to accept all manner of tribulation. Calling the followers of the Qibla as being kafir is the crime which Hazrat Mirza sahib bitterly accused his opponent Maulvis of committing. But alas! Today we ourselves are doing what we accused others of. I shudder at the thought of calling those who recite the Kalima, ‘There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, as being kafirs and excluded from the fold of Islam.”27

Maulana Muhammad Ali’s life was now being made intolerable in Qadian by supporters of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad shouting abusive slogans and hurling insults at him. When conditions deteriorated from bad to worse he left Qadian for Lahore in April 1914.

Other Muslims in India also took note of this dissension. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad commented on this in his famous newspaper Al-Hilal, dated 25 March 1914, as follows:

“For some time, there had been two parties in this Movement over the question of takfir. One party believed that non-Ahmadis are Muslims even though they may not believe in Mirza sahib’s claims. The other party, however, declared openly and clearly that those people who do not believe in Mirza sahib are kafir absolutely — inna li-llahi wa inna ilai-hi raji‘un. The head of the latter party is Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, and this faction has now made him khalifa but the first group does not accept this. The writing published in this connection by Maulana Muhammad Ali, and the wonderful and admirable courage he has shown in expressing these views while staying in Qadian, where the heads of the other party live, is truly an event which shall always be regarded as a memorable event of this year.”

It may here be noted that in the official record of the Proceedings of the National Assembly of Pakistan held in August and September 1974, after which this Assembly declared that Ahmadis are non-Muslim, it is mentioned that Mirza Masud Baig, appearing for the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore, read out the above quotation from Al-Hilal when answering the question from the Attorney-General of Pakistan as to why the split in the Ahmadiyya Movement had taken place. The hostile Attorney-General was trying his hardest to show that Maulana Muhammad Ali left Qadian because he failed to become khalifa. After Mirza Masud Baig read out this quotation, the Attorney-General had no comment to make.28

Notes to this chapter:

1 Material for chapters 5 and 6 is taken from the English translation of the biography of Maulana Muhammad Ali entitled A Mighty Striving, with editing and many additions.

2 Badr, 24–31 December 1908, p. 13, col. 1.

3 Ibid.

4 Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf by Maulana Muhammad Ali, published 1922. It was later translated into English and published as True Facts about the Split in 1966.

5 Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab, December 1914, p. 55.

6 Ibid., p. 55–56.

7 Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf, p. 48 and 51.

8 Badr, 21 October 1909, p. 11, col. 1.

9 Badr, 27 June 1912, p. 4, col. 2, paragraph entitled Promise of the Hazrat to Shaikh Sahib.

10 Badr, 27 June 1912, p. 3, col. 2.

11 Badr, 4 July 1912, p. 6, col. 3.

12 Badr, 11 July 1912, p. 5, col. 3.

13 Ibid., p. 4 and 5.

14 Nawab Muhammad Ali of Malerkotla is meant.

15 Khutbat Nur, p. 622, from Al-Fazl, 22 October 1913. (Note that Khitabat Nur is a different book, not containing all the sermons.)

16 Ibid., p. 631, from Al-Fazl, 12 November 1913.

17 Ibid., p. 632. The words in parentheses are thus in the original.

18 Al-Fazl, 7 January 1914, p. 14, col. 2.

19 The original article is in the collection of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s writings entitled Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 1, number 9 (pages 303–330). He later gave a summary of this article and defended it in his book A’inah-i Sadaqat. We have quoted from this summary on pages 123–124 of the present book.

20 Paigham Sulh, 17 March 1914, p. 1.

21 Paigham Sulh, 3 March 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

22 Mas’ala Islam wa Kufr Hasb Irshad Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih (‘Issue of Unbelief and Islam according to the directions of Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih’). This was also published in Paigham Sulh, 17 March 1914, p. 2–3.

23 This was also published in Paigham Sulh, 15 March 1914.

24 Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf, p. 70–71.

25 Paigham Sulh, 17 March 1914, p. 1, col. 2.

26 Ibid., p. 3–4.

27 Paigham Sulh, 19 March 1914, p. 4, col. 3.

28 Official Report of the National Assembly of Pakistan entitled Proceedings of the Special Committee of the Whole House held in Camera to consider the Qadiani Issue (held August–September 1974), p. 1534–1537.

6. Founding of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore

“Our members of pure character are to be found in Lahore.”

“Our true devotees are in Lahore.”

Revelations of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.1

After the deplorable events in Qadian mentioned in the last chapter, Maulana Muhammad Ali called a meeting of Ahmadis at Lahore on 22 March 1914. A few members attended this at the house of Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah. After giving careful consideration to the prevailing state of affairs, some resolutions were passed the gist of which is as follows:

According to the Will (Al-Wasiyyat) of the Promised Messiah the decisions of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian, should be regarded as final and binding, and no individual man should have the power to revoke them.

It should not be obligatory for people who have previously taken the bai‘at to renew their pledge at the hand of the new head of the Movement.

As forty persons or more have already taken the bai‘at at the hand of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, he is entitled to take the bai‘at from new entrants to admit them into the Ahmadiyya Movement.

If Mirza Mahmud Ahmad accepts the decisions of the Anjuman as being final and binding, and does not consider it obligatory for existing Ahmadis to renew their bai‘at at his hand, then he should be accepted as the President of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and Head of the entire community (jama‘at).2

These resolutions were exactly according to the following directions of the Promised Messiah — that “you must all work together after me”, that after him the decisions of the Anjuman were to be final and no individual would have the power to alter them, that the Anjuman was to be his successor, and that to admit new entrants into the Movement, any elders upon whom forty members agree would be entitled to administer the bai‘at in the name of the Promised Messiah.

Although all those who attended this meeting disagreed in principle with Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s doctrine of calling other Muslims as kafir, they were prepared in order to preserve the unity of the community to accept him as head if he worked according to the conditions of Al-Wasiyyat. They intended to put the issue of takfir before the entire community and believed that the Jama‘at would accept the right belief.

Copies of these resolutions were sent to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in Qadian and also published in Paigham Sulh, dated 24 and 26 March 1914. A deputation of fifteen men was proposed to go and meet Mirza Mahmud Ahmad on 28 March in order to seek his acceptance of these terms. However, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, in his response, refused to talk to the deputation about these proposals.

As a result, on 28 March once again a meeting was held in Lahore and Maulana Muhammad Ali put to it the question as to how to proceed. He made a very well-reasoned, detailed speech to the effect that the question was whether we should give priority to Hazrat Mirza sahib’s writings or not. He placed before the meeting the handwritten note of Hazrat Mirza sahib dated 27 October 1907 which stated in plain words that the Anjuman was to be his successor and all its decisions were to be final. He also proved that Hazrat Mirza sahib never envisaged a khalifa as his successor who would rule over the Anjuman. He also related all the past events when during Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s time efforts were made to expel him and the Lahore members from the Sadr Anjuman, and how these efforts had failed. After his speech, others gave expression to their views. Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah described the conditions in Qadian, explaining that it had now become impossible for Maulana Muhammad Ali to continue working in Qadian.

Accordingly, the following decisions were taken:

As Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had refused to meet the deputation to discuss the proposals of 22 March, the delegation would not now go to Qadian.

The resolutions passed previously would still remain in force (i.e., the door for reconciliation with Mirza Mahmud Ahmad would remain open).

According to the Will of the Promised Messiah, the propagation of Islam is the real aim of the Movement and it is obligatory to carry out this service so far as it is within our power. As, due to the dissension, it would be troublesome to do this work from Qadian, so it is appropriate as a matter of necessity that an Anjuman should be created by the name of Isha‘at-i Islam which should have its head office in Lahore.

There were to be at least forty trustees of this Anjuman. Some office holders were agreed upon, the President being Maulana Muhammad Ali.

To draft the rules and regulations a committee was set up. Twenty-nine members were present in this meeting.3

The position at that time was that these people had not severed their ties with the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian. However, as it had become impossible for Maulana Muhammad Ali and his associates to work and serve religion in Qadian, this was why they wanted to continue their work from Lahore through an Anjuman. To divide the community in two was a step they were forced to take after very careful consideration, but their first offer was still open, namely, that within the limits specified by the Promised Messiah in his Al-Wasiyyat and in his other rules, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad could be the head of the community.

Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a lengthy article, published as an appendix in the issue of Paigham Sulh for 2 April 1914, in which he went through the origin and history of the differences between the two parties and the proposals by the Lahore side for maintaining unity. In the end he said:

“In spite of our strong feelings we must not forget our real object, which is the propagation of Islam. In view of this necessity, and having in mind that the energies of the community should be channelled towards its real objective … and considering that the doctrine of calling other Muslims as kafir poses a danger to the work of the propagation of Islam and the progress of the Movement, and in order to prevent damage to the work of spreading Islam in Europe that has just now been started, it has been deemed advisable that in addition to the work that members of the Movement are carrying on under the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, an Anjuman be created in Lahore for the purpose of the propagation of Islam whose main aim should be to strengthen the real objective of this Movement, which is the propagation of Islam. A firm foundation should be laid for this work and all friends who do not call the general Muslims, the ahl-i Qibla and the reciters of the Kalima as being kafir should join it with renewed fervour. … Accordingly, it is on this basis that the foundation of an Anjuman has been laid, with trust in Allah.”4

Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya

On 10 April 1914 was held the first meeting of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian, after the death of Maulana Nur-ud-Din, and was attended from the Lahore side by Maulana Muhammad Ali, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, Shaikh Rahmatullah and Maulana Sadr-ud-Din. Of the seven attending from the Qadiani side, three had stopped coming to the Anjuman’s meetings long ago but came for this meeting, namely, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad himself, Nawab Muhammad Ali of Malerkotla and Mir Muhammad Ismail. The first two of these had in fact resigned from the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya but withdrew their resignations two days before Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s death.

The Lahore members soon found that dictatorship prevailed in the meeting and matters that were not on the agenda were being approved. When those who disagreed with the motions insisted that their dissenting views should be noted in writing, this was rejected. Besides other matters, it was also decided by the casting vote of the president of the meeting, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, that Maulvi Sher Ali should not be sent to England to help Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din even though in Maulana Nur-ud-Din’s time a firm decision had been taken to this effect, and Maulana Nur-ud-Din had himself repeatedly instructed that he should go to England. Upon this decision, these four members left the meeting: Maulana Muhammad Ali, Shaikh Rahmatullah, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig and Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah.5

Two days after this, on 12 April 1914, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad called a meeting of a few select persons and made an attack on the powers of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya which destroyed its very foundations. Rule number 18 of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya had, up to that time, read:

“In every matter, for the Majlis-i Mu‘timidin [Council of Trustees] and its subordinate branches if any, and for the Sadr Anjuman and all its branches, the order of the Promised Messiah shall be absolute and final.”

It was proposed that it should be amended by replacing the words “the Promised Messiah” with the words: “Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad the second Khalifa”, so that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad would gain absolute power over the Anjuman. When the news of this proposal reached Maulana Muhammad Ali he published an announcement in Paigham Sulh of 21 April entitled:

Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Qadian — Inna li-llahi wa inna ilai-hi raji‘un.

He warned that if this amendment were made, the Sadr Anjuman as founded by Hazrat Mirza sahib would in effect cease to exist. He wrote:

“If this proposal were correct in the least, then such an amendment should have been made at the death of the Promised Messiah. For, if anyone had the right to have such a change made, it was that selfless man [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] before whom the entire community bowed its head unanimously. … Is it not worth pondering why the words ‘Promised Messiah’ are being replaced by the name of the second khalifa, but the name of the first khalifa is missing? This shows the real intention behind this proposal.”6

However, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was undeterred and got this motion passed in a meeting of the Council of Trustees on 26 April due to the majority of the members having taken the bai‘at at his hand.7 When this happened, an announcement was published in Paigham Sulh of 5 May 1914 from Maulana Muhammad Ali, Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig, Dr Syed Muhammad Husain Shah, Shaikh Rahmatullah, Maulana Ghulam Hasan and Maulana Sadr-ud-Din, in which they clarified again the whole matter and announced:

“We declare with the deepest regret that Sahibzada sahib [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] and his pledged followers, by removing the name of the Promised Messiah from the Rules, have not only given to a man who is not appointed by God the status of one sent by God, but have shown disrespect for the name of the Promised Messiah. … Moreover, after destroying the foundations of the Anjuman and dismantling it in practice, … two important funds, i.e., the zakat fund and the fund for the propagation of Islam, which during the life of the Promised Messiah and the Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] were in the control of the Anjuman, have been removed from the Anjuman’s treasury and placed in his complete charge.8 … If legal action were taken, all this could be declared invalid and the Anjuman restored to its original status. But since we do not wish to waste the Movement’s energy and money on litigation, we issue this declaration to absolve ourselves from these moves, and we warn the community that there is still time to recover from stumbling. Everyone, whether they have entered into the bai‘at or not, must compel Sahibzada sahib to leave the Anjuman in its original state, not to interfere in financial matters, and not to demolish the system which was created by the Promised Messiah himself, and which Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih [Maulana Nur-ud-Din] followed for six years. … By this declaration we discharge our duty and clear ourselves of responsibility in the eyes of God, for it appears that taking legal action will do more harm than good.”9

It was under these circumstances that the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore came into existence. The first meeting of its Council of Trustees was held on 3 May 1914. Maulana Muhammad Ali was elected as the Head (amir) of the community and President, and other office-holders were appointed. In all 59 members were elected as trustees, of whom fourteen were permanent life members.

It will have become clear from all these events that for one and a half months after the dispute Maulana Muhammad Ali and his associates kept on trying to maintain the unity of the community if at all possible. They even offered to accept Mirza Mahmud Ahmad as Head on condition that he would not become an autocratic leader in violation of the directions of the Promised Messiah because, firstly, this was against Al-Wasiyyat and, secondly, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had invented the dangerous belief of calling all other Muslims as kafir. However, when Mirza Mahmud Ahmad went ahead to change the regulations of the Anjuman and assume all power himself, then it became unavoidable to separate from the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and create the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam at Lahore.

It may be added that the six members of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya who joined the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at, i.e., Maulana Muhammad Ali and others, did not resign from the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian. Two years later, the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, now working as a body of the Qadiani Jama‘at, served a notice on them to explain why they should not be expelled from its membership as they had ceased to attend its meetings, to do any work for it, to pay their subscriptions to it, and had created a separate Anjuman in Lahore, etc. They gave a detailed reply which was published in Paigham Sulh in August 1916. In it they wrote:

“The basis of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, Qadian, founded 1906, is Al-Wasiyyat of the Promised Messiah. Its regulations were formulated during Hazrat Mirza sahib’s life and published with his permission and approval, and the Anjuman operated according to them. Hazrat Mirza sahib wrote a codicil to this Will in 1907… in which he gave the clear verdict that the decisions of the Anjuman taken by majority of opinion were to be final, and after him no individual would have the power to issue or to annul its decisions.

You people have forsaken this basic principle, and in Rule 18 formulated by the Promised Messiah you have deleted his name and replaced it by the name of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, and against the wishes of Hazrat Mirza sahib you have made one man, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, supreme over the Anjuman. So after this action of yours, this does not remain the Anjuman based on Hazrat Mirza sahib’s Al-Wasiyyat and his codicil added to it. … We being Ahmadis, and regarding it as our duty to honour the words of Hazrat Mirza sahib, consider it an insult to the Ahmadiyya Movement to participate in the activities of this Anjuman.

It is a misconception that this authority has been given to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad by majority vote in a meeting of the Sadr Anjuman… In a will in which its aims are implemented by the executors by majority, they cannot by majority nullify its objectives. … As the Founder of the Anjuman, the Promised Messiah, has handed his conclusive writing to the Anjuman, penned in his own hand, that after him no individual has the right to overturn the decisions of the Anjuman taken by majority of opinion, then for you to give this authority to one person among you constitutes nullifying the terms of the Will. …

So we waited for a long time, hoping that you might find a way to rectify the situation, but when it became apparent that the income of the Sadr Anjuman and its duties are gradually being transferred to another body and matters are deteriorating day by day, we did not wish to leave the enforcement of our wills in your hands. So we cancelled the wills, and to fulfil the objective for which Hazrat Mirza sahib created the Sadr Anjuman we formed an Anjuman by the name of Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam and made our wills in its favour.”10

Fate of Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya in the Qadiani Jama‘at

Even after he was firmly established as khalifa in the Qadiani Jama‘at, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad felt that the passing of the resolution mentioned above, by which his order became absolute and final over the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya in every matter, did not assure him of complete, unassailable power. In a speech in October 1925, therefore, he laid down a new system of administration, reducing the Council of Trustees of this Anjuman to an entirely subservient body.11 At the outset of his speech he attacked the principles upon which the Anjuman was founded, and declared:

“As I have said again and again, the name Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and its method of working were devised by others and not by the Promised Messiah. But since the approval of the Promised Messiah had been given in respect of it, I have decided that all those names which were established during the time of the Promised Messiah should be retained.”12

He then announced his decision that the names Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and Majlis-i Mu‘timidin (Council of Trustees) would be transferred to certain other bodies, so that their names would be retained but the institutions themselves would cease to exist. His statement means that the Promised Messiah approved the way of working of the Anjuman which was devised by “others”, i.e., the Lahore Ahmadiyya founding members, without himself knowing that this would be harmful to the Movement, and now Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was going to rectify the Promised Messiah’s error! Moreover, while out of respect he would retain the names of the institutions created during the Promised Messiah’s time, he could completely overturn their nature and purpose!

There are several most interesting and revealing admissions made by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in this speech. He said:

“The founding principle of the Council of Trustees (Majlis-i Mu‘timidin) did not include the existence of the khalifa of the time, which is the very fundamental issue in Islam. A resolution has been passed during the second khilafat to the effect that the Council must accept whatever the khalifa says. But this is not a matter of principle. What it means is that a body of members says that it would do so. However, the body which is entitled to say this, can also say that it shall not do so. For, the Anjuman which can pass the resolution that it shall obey the khalifa in everything, if ten years later it says that it shall not obey him, it is entitled to do so according to the rules of the Anjuman. Or if the Anjuman says that it will obey this khalifa in everything but will not obey another one, it has the right to do so according to its rules, as happened in the time of the first khalifa.”13

Here he has admitted that there is no mention of the concept or the institution of a personal khilafat in the basic principles of the Anjuman, upon which it was created by the Promised Messiah. He has also admitted that it remained within the Anjuman’s powers to revoke at any time its resolution, which he got it to pass in 1914, to follow the khalifa’s orders. This shows that the Anjuman was not originally created to be subservient to any individual leader, but was the supreme and sovereign executive of the Movement. He is, in fact, expressing his fear that the Anjuman may at some time in future decide to re-assert its original authority and cease to be subservient to an individual khalifa.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad went on to say:

“For the sake of the khilafat we had to make an unparalleled sacrifice. And that was that we sacrificed for its sake the old followers of the Promised Messiah, those who were called his friends, those who had a very close relationship with him. If this religious difference had not arisen between them and ourselves, they would be dearer to us than our own children because they included those who knew the Promised Messiah and those who were his companions, and had worked with him. … But because a difference arose regarding a teaching which was from God, and which had to be accepted for the sake of our faith and the Jama‘at, we sacrificed those who were dearer to us than our children. So, over this question, we have made such a magnificent sacrifice that no other sacrifice can equal it. This is far greater than sacrificing one’s life because in that case a man sacrifices only himself. But here we had to sacrifice a part of our Movement.

If even after so much sacrifice the movement still remains insecure, that is, it is at the mercy of a few men who can, if they so wish, allow the system of khilafat to continue in existence, and if they do not so wish, it cannot remain in existence, this cannot be tolerated under any circumstances. Because the institution of khilafat was not included in the basic principles of the Jama‘at, the movement lives in the constant danger which can turn pledged members into non-pledged members, and by the stroke of the pen of ten or eleven men Qadian can at once become Lahore.

Therefore, the works of the Jama‘at relating to propagation and training cannot be entrusted to such an Anjuman, even though that Anjuman may consist of pledged members, and even though they may be men of the highest sincerity.”14

This statement disproves the allegation made commonly by the Qadiani Jama‘at members that the split in the Movement in 1914 came about because Maulana Muhammad Ali was trying to become the khalifa, and having failed in that attempt he and his associates left and formed their own separate group. It shows that they left because they were opposed to the introduction of a khilafat system which, as Mirza Mahmud Ahmad says, “was not included in the basic principles of the Jama‘at”. Therefore Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his supporters made the “unparalleled sacrifice” of losing the “old followers”, “friends” and “companions” of the Promised Messiah who “had worked with him”.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s words that “by the stroke of the pen of ten or eleven men Qadian can at once become Lahore” show he is admitting that what makes the Lahore Jama‘at different from the Qadiani Jama‘at is that the Lahore Ahmadis hold the Anjuman to be supreme, and if this supremacy were again accepted in Qadian then Qadian would become Lahore. In view of this admission, it is false to allege that the Lahore Ahmadis separated from Qadian because Maulana Muhammad Ali failed to become the khalifa there. If that had been the reason for the split, then the only way Qadian could become Lahore would be if Qadianis accepted Maulana Muhammad Ali as their khalifa!

The final words in the above extract reveal the great fear entertained by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad that, as long as the Anjuman possessed the power, even just on paper, to overturn its previous resolution, he could not trust such an Anjuman even though it consisted entirely of members who had pledged themselves to his leadership and who were sincere in their pledge.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad then went on to announce in this speech that in his new system the term Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya would refer to “the khalifa and his advisors”, the advisors would advise and the khalifa would decide, and this would be known as the decision of the Sadr Anjuman. The Majlis-i Mu‘timidin (Council of Trustees) would merely carry out the decision without question.

The admissions that can be seen in this speech, and Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s anxiety to remove all vestiges of authority from the Anjuman, show that the Lahore Ahmadiyya founding elders were absolutely right in holding that the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, as created by the Promised Messiah, was the sovereign and supreme body for running the Ahmadiyya Movement. It is also seen that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s greatest fear was that the Anjuman may re-assert its powers against him in future.

Khilafat

Khalifas of the Qadiani Jama‘at have, over the years, made statements pointing out some fine and noble principles of Islam about spiritual leadership, but the same principles are plainly violated by them in their own concept of the khilafat.

1. In a speech at the December 1914 annual Jalsa of the Qadiani Jama‘at, the first such gathering after he became khalifa, replying to objections to the Qadiani concept of khilafat raised by the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad declared:

“Foolish is he who says that a hereditary seat has been established. I say to such a one on sworn oath: I do not even consider it allowable that the son should succeed the father as khalifa. Of course, if God makes him His appointed one, then that is a different matter. Like Hazrat Umar, I also believe that the son should not be khalifa after the father.”15

Yet his own son succeeded him in 1965, and a hereditary seat of spiritual leadership is exactly what was established, as has been proven by the succession of later khalifas till now. Thus the Lahore Ahmadiyya pioneers were proved absolutely right, and not at all “foolish”, in raising this objection.

2. Not only in Urdu as above, but also in his English book Ahmadiyyat or The True Islam, first published in 1924, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad stated near the beginning:

“It is not necessary that the head of the Community should be, in any way, related to the holy founder of the Movement, as, for instance, his first successor was not related to him either by blood or by marriage, nor, on the other hand, is it necessary, that the Head of the Community should not be related to the holy founder of the Movement, as, for instance, I have the honour to be his son.”16

However, it is now firmly established that none but a direct descendant of the Founder can be head of the Qadiani Jama‘at.

3. In a Friday khutba on the occasion of Muharram, delivered on 23 November 2012, their fifth khalifa, Mirza Masroor Ahmad quoted at length from an announcement issued by the Promised Messiah reprimanding an Ahmadi who had made a disrespectful statement about Imam Husain.17 The quotation given by Mirza Masroor Ahmad, if we translate it into English, begins as follows:

“Let it be known that I have learnt from a postcard sent by someone that some foolish men who describe themselves as belonging to my Jama‘at say about Hazrat Imam Husain that, God forbid, because he did not enter into the bai‘at of the khalifa of the time, namely, Yazid, therefore Husain was a rebel and Yazid was on the side of right. ‘May the curse of Allah be on the liars.’ I do not expect that such evil words would come from the lips of any righteous person from my Jama‘at.”

The Promised Messiah goes on to say, as quoted in this khutba:

“I inform my Jama‘at by this notice that we believe that Yazid was of an impure nature, bent low upon this world, and unjust. The sense in which a person can be called a believer, such a meaning did not apply to him. … He was blinded by love for this material world. Imam Husain, on the other hand, was perfectly pure, and is without doubt one of those eminent persons whom God purifies by His own hand, and fills with His love, and no doubt he is one of the leaders of the dwellers of paradise…”

Yet it is the most fundamental doctrine of the Qadiani Jama‘at that a khalifa is appointed by Allah with His approval, and that once someone has become a khalifa it is incontrovertible proof that he has Allah’s support to hold this office. Moreover, they regard it as absolutely essential that every member must enter into the bai‘at of the khalifa and obey him unreservedly and unquestioningly, and they consider it a most grave sin for anyone to refuse to enter into his bai‘at or to disobey him. However, as we read here, and listen from the mouth of the Qadiani khalifa himself, in the case of Yazid and Imam Husain it was the khalifa of the time who was the embodiment of wickedness and immorality, and it was the man who refused to pledge the bai‘at to him who was a purified and chosen one of Allah.

It may be noted that the disrespectful statement about Hazrat Imam Husain, for which the Promised Messiah so strongly reprimanded those of his followers who dared to utter it, is exactly what members of the Qadiani Jama‘at say commonly about Maulana Muhammad Ali: that because the Maulana did not enter into the bai‘at of the khalifa of the time, he was therefore a sinner. We have already shown in chapters 3 and 4 that he was held in the highest esteem by both Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din.

Notes to this chapter:

1 These two revelations were published in Al-Hakam, the first in the issue dated 17 December 1900 and the second in 17 August 1902.

2 For this summary, see Paigham Sulh, 31 March 1914, p. 2, col. 1.

3 Paigham Sulh, 31 March 1914, p. 2; and p. 4, col. 2.

4 Paigham Sulh, 2 April 1914, 4th page of the appendix.

5 Paigham Sulh, 12 April 1914, p. 2, cols. 2–3.

6 Paigham Sulh, 21 April 1914, 1st page of appendix.

7 The passing of this motion was also announced in the Review of Religions, which was now in the hands of the Qadiani Jama‘at, in the Urdu edition, the April 1914 and May 1914 issues, inside of the front cover.

8 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had directed that donations for the propagation of Islam as well as all other donations should be sent to him and would be spent only as determined by him.

9 Paigham Sulh, 5 May 1914, p. 1, cols. 1–2.

10 Paigham Sulh, 17 August 1916, p. 2–3.

11 This speech was published in Al-Fazl in instalments in late October and early November 1925. It is included in the collection of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s writings entitled Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 9, number 9, page 125 to 146.

12 Al-Fazl, 31 October 1925, p. 3, col. 1; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 9, number 9, p. 127.

13 Al-Fazl, 3 November 1925, p. 3, col. 1; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 9, number 9, p. 132.

14 Al-Fazl, 3 November 1925, p. 3, cols. 1–2; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 9, number 9, p. 132–133.

15 Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 2, number 7, p. 171.

16 Ahmadiyyat or the True Islam, by Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, ch. ‘History of the Movement’, p. 6.

17 This announcement is in Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, v. 3, pages 544–547. It is Ishtihar number 263, entitled Tabligh-i Haqq, published 8 October 1905.

7. Retraction of beliefs by the Qadiani Jama‘at

At the time of the split there were three related doctrines regarding the status and claims of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad upon which the Qadiani Jama‘at and the Lahore Jama‘at differed, so much so that this led to their separation as movements and organizations. These were stated and argued about by Maulana Muhammad Ali in the fourth of a series of English booklets, this one being entitled The Ahmadiyya Movement — IV: The Split, published at the beginning of 1918. In this he writes:

“I shall now take the three doctrines which M. Mahmud [Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] is promulgating and which are opposed to the teachings of the Promised Messiah.”1

In reply Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote a book in Urdu, A’inah-i Sadaqat, published in 1921, in which he has confirmed that the three doctrines attributed to him by Maulana Muhammad Ali were indeed his beliefs. What he denies is the Maulana’s charge that he had thereby deviated from the teachings of the Promised Messiah. He claims that he always held these beliefs. We quote below from its English version, The Truth about the Split: 2

“[Maulana Muhammad Ali] endeavours to show how after the death of the Promised Messiah a certain conjunction of circumstances gradually led the present writer to introduce changes in my former beliefs.

These changes, according to Maulawi Muhammad Ali, relate to three matters; (1) that I propagated the belief that Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was actually a Nabi; (2) the belief that he was ‘the Ahmad’ spoken of in the prophecy of Jesus referred to in the Holy Quran in Al-Saff 61:7; and (3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be, are Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah.

That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit. What I deny is the statement that I have been entertaining these views since 1914 or only three or four years before.”3

What we intend to show in this chapter is that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and the Qadiani Jama‘at subsequently retracted all the three beliefs mentioned here, explicitly and directly in the case of beliefs number (2) and (3), and implicitly in the case of belief number (1). Thus the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at has, over the past hundred years, been proved to be absolutely right that these three beliefs are false and heretical, and that they were never taught by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Who is ‘Ahmad’ in Jesus’s prophecy given in the Quran?

We take belief number (2) first for the following two reasons. Firstly, in his book Anwar-i Khilafat, published in 1916,4 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has raised this as the first issue while dealing with the points of difference between his Jama‘at and the Lahore Ahmadis. Secondly, the Qadiani Jama‘at was already retracting and withdrawing this belief even as Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote the words quoted above in 1921.

In Anwar-i Khilafat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad argued most emphatically that this prophecy of Jesus about the coming Ahmad, referred to in the Quran in Sura Al-Saff (61:6), does not apply to the Holy Prophet Muhammad but to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He wrote:

“My belief is that this verse applies to the Promised Messiah, and he is the one who is Ahmad. … I am prepared to offer a reward: if anyone can disprove my evidences and show from the Holy Quran and authentic Hadith that Ahmad was the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and not his attribute, and that the signs about Ahmad given in the Holy Quran apply to the Holy Prophet, and that the Holy Prophet applied this prophecy to himself, I will pay that person a monetary penalty as mutually agreed between the two parties.”5

“This prophecy does not contain any word to show that it is about the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, nor any word to cause us to apply this prophecy necessarily to the Holy Prophet Muhammad. … There is no Hadith report of any kind, whether true or false, weak or strong, of whatever standard of authenticity, mentioning that the Holy Prophet Muhammad applied this verse to himself and declared himself as fulfilling this prophecy. When that also is not the case, why should we apply the prophecy to the Holy Prophet Muhammad, in contradiction to the subject-matter of the verse?”6

“Why should the meaning of this verse be distorted to apply it to the Holy Prophet Muhammad just in order to prove that no messenger can come after him? Has the fear of Almighty God departed from the hearts of the people so much that they alter His word in this way and distort its meaning by misinterpreting it so blatantly?”7

“…the signs of the person having the name or the qualities of Ahmad that are given here are not fulfilled in the Holy Prophet Muhammad, as will be shown later. … Our claim is that it is the Promised Messiah who is that messenger, the prophecy about whom is given in this verse.”8

“Now I present evidence from the Holy Quran that the one who fulfils this prophecy can only be the Promised Messiah and no one else.”9

Maulana Muhammad Ali refuted these ideas and arguments most forcefully in his Urdu book of some 90 pages entitled Ahmad Mujtaba, published in December 1917. Covering the same subject in his 1918 English booklet about the split, mentioned above, he wrote:

“I take first the question whether Ahmad was not a name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad and whether the prophecy of Jesus relating to the appearance of a messenger named Ahmad was not fulfilled by the advent of the Holy Prophet. … the idea that the prophecy of the advent of the messenger named Ahmad was fulfilled by the appearance of the Promised Messiah seems to have been the nucleus about which the doctrine of his prophethood was formed, this being the first question brought into prominence by M. Mahmud after the dissension of 1914.”10

Even in A’inah-i Sadaqat, in which Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had written “That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit”, we see the first step of retraction on this point. He wrote:

“…my opinion is that the passage contains a double prophecy, relating to two persons, one a counter-type and the other his prototype. The counter-type of course is the Promised Messiah, while the prototype is the Holy Prophet. The passage under reference speaks directly about the counter-type. A reference to the prototype of course comes in, but only indirectly…”11

From his position of 1915-1916, that the prophecy could not at all be applied to the Holy Prophet Muhammad and that “the one who fulfils this prophecy can only be the Promised Messiah and no one else”, he now said that the prophecy relates to “two persons”: directly to the Promised Messiah and indirectly to the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad continues on the next page:

“But the whole question is one regarding which no decision on the basis of revealed authority has been left by any of the Prophets. Any discussion of the question therefore has little more than mere academic interest. If any person holds a different view regarding the interpretation of the verse, all that I shall say is that he is mistaken, but I shall never deem him, on that account, any the less an Ahmadi, and much less shall I deem him a sinner.”12

From challenging the whole Muslim world in 1915 to prove their belief that this prophecy applies to the Holy Prophet, he now says that the question is merely of academic interest. From declaring their belief to be a distortion of this verse, and condemning those who hold it as having lost fear of God from their hearts, he now says that he does not even regard them as sinners.

