6c. From 1939 to June 1947
(Third of three sections)
Relations with the Qadian Jama‘at (19391946)
It has been mentioned before that Maulana Muhammad Ali was always
concerned that if the Jama‘at devoted too much attention
to the issues of the differences between the two parties, this might
detract from its task of the propagation of Islam. Accordingly,
on many occasions he would ignore attacks from the Qadian Jama‘at
and its paper Al-Fazl. However, at times some events would
happen, making it unavoidable to engage in argument. The greatest
problem was that, due to the publicising and propagation of those
beliefs of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad that were contrary to the beliefs
of the Promised Messiah, misconceptions arose among the general
Muslim community regarding the Promised Messiah’s own position and
views. The exaggerations of the Qadiani Jama‘at were becoming
a hindrance in the path of the propagation of Islam because they
made other Muslims hesitant to join or assist the Lahore Ahmadiyya
Movement as they could not be sure that the Founder of the Movement
held the beliefs that the Lahore Jama‘at was presenting.
In December 1939 Maulana Ghulam Hasan took the bai‘at (pledge)
at the hand of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, and with that the Qadian Jama‘at
launched an aggressive campaign against the Lahore Jama‘at.
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad instructed his Jama‘at to make special
efforts to preach to the “Paighamis”.{footnote
1} It became imperative to take steps to counteract this
assault. So, during 1941 and 1942, much of Maulana Muhammad Ali’s
attention was taken up in presenting conclusive arguments to Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad and trying to bring about rectification in this matter.
Maulana Ghulam Hasan was the man who had refused to take the bai‘at
at the hand of Maulana Nur-ud-Din after the Promised Messiah’s death
because he believed that the Anjuman was the Promised Messiah’s
successor and that it was an error to re-take the bai‘at
at the hand of another individual. Maulana Ghulam Hasan was one
of the fourteen members of the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya and despite
having family connections in Qadian he was one of six members who,
at the time of the Split, rose to oppose openly the khilafat
of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his reducing the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya
to a subservient body. As to why, after adhering strictly to this
standpoint for almost 32 years, he took the bai‘at at Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad’s hand, there is no need to go into the details of
that. Anyhow, after he had taken this step Maulana Muhammad Ali,
through Paigham Sulh, drew his attention to his previous
beliefs and writings and asked him repeatedly on what basis he had
taken the bai‘at, which he had been opposing for 32 years,
and on what grounds he had joined the Jama‘at which he had
labelled in his Quran commentary Husn-i Bayan as “a group
of extremists” and “followers of falsehood”. However, in the answers
that Maulana Ghulam Hasan published, he nowhere gave the arguments
that had made him change his standpoint. In this connection Maulana
Muhammad Ali wrote many articles in Paigham Sulh from March
to June 1940, addressed to Maulana Ghulam Hasan, in which he compared
the beliefs and the practical work of the two groups and clarified
the issues of khilafat and of ‘unbelief and Islam’.
Appeal to Qadian Jama‘at, 1939
Along with that, Maulana Muhammad Ali repeatedly addressed Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad in an effort to settle these differences. At the annual
gathering of 1939, he addressed the Qadiani Jama‘at by means
of a pamphlet entitled Ahbab-i Qadian say appeal (‘An Appeal
to Friends of Qadian’). In this pamphlet he did not elaborate upon
the issues of disagreement, which had been discussed exhaustively
on many previous occasions, but only dealt with the heart-felt wishes
of the Promised Messiah and the work of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at
over the past twenty-five years, and drew the attention of the Qadian
Jama‘at to facts about what the Promised Messiah had wanted
his followers to accomplish, and what we had achieved in the twenty-five
years of our existence starting from scratch, as contrasted with
what the much larger Jama‘at of Qadian had done in the same
period.
Invitation and challenge to debate, 1940
Then in April 1940 Maulana Muhammad Ali issued a challenge to Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad to enter into a debate on the following three issues,
whether with or without judges as he wished, as to which party was
holding beliefs contrary to the beliefs of the Promised Messiah:
- Unbelief and Islam (whether a person must believe in the Promised
Messiah in order to be a Muslim).
- Prophethood (whether the Promised Messiah claimed to be a prophet).
- Khilafat (whether the kind of headship instituted in
the Qadiