|
Reply to certain quotes alleging
that he called other Muslims as kafir
|
The following question was received at this website (www.muslim.org).
Our esteemed enquirer informed us that he had copied these quotations
from an anti-Ahmadiyya website.
Question:
Regarding who is Muslim according to Mirza Sahib, following observations
are noted:
“Question: Huzoor-e-aali (Respected Mirza Ghulam Ahmad)
has mentioned in thousands of places that it is not at all right
to call Kafir a Kalima-go (someone who recites the Kalima) and
an Ahle-Qibla. It is quite obvious that except those Momineen
who become Kafir by calling you (Mirza Ghulam) a Kafir, no one
becomes a Kafir by merely not accepting you. However, you have
now written to Abdul Hakeem Khan that anyone who has received
my message and has not accepted me is no longer a Muslim. There
is contradiction between this statement and your statements in
previous books. Earlier in Tiriaq-ul-Quloob etc you had mentioned
that no one becomes Kafir by not accepting you; now you are writing
that by rejecting me he becomes a Kafir?!
“Answer: This is strange that you consider the person who
rejects me and the person who calls me Kafir as two different
persons, whereas in the eyes of God he is the same type; because
he who does not accept me is because he considers me a fabricator…”
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 22, P. 167)
similarly:
“It has been revealed to me that the person who did
not follow me and did not enter into my fold, is disobedient and
as such, should be thrown into Hell.” (Miyar-ul-Akhyar, Vol.
9, P. 27)
Answer:
Regarding your quote from Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, in the same book
he wrote a few pages earlier:
“These people first prepared a fatwa of kufr
against me, and about 200 Maulvis put their seals upon it, calling
us kafir. In these fatwas, such hostility was shown
that some Ulama even wrote that these people (Ahmadis) are worse
in disbelief than Jews and Christians; and they broadcast fatwas
saying that these people must not be buried in Muslim cemeteries,
they must not be offered salaam and greetings, and it is
not proper to say prayers behind them, because they are kafir.
They must not be allowed to enter mosques because they would pollute
them; if they do enter, the mosque must be washed. It is allowable
to steal their property, and they may be killed …
Now look at this falsehood, namely, that they accuse me of having
declared 200 million Muslims and Kalima-professing people
to be kafir. We did not take the initiative for branding
people as kafir. Their own religious leaders issued fatwas
of kufr against us, and raised a commotion throughout Punjab
and the whole of India that we were kafir. These proclamations
so aliented the ignorant people from us that they considered it
a sin even to talk to us in a civil manner. Can any maulvi, or
any other opponent, prove that we had declared them kafir
first? If there is any paper, notice or booklet issued by us,
prior to their fatwas of kufr, in which we had declared
our Muslim opponents to be kafir, then they should bring
that forward. If not, they should realise how dishonest it is
that, while they are the ones who call us kafir, they accuse
us of having declared all Muslims as kafir. …Then
having declared us kafir by their fatwas, they themselves
admit that he who calls a Muslim a kafir gets the kufr
reflected back upon himself. Under these circumstances, was it
not our right to call them kafir according to their own
admission?”
(Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, See Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 22,
p. 122-124)
It is absolutely clear from this that Hazrat Mirza sahib never called
any Muslim as a kafir for not believing in him. If he had done
so, then he would have been the first to call others as kafir.
But he declares here that, on the contrary, it was his opponents who
initiated this by branding him as kafir and instructing all
Muslims to shun and ostracise Ahmadis.
It is against this background and in this context that Hazrat Mirza
sahib’s answer to that question should be read.
It is admitted in the question itself that Hazrat Mirza sahib wrote
in “thousands of places that it is not at all right to call
Kafir a Kalima-go and an Ahle-Qibla”,
and he is asked that what he has now written in just one place seems
to contradict this. In reply he does not say that he was
wrong in those thousands of places; rather, he explains that what
he wrote in that one place does not contradict those “thousands
of places”.
His reply extends to about 3 pages, from which just the opening
has been quoted by our critics. The whole reply shows that his words
“he who does not accept me” are not general but apply
to those who were followers of the Ulama who had declared
Hazrat Mirza sahib and Ahmadis as kafir. As he writes at
the end of his answer to this question:
“I see that all those people who do not believe in
me regard all those who have declared me to be kafir as being
momin (believers).” (Ruhani Khaza’in, v.
22, p. 169, footnote).
Now note his following words in this same reply:
“Two hundred Maulvis declared me to be kafir
and wrote a fatwa of kufr about me. Their fatwa
shows that anyone who calls a momin (believer) as kafir
becomes kafir himself, and anyone who calls a kafir
as momin also becomes a kafir…” (p. 168)
The Maulvis not only declared Hazrat Mizra sahib and his followers
as kafir but further that anyone who regards him or Ahmadis
as Muslim (i.e. regards a kafir as momin) is also
a kafir. This means that an ordinary Muslim who does not
accept Hazrat Mirza sahib is not even allowed by the Maulvis
to regard him as a Muslim, because if he did then he would himself
be declared as kafir by the Maulvis!
This is in fact the legal position in Pakistan at present, that
each and every person who wants to be recognised as a ‘Muslim’
in Pakistani law must declare on a form that he/she regards
Hazrat Mirza sahib as an “imposter” and all Ahmadis as
non-Muslim. So each and every Muslim in Pakistan who does not accept
Hazrat Mirza sahib also declares him and Ahmadis as kafir
by signing a compulsory form to this effect.
Another example is the Muslim community of Cape Town, South Africa.
The Ulama there have ruled that what they call “Ahmadi sympathisers”
are also kafir like Ahmadis. An “Ahmadi sympathiser”
is one treats Ahmadis like Muslims. A Sunni Imam was dismissed by
the Ulama for allowing Ahmadis to enter his mosque for prayer, and
this led to a famous civil court case in the late 1980s. They require
all Muslims to declare Ahmadis as kafir.
It is the original fatwa of the Maulvis, and the present
day law of Pakistan, that has placed “he who does not accept
me” in the same category as “the person who calls me kafir”.
Hazrat Mirza sahib, in this same answer, proposes the following
solution about those who don’t believe in him. Immediately
after the lines quoted above from p. 168, he writes:
“Now the easy solution to this is that if there are
other people who are honest and sincere, and not hypocrites, they
should issue an announcement about these Maulvis, naming each Maulvi,
saying that these are all kafir because they declared a Muslim
to be kafir. Then I will believe them to be Muslims. …
If it is not correct that by calling someone else a kafir
a person himself becomes a kafir, then show me a fatwa
of your Maulvis to this effect and I will accept it. Otherwise,
if such a person does become a kafir then they should issue
an announcement about the kufr of two hundred Maulvis, by
name. After that it would be forbidden for me to doubt their being
Muslims, provided they are not behaving hypocritically.” (p.
169)
If they issue this announcement, he says he will believe them to
be Muslims and never doubt their being Muslims, even though they
do not accept him. It is the fatwa of the Maulvis that makes
it impossible for these Muslims to regard him as Muslim as well
as regarding the Maulvis as Muslims.
Hazrat Mirza sahib ends his answer as follows:
“So I do not even now call the ahl-i qibla as
kafir, but as to those who have themselves created a reason
for their own kufr, how can I call them momin?”
(Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 22, p. 169, footnote).
This, in brief, is the answer to the question: that he does not
even now call the ahl-i qibla as kafir, just as he
wrote in those “thousands of places”.
Regarding your second quotation (“It has been revealed to
me that the person who did not follow me and did not enter into
my fold, is disobedient and as such, should be thrown into Hell”),
in this case, two sets of words have been omitted and the rest of
the translation is distorted as well. It should read:
“…God reveals to one man that he who does not
follow you and does not enter into your bai‘at and
remains your opponent, he is disobedient to Allah and the Messenger
and will go to hell”.
It is clearly stated here: “and remains your opponent”
(which I have underlined). Anyone who opposes the mission of Hazrat
Mirza sahib as Mujaddid, which is to defend Islam and make
it victorious over its detractors, is disobedient to the instructions
of Allah and the Holy Prophet Muhammad and is liable to the punishment
of hell as Allah may determine. Those Muslims throughout history
who have damaged Islam and the Muslim Umma will certainly receive
Allah’s punishment for their misdeeds, even though they are
Muslims and not kafir.
Secondly, note that Hazrat Mirza sahib calls it his revelation.
His revelations are not an independent authority but have to be
made subject to the teachings of Islam in the Quran and Hadith.
The Quran tells us in 24:55, after promising the Muslims that khalifas
to the Prophet Muhammad will appear among them, that those who oppose
them are transgressors (fasiq). In Bukhari it is stated that
Allah Himself says:
“I will declare war against him who shows hostility
to a pious worshipper (wali) of Mine.”
(Muhsin Khan’s translation, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 509)
Hazrat Mirza sahib’s revelation is in accordance with this.
Thirdly, reading the context where this quote occurs, we find that
Hazrat Mirza sahib was writing in refutation of a Muslim opponent
who was also claiming to receive revelation. The opponent was claiming
that God had sent him revelation that Hazrat Mirza sahib was “a
firaun, kazzab (liar), musrif (exceeding limits in
committing sin), fasiq (wrong-doer) and kafir”
etc. Hazrat Mirza sahib writes in response that God had revealed
to him that he is “the chosen one of God … Promised Messiah
and Mujaddid of the 14th century…”. Similarly,
that man claimed to receive revelation that those who follow Mirza
sahib are on the path to spiritual destruction, and Hazrat Mirza
sahib countered this with the revelation we are discussing.
So in this same reference Hazrat Mirza sahib has said that God
revealed to him that he is the Mujaddid of the 14th century.
Therefore when he says that God revealed to him that “he who
does not follow you and remains your opponent …”, this
refers to what happens to those who deny and oppose a Mujaddid.
There is no mention here by Hazrat Mirza sahib of any claim
by him to be a prophet or that those who don’t believe in him
are kafir. (Note: Even the Qadianis believe that he was not
claiming to be a prophet at the time he wrote this in 1899.)
Also, the statement about what happens to “he who does not
follow you…” applies to the kind of opponent that Hazrat
Mirza sahib is writing against here, the person who announces to
the world that God has revealed to him that Mirza sahib is “a
firaun, kazzab, musrif, fasiq, kafir”.
— Zahid Aziz.
|
Top