The final retraction on this prophecy

The final retreat on this point came in the Qadiani Jama‘at English translations of the Quran. In the five volume English translation of the Quran with commentary by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, or taken from his writings, his footnote on this verse consists of a total of 129 lines of print, out of which 122 lines are devoted to showing that the Ahmad of this prophecy is the Holy Prophet Muhammad. Having exhaustively argued that it was the Holy Prophet Muhammad who fulfilled this prophecy, he writes in this footnote:

“Thus the prophecy mentioned in the verse under comment applies to the Holy Prophet, but as a corollary it may also apply to the Promised Messiah, Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement…”13

In A’inah-i Sadaqat, as quoted from its English version above, he had written that this verse “speaks directly” about the Promised Messiah, and the Holy Prophet “comes in, but only indirectly”. Here it is the exact opposite.

Thus from his original position expressed so forcefully in Anwar-i Khilafat, published in 1916, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad made one retreat in A’inah-i Sadaqat, published in 1921, and made a complete retreat in his commentary of the Quran published some decades later.

Declaring other Muslims as kafir and its reversal

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s belief number (3) in A’inah-i Sadaqat, declaring “all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his Bai‘at formally, wherever they may be” to be kafir and “outside the pale of Islam”, was expanded upon by him in the same book. He explains that he had expressed the same view in an article which he wrote in 1911: Declaring other Muslims as kafir

“The article was elaborately entitled — ‘A Muslim is one who believes in all the Messengers of God.’ The title itself is sufficient to show that the article was not meant to prove merely that those who did not accept the Promised Messiah were deniers of the Promised Messiah. Its object rather was to demonstrate that those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims.”14

“Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiah to be one of the prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims.”15

He claims that in his article he had proved by quoting the Promised Messiah that:

“not only are those deemed to be Kafirs, who openly style the Promised Messiah as Kafir, and those who although they do not style him thus, decline still to accept his claim, but even those who, in their hearts, believe the Promised Messiah to be true, and do not even deny him with their tongues, but hesitate to enter into his Bai’at, have here been adjudged to be Kafirs.”16

He concludes about his article as follows:

“And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiah as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable Kafirs.”17

In 1953 in Pakistan, following agitation against the Ahmadiyya Movement which led to serious public disturbances and rioting in the Punjab, a Court of Inquiry was appointed by the provincial government to investigate the causes of the rioting.18 The Inquiry sent a set of seven questions to the Qadiani Jama‘at central body, the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, to answer in writing. The first question was whether a person who did not believe in Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was “a believer (mu’min) and a Muslim”. Regarding ‘Muslim’, the answer was as follows:

“ ‘Muslim’ is the name applied to members of the Ummah of the Prophet Muhammad. … according to the verse of the Holy Quran ‘He has named you Muslims’ (Surah Hajj, Section 10), every member of the Ummah of the Prophet Muhammad is entitled to be called a Muslim. …

According to the above explanation, whoever believes in the Holy Prophet Muhammad and affirms that he belongs to his Ummah cannot be deprived of this name because of some intentional or unintentional error in his creed or practice. It is obvious that according to this explanation, and under the verse of the Quran, ‘He has named you Muslims’, no person can be called a non-Muslim because of not believing in the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.”19

This answer was not the only retraction. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was called to appear at this Inquiry, where he was questioned about his beliefs and other matters on 13–15 January 1954. The questions and answers were published as a booklet in Urdu by the Qadiani Jama‘at.20 We translate from it below:

“Question: If a person, after considering the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib, honestly comes to the conclusion that his claim was wrong, would he still remain a Muslim?

Answer: Yes. In common terminology he would still be considered a Muslim.”21

“Question: You have now stated in your testimony that the person who sincerely does not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib still remains a Muslim. Have you held this view from the beginning?

Answer: Yes.”22

“Question: Do you include Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib in the category of those sent by God whose acceptance is essential for a person to be called a Muslim?

Answer: I have earlier answered this question. A person who does not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib cannot be declared as outside the pale of Islam.”23

At the Inquiry he was also asked about his statement in A’inah-i Sadaqat in which he had described all other Muslims as “Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah”. He explained to the Inquiry:

“These very words show that I am considering the people whom I have in mind as Muslims. So when I use the word kafir I have in mind the second category of kafir who, as I have explained, are not outside the Muslim nation.”24

However, while in Urdu in his book A’inah-i Sadaqat, as quoted from in the Inquiry, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had used the words “all those Muslims” to mean other Muslims, but in the English translation of this book, The Truth about the Split, these words are translated as “all those so-called Muslims”. This demolishes the explanation he gave in the above reply because he is calling them, in the English version of his book, as “so-called” Muslims. Moreover, other quotations from this book which we gave earlier show that he had referred to them in the following terms: “those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims” and “we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims”.

Retraction by Mirza Nasir Ahmad, 3rd Khalifa

In 1980 the Head of the Qadiani Jama‘at, Mirza Nasir Ahmad, son of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, went on a tour of Europe and an account of this tour was published by the Qadiani Jama‘at as a book entitled Daura Maghrib 1400 Hijra. Answering a question from a press correspondent in Norway, regarding other Muslims calling Ahmadis as non-Muslim, Mirza Nasir Ahmad said:

“No one has the right to say to a person who calls himself a Muslim that ‘you are not a Muslim’. To act on the Quran, he must be accepted as a Muslim. Those people who do not accept us as Muslims are acting against the Quran. But we accept their right to call themselves Muslims, and we consider them to be a part of the Islamic community (Ummah).”25

The book then records:

“At this, the correspondent asked: Will you call them Muslims even though they do not consider you to be Muslims? Huzoor [Mirza Nasir Ahmad] replied: Yes, despite this, we believe them to be Muslims.”26

Definition of ‘Muslim’ submitted to National Assembly

The Qadiani Jama‘at officially published from the UK a document in English (in 2003) and Urdu (in 1990) entitled Mahzarnama, meaning The Memorandum. The introduction begins:

“Mahzarnama—the Memorandum—is an important historical document which was presented by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at in 1974, to the Special Committee of the National Assembly of Pakistan, comprising the entire house. The purpose of this document was to establish that the members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at are Muslims and to explain its basic tenets, as well as refute the baseless allegations levelled against it.”27

The Memorandum contains a section on the ‘Definition of a Muslim’ in the view of the Qadiani Jama‘at. It is stated therein:

“So the viewpoint of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at is that we must adopt as a Constitutional definition which was precisely formulated by the Khaatamul Anbiyaa’, Hadhrat Muhammad and which constitutes a glorious charter for an Islamic country. In this context, we quote below, three Sayings (Ahadith) of the Holy Prophet.”28

In the first two sayings which are quoted, the Holy Prophet, answering someone’s question as to what constitutes Islam, defines practising Islam as consisting of: not associating partners with Allah, saying the five daily prayers, fasting in Ramadan, and giving Zakat. In the third hadith, the Holy Prophet has defined a Muslim as one “who observes the same prayer as we do, faces the same direction (in prayer) as we do, and partakes from the animal slaughtered by us”.

The definition of ‘Muslim’ presented here by the Qadiani Jama‘at is exactly what they rejected at the time of the split and for long afterwards. The Qadiani Jama‘at argued and debated this issue for decades with the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at, and insisted that a person fulfilling such a definition was not a Muslim but outside the pale of Islam if he did not formally enter into the bai‘at of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Maulana Muhammad Ali warned them, from the time of the split till his death, of the most dangerous consequences of declaring other Muslims, who are Muslims according to the above definitions, as being kafir and outside the pale of Islam. But he met with nothing but rejection, abuse and ridicule from the Qadiani Jama‘at. Eventually it was external circumstances which compelled the Qadiani Jama‘at to accept, or at least outwardly claim to accept, as shown above, that other Muslims are Muslims and cannot be declared as outside the fold of Islam.

Belief in Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as prophet

We now turn to belief number (1) in A’inah-i Sadaqat, namely that “Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was actually a Nabi”. If the Qadiani Jama‘at accepts that other Muslims cannot be called kafir, and are in fact Muslims, then their position cannot be maintained that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet. It is an implicit and indirect rejection of this belief. In A’inah-i Sadaqat, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has plainly stated and argued at length that other Muslims are kafir because they do not accept a prophet:

“The man who rejects a Prophet thus necessarily becomes a kafir…”29

Explaining why even those Muslims are kafir who have not heard of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he writes:

“Now, as Islam bases its judgments upon what is patent and not upon what is possible, it cannot but class as kafir such as fail to accept any of the Prophets, even though such failure may be due to their want of information concerning him.”30

This, he writes, is the reason why Muslims have always, unanimously, “designated as kafirs all those who have not accepted the faith of Islam” even if they live in such countries where they “have not yet heard anything regarding the teachings of the Holy Prophet”.31

Hence it follows that if the Qadiani Jama‘at has ceased to call other Muslims as kafir and accepts that they are Muslims, then it cannot maintain the belief that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet.

There is another strong basis also for saying that the Qadiani Jama‘at has, indirectly and implicitly, withdrawn its belief that he was a prophet. To uphold this belief, they constructed the theory that he had denied claiming to be a prophet up to the year 1901, as it was not clear to him what is a prophet, but thereafter he realised that he was a prophet and made the first announcement of this claim in November 1901 in the leaflet Ayk Ghalati Ka Izala. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote in 1915:

“The books in which he has denied being a prophet in clear words, and has called his prophethood as partial and imperfect, and as the prophethood of saints (muhaddas), are all without exception books from before the year 1901. … The issue of prophethood became clear to him in 1900 or 1901… he made a change in his belief in 1901, and the year 1900 is a middle period which is like a boundary between the two views. … It is proved that the references dating prior to the year 1901 in which he has denied being a prophet, are now abrogated and it is an error to use them as evidence.”32

Yet in their Mahzarnama mentioned above, in the section entitled “The exalted station of Khaatamul Anbiyaa in the eyes of the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at”, several of the quotations from the writings and talks of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, presented by them in relation to his own claim, are from before the year 1901. We comment on these as follows.

1. The first quotation they give begins as follows:

“The accusation levelled against me and my followers that we do not believe the Messenger of Allah to be Khaatamun Nabiyyeen, is a colossal calumny against us. The force, certainty, perception and insight with which we believe the Holy Prophet to be Khaatamun Nabiyyeen is such that the other people’s belief in this regard is not even the millionth part, in strength, as compared to ours.”33

This extract is, in fact, from a speech by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in November 1899.34 The Qadiani Jama‘at acknowledges that at that time he did not consider himself to be a prophet and believed that no prophet could come after the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, the Holy Prophet Muhammad. It is obvious that this statement is so powerfully made because he was not claiming to be a prophet. If the Qadiani Jama‘at believe that he later claimed to be a prophet, then they cannot present this statement as it loses its value. On the other hand, by presenting this extract they have, in effect, withdrawn their doctrine that he later on, in 1900/1901, came to realise that he was a prophet.

In the same speech, only three paragraphs after the end of the extract quoted in Mahzarnama, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad mentions as two separate groups the prophets and the saints (auliya), and includes himself in the category of saints. Discussing the fact that the denial of prophets and saints leads to a loss of faith in God in the heart of the denier, he writes:

“Loss of faith is of two kinds. First, by denying the prophets. This idea is not rejected by anyone, and is an accepted matter. Second, there is loss of faith by denying the auliya of Allah and the ones appointed by him. … Loss of faith by denying the prophets is a clear matter, known to everyone. … But loss of faith by denying the auliya of Allah is different. In one hadith it is related that Allah says: ‘He who bears animosity towards one of My auliya, I declare war on him’, as if he is preparing for war with Allah.”35

By presenting the extract which they have done from this speech, the Qadiani Jama‘at has validated whatever else he has said in the same speech about his claim, unless they explain why only certain statements from the speech correctly reflect his beliefs and others do not.

The points we have made above apply also to some other quotations in the Mahzarnama, which we deal with below.

2. The second quotation is part of a letter by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, written and published in August 1899. The end part of the letter has been quoted, in which he writes that he believes in the Quran, in the Holy Prophet as khatam-ul-anbiya, and in Islam, and makes no claim except that of being a servant of Islam. Within the quoted extract he writes:

“Therefore, it is befitting that no one must entertain in his heart anything contrary to this declaration of mine, otherwise he will be liable to be accountable to God for it.”36

But before the extract quoted here by the Qadiani Jama‘at, he writes in this letter:

“There are many such revelations [of mine] in which the word nabi or rasul has occurred regarding myself. However, that person is mistaken who thinks that by this prophethood and messengership is meant real prophethood and messengership … As these words, which are only in a metaphorical sense, cause trouble in Islam, leading to very bad consequences, these terms should not be used in our community’s common talk and everyday language. It should be believed from the bottom of the heart that prophethood has terminated with the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him, as Allah Almighty says: ‘He is the Messenger of Allah and the Khatam-un-nabiyyin.’ To deny this verse, or to belittle it, is in fact to separate oneself from Islam. … It should be known that God has ended all His prophethoods and messengerships with the Holy Quran and the Holy Prophet.”37

This is also a part of the same “declaration of mine”, the declaration about which Hazrat Mirza sahib warns that if any follower of his holds a belief contrary to it then that person “will be liable to be accountable to God for it”. The Qadiani Jama‘at should ponder whether their beliefs are contrary to these important statements in this declaration, and indeed whether they are trying to keep them out of public view.

3. The third and fourth quotations are from the book A’inah-i Kamalat Islam and are eulogies of the Holy Prophet Muhammad in poetry and prose.38 This is the book in which, in an Arabic section addressing the Muslim spiritual leaders of India, Afghanistan and Arab countries, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has written about his claim as follows:

“O brothers, I have been sent as a muhaddas from God, to you and to all those on earth.”39

“It does not befit God that He should send a prophet after the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, or that He should re-start the system of prophethood after having terminated it.”40

“I am not a prophet but a muhaddas from God, and a recipient of Divine revelation so that I may re-vitalise the religion of the Holy Prophet.”41

A muhaddas is one who is not a prophet but receives revelation from God. The Qadiani Jama‘at have quoted his praises for the great status of the Holy Prophet Muhammad from this book. But it is also a measure of the status of the Holy Prophet, from this same book, that God will not send a prophet after the Khatam-un-nabiyyin.

4. A little later, a quotation is given from near the end of the book Siraj Munir.42 Yet this is the book at the beginning of which Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote so powerfully:

“Do not level false allegations against me that I have claimed to be a prophet in the real sense. Have you not read that a muhaddas too is a mursal [messenger]?…

We believe and acknowledge that, according to the real meaning of nubuwwat (prophethood), after the Holy Prophet Muhammad no new or former prophet can come. The Holy Quran forbids the appearance of any such prophets. But in a metaphorical sense God can call any recipient of revelation as nabi or mursal. … This is the knowledge which God has given me. Let him understand, who will. This very thing has been disclosed to me that the doors of real prophethood are fully closed after the Khatam an-nabiyyin, the Holy Prophet Muhammad. According to the real meaning, no new prophet nor an ancient prophet can now come.”43

5. The most remarkable quotation comes a little further along and it is from the book Anjam Atham.44 Here the lengthy quotation itself, which is also often presented by the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at, shows that he did not claim to be a prophet and regarded the Holy Prophet Muhammad as the last Prophet. In this case we need only to refer to the quotation as presented by the Qadiani Jama‘at without going outside it. The extracts that we give below from this quotation are in the words of the English translation presented by the Qadiani Jama‘at.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad asks rhetorically whether:

“a person who believes in the Holy Quran — and firmly holds that the Khatam-un-Nabiyyin verse is the Word of God — can he ever assert that, ‘I, too, am a Messenger and Prophet after the Holy Prophet’?”

What could be clearer than this! He then continues:

“A seeker after justice must remember that my humble self has never — never — claimed to be a Prophet or Messenger in the real and literal sense of the term. And employing a word in its figurative sense and using it as part of everyday parlance consistent with lexical usage does not mean disbelief (kufr). For my part, I wouldn’t have used this term for it is likely to mislead the lay Muslims.”

Again we ask, what could be clearer? He continues:

“But since I am the Appointed One from God, so I could not have concealed those instances of Divine dialogues and converse which Allah, in His Grand Majesty, granted to me and in which the words Prophet and Messenger have repeatedly occurred. But I repeat it over and over again that the word Mursal (one who is sent), or Rasool (Messenger) or Nabi (Prophet) which has been used in those revelations in reference to me, is not meant in its literal and real meaning.”

He writes here that he does not wish to use the words nabi (prophet), rasul and mursal (messenger) about himself but he cannot conceal his revelations containing these terms about him. So he repeats it “over and over again” that these are not meant in their real sense. He then continues to tell us what is “real”:

“The real truth which I solemnly affirm on the basis of evidence is that Our Prophet is Khaatamul Anbiyaa and no prophet will appear after him neither any of the old ones nor any new ones.”

With such statements of the Promised Messiah being confirmed and validated by the Qadiani Jama‘at in what they themselves describe as “an important historical document” presented in 1974 to the National Assembly of Pakistan, a document whose purpose was “to establish that the members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at are Muslims and to explain its basic tenets”, we are justified in concluding that they retracted their belief that the Promised Messiah was a prophet, or at least that they themselves have thrown the greatest doubt on this belief, by presenting such statements from him.

The theory of a change of claim in 1901 was so baseless and self-contradictory that the Qadiani Jama‘at kept on modifying it from the very beginning.45 For several years now, there have been almost no members of the Qadiani Jama‘at who are aware of this belief of theirs, or who realise that if they put forward the Promised Messiah’s writings about prophethood published before 1901 as valid, they are destroying the very basis on which their Jama‘at built the belief that he claimed to be a prophet.

Meaning of al-akhira in the Quran, 2:4

The following verse of the Quran requires Muslims to believe in the revelation sent to the Holy Prophet Muhammad and the revelations sent to prophets before him, and mentions a third belief:

“and who believe in what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad) and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are sure.”

The words “and of the Hereafter (al-akhira) they are sure” are always taken to mean belief in the life after death. In 1915, the Qadiani Jama‘at published a statement claiming that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had stated verbally before some followers that Allah had intimated to him that al-akhira here indicates the revelation sent to the Promised Messiah, because this word means “what is to come” and it is mentioned in the context of revelation sent to the Holy Prophet and to prophets before him. This new interpretation made the revelation received by the Promised Messiah to be wahy nubuwwat, the kind of revelation which is received by none other than prophets and which a Muslim is required to believe in as an essential of Islam.

There was no corroborating evidence from the lifetime of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad that he gave such a meaning of al-akhira. The Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at refuted this interpretation at the time. The Promised Messiah himself took al-akhira in this verse to mean life after death. For instance in 1904, quoting these words about al-akhira from this very verse, he gives them the following meaning: “and he who seeks salvation must believe in the hour to come, that is, qiyamat, and must believe in reward and punishment”.46

Later on, when the Qadiani Jama‘at published their English and Urdu translations of the Quran, they used this new interpretation in translating these words. In English, the translation of al-akhira was given as “what is yet to come” and this was explained in the footnote as “the message or revelation which is to come”.47 In Urdu, the translation in both Tafsir-i Kabir (larger commentary) and Tafsir-i Saghir (shorter commentary) was “A’inda honay wali (mau‘ud batain)”, or what is promised to happen in the future, and the commentary in the larger work explains this by saying: “Al-akhira means the revelation to come after the Holy Prophet”.48

However, the edition of the translation Tafsir-i Saghir published in 1990 contains a Publisher’s Note stating that “objections had been raised from some quarters that at certain places there was, God forbid, a deliberate departure from the translation”. Therefore, says the Publisher’s Note, the standard, literal translation has now been used at those points and the earlier rendering moved to a footnote. The note adds that the khalifa Mirza Tahir Ahmad has himself considered all such places about which objections were raised, and made these changes. A list of such verses is also provided. One of those places is this very verse. Al-akhira in it is now translated by the equivalent Urdu word akhirat, and the earlier translation moved to a footnote.

This amendment is, of course, desirable, and in fact it shows that the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at was right to challenge the wrong translation of al-akhira as the revelation to come. The question it leaves us with is whether the Qadiani Jama‘at still regard as true the statement they published in 1915, that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said that Allah had intimated to him that al-akhira in this verse means his revelation.

Conclusion

As mentioned earlier, three doctrines held by the Qadiani Jama‘at were the basis of the split, namely, that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the ‘Ahmad’ who fulfilled the prophecy of Jesus referred to in the Quran, that he was a prophet, and that those Muslims who do not accept him formally are outside the fold of Islam. Regarding these, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had written: “That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit.” In this chapter we have proved, conclusively and irrefutably, that these beliefs were all retracted and withdrawn by the Qadiani Jama‘at, two of them directly and one implicitly, within sixty years of the split of 1914.

Notes to this chapter:

1 The Ahmadiyya Movement — IV: The Split, original edition, p. 25. The 1994 reprint, Split in the Ahmadiyya Movement, p. 18.

2 The English translation of A’inah-i Sadaqat was published as The Truth about the Split in 1924, and has been revised and reprinted since. The latest edition was published in 2007, from which we have taken all the quotations given here.

3 The Truth about the Split, 2007 edition, p. 56–57.

4 This book is the text of a speech delivered by him at the December 1915 annual gathering (Jalsa) in Qadian. It is included in the collection of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s writings Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, book number 5.

5 Anwar-i Khilafat, p. 18–19; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, number 5, p. 83-84.

6 Ibid., p. 23; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, number 5, p. 88.

7 Ibid., p. 24; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, number 5, p. 89.

8 Ibid., p. 31; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, number 5, p. 96.

9 Ibid., p. 33; Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 3, number 5, p. 97.

10 The Ahmadiyya Movement — IV: The Split, original edition, p. 25. The 1994 reprint, Split in the Ahmadiyya Movement, p. 18.

11 The Truth about the Split, 2007 edition, p. 58.

12 Ibid., p. 59

13 The Five Volume Commentary of the Holy Quran in English, footnote 4226 from page 2620 to 2622. Almost the same footnote is in their one-volume ‘Short Commentary’, edited by Malik Ghulam Farid.

14 The Truth about the Split, 2007 edition, p. 144.

15 Ibid., p. 146.

16 Ibid., p. 148.

17 Ibid., p. 148.

18 The report produced by this Court of Inquiry in July 1954 is commonly known as the Munir report, after the name of the presiding judge, Justice Mohammad Munir.

19 Signed statement of the advocate of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Rabwah, published as the Urdu pamphlet Tahqiqati Commission kay Sat Swalon ka Jawab, publisher Dar-ut-Tajleed, Lahore, September 1953, p. 1, 2.

20 Tahqiqati ‘adalat main Hazrat Imam Jama‘at Ahmadiyya ka Bayan (‘Testimony of the Head of the Ahmadiyya Community at the Court of Inquiry’), published by Dar-ut-Tajleed, Lahore.

21 Ibid., p. 10.

22 Ibid., p. 15.

23 Ibid., p. 28.

24 Ibid., p. 14.

25 Daura Maghrib, p. 217.

26 Ibid.

27 Mahzarnama — the Memorandum, English version published in 2003 by Islam International Publications, Tilford, U.K., p. iii.

28 Ibid., p. 16.

29 The Truth about the Split, 2007 edition, p. 60.

30 Ibid., p. 60–61.

31 Ibid., p. 61.

32 Haqiqat-un-Nubuwwah, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, published March 1915, p. 120–121. See Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, v. 2, number 10, p. 444–445.

33 Mahzarnama, English version, p. 69.

34 Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 1, p. 221–256 (1984 edition, v. 1, p. 331–386).

35 Malfuzat, 5-volume edition, v. 1, p. 229 (1984 edition, v. 1, p. 344).

36 Mahzarnama, English version, p. 70.

37 Letter dated 7 August 1899, published in Al-Hakam, v. iii, no. 29, 17 August 1899.

38 Mahzarnama, English version, p. 70–72.

39 Ainah-i Kamalat Islam in Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 5, p. 367.

40 Ibid., p. 377.

41 Ibid., p. 383.

42 Mahzarnama, English version, p. 75.

43 Siraj Munir in Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 12, p. 4–5.

44 Mahzarnama, English version, p. 81–82.

45 The history of the collapse of this theory is discussed in my translation of Ayk Ghalati Ka Izala with accompanying material, published in 2011 by Ahmadiyya Anjuman Lahore Publications U.K., in chapter 7.

46 Al-Hakam, 10–17 October 1904, p. 9.

47 The Five Volume Commentary, the first volume of which, containing this translation, was published in 1947. See verse 2:5 on p. 34.

48 Tafsir-i Kabir, p. 144, sub-heading.

8. Summary

In his book, The Truth about the Split, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad relates that, following the death of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, Maulana Muhammad Ali came to see him in the presence of some of his leading supporters and stated the following:

“He pointed out that it was difficult to proceed with the election of a Khalifa, because there was such serious disparity of beliefs prevailing in the Community. One party regarded the Promised Messiah as a Nabi and his deniers as kafir while the other party refused to subscribe to any such doctrine.” (2007 edition, p. 191)

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad confirms, while recounting this incident, that this was indeed the difference of beliefs between the two parties. This, in a nutshell, was the reason for the split.

Maulana Muhammad Ali, writing in 1949, summing up his life’s work in the booklet Jama‘at-i Qadian aur har ayk musalmaan kay li’ay lamha fikariyya (‘Time of reflection for the Qadiani Jama‘at and for every Muslim’), begins as follows:

“In 1914 we separated from Qadian and laid the foundations of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam in Lahore. The reason for this was only that we considered the creed of the khalifa of Qadian, that all non-Ahmadis are kafir and outside the pale of Islam, to be wrong. This belief was also contrary to the clear and open teachings and practice of the Founder of the Movement, and it was also against the express teachings of the Quran and Hadith.

“In the last days of the illness of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din this issue had become such a topic of division in the Jama‘at, that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, having called a separate meeting in the Jami‘a mosque of Qadian during the annual gathering in December 1913, declared that even if a sword were placed on each side of his neck, he would still not refrain from calling non-Ahmadis as kafir.

“When the news of this reached Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, the head of the Jama‘at at the time, he instructed me, while I was reading out to him the notes of the English translation of the Holy Quran, to write a paper on the issue of disbelief and Islam, and he let me know that its basic principle should be that the great leaders of the religion of Islam held that if there were found ninety-nine grounds for declaring a man to be an unbeliever, and one ground on which to include him in the fold of Islam, even then he would not be called kafir but would be called a Muslim. On another occasion, he said directly to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in a gathering: ‘There are many people who have not understood the issue of disbelief and Islam, even our Mian [i.e., Mirza Mahmud Ahmad] has not understood it.’ Accordingly, after this I wrote the leaflet and read it out to Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din. Later it was also published.

“After his death, I made efforts to persuade Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to reach an agreement, so that a split in the Jama‘at could be prevented. However, he did not accept any of my proposals. One of my proposals was that both sides should present their arguments before a gathering of the leading men of the Jama‘at, and whichever side is considered to be right by the majority, its view should be adopted as the belief of the Jama‘at, and the community should remain as one. But Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was insistent, in regard to our belief that all those who profess the Kalima are Muslims, whatever sect they may belong to, that although we could hold this belief within our hearts but we would not be allowed to express it openly. This was impossible for us to accept. Therefore, we few men refused to accept him as khalifa and to enter into his bai‘at. We decided among ourselves that we would continue the work of the propagation of Islam even if, due to prevailing circumstances, we have to leave Qadian to do this work. We had not as yet created a separate Jama‘at, and for more than one month after our difference I remained in Qadian in the hope that some solution may be found enabling us to work together. Eventually, seeing the circumstances deteriorate from bad to worse, I left Qadian and went to Lahore around 20th April. Here, on 2nd May, the foundations of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore were laid.

“We remained resolute on our purpose and laid these new foundations for the propagation of Islam in May 1914 in Lahore. By that time, the mass of members of the Movement had entered into the discipleship of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in the form of blind obedience to the spiritual leader. Only those remained separate who realised the grave significance of declaring other Muslims as kafir, and they were few. This can be gauged from the fact that when we created the new Anjuman its budget for the first year was only Rs. 7000 whereas before this the budget of the whole Jama‘at was Rs. 200,000. We were also bereft of everything, and there was no office nor building. But Allah placed blessings in this work, a brief sketch of which is given below.” (p. 1–3)

After presenting the brief sketch of work mentioned above, Maulana Muhammad Ali puts the following question to all Muslims:

“Now I invite every Muslim brother in general, and members of the Qadiani Jama‘at in particular, to consider whether such great work of the propagation of Islam and the production of so much literature for this work was possible without the help of God, when the Jama‘at doing it was so small, possessing no resources, and the work was so magnificent.” (p. 5)

With the above question to ponder, we conclude this book.

Bibliography

Numbers in square brackets, given after the names of sources, refer to the notes at the end of the Bibliography on online availability of sources.

Pre-split Ahmadiyya sources:

Badr, weekly Ahmadiyya community newspaper (earlier entitled Al-Badr). [1]

Al-Hakam, newspaper similar to Badr. [1]

Review of Religions, English monthly of Ahmadiyya Movement. [1]

Published books of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: Izala Auham, 1891; A’inah-i Kamalat Islam, 1893; Siraj Munir, 1897; Anjam Atham, 1897; Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, 1908. [2]

Malfuzat, compilation of the talks and conversations of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad taken from Badr (earlier Al-Badr) and Al-Hakam. [3]

Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, collection of handbills or public announcements issued by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. [3]

Khutbat Nur, Sermons of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, published by the Qadiani Jama‘at. [3] (Note: Khitabat Nur is a different book.)

Lahore Ahmadiyya sources:

The Ahmadiyya Movement –IV: The Split, by Maulana Muhammad Ali, 1918. [4]

Jama‘at-i Qadian aur har ayk musalmaan kay li’ay lamha fikariyya (‘Time of reflection for the Qadiani Jama‘at and for every Muslim’), by Maulana Muhammad Ali, 1949. [5]

Haqiqat-i Ikhtilaf, by Maulana Muhammad Ali, 1922. (Its English translation, True Facts about the Split, was published in 1966.) [5]

Mujahid-i Kabir, by Muhammad Ahmad and M.A. Faruqui, biography of Maulana Muhammad Ali, 1962. [5]

A Mighty Striving, translation of Mujahid-i Kabir, 2005. [4]

Ikhtilaf Silsila Ahmadiyya kay Asbab (‘Causes of the Split in the Ahmadiyya Movement’), by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, 1914. [5]

Mujaddid-i Kamil (‘The Perfect Mujaddid’), by Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, December 1930. [5]

Paigham Sulh, weekly or more frequent newspaper. [1]

The Islamic Review, monthly magazine of the Woking Muslim Mission (not an official Lahore Ahmadiyya organ). [1]

Qadiani Jama‘at sources:

Ahmadiyyat or the True Islam, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1924. [3]

A’inah-i Sadaqat, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1921. [3]

The Truth about the Split, English translation of A’inah-i Sadaqat, first published 1924, latest edition 2007. [3]

Al-Fazl, newspaper and organ of the Qadiani Jama‘at.

Anwar-i Khilafat, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1916. [3]

Anwar-ul-‘Ulum, collection of the writings of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. [3]

Haqiqat-un-Nubuwwah, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1915. [3]

English Translation and Commentary of the Holy Quran (Five Volume), Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, published starting 1947. [3]

Tafsir-i Saghir, Urdu translation of the Quran. Older edition is at [3]. The 1990 edition we refer to on p. 136 is not available online.

Mahzarnama, the Memorandum, 2003. [3]

Tahqiqati Commission kay Sat Swalon ka Jawab (‘Answers to the Seven Questions of the Court of Inquiry’), by the advocate of Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya Rabwah, 1953. [5]

Tahqiqati ‘adalat main Hazrat Imam Jama‘at Ahmadiyya ka Bayan (‘Testimony of the Head of the Ahmadiyya Community at the Court of Inquiry’), 1954. [5]

Daura Maghrib, Mirza Nasir Ahmad’s Tour of Europe of 1979/80.

General sources:

Official Report of the National Assembly of Pakistan entitled Proceedings of the Special Committee of the Whole House held in Camera to consider the Qadiani Issue (held August–September 1974).

Notes on online availability of sources

[1] Most issues are available on www.aaiil.org.

[2] Books of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad are available on www.aaiil.org and on www.alislam.org. On the latter website they are in the collection entitled Ruhani Khaza’in.

[3] Available on www.alislam.org.

[4] Available on www.ahmadiyya.org.

[5] Available on www.aaiil.org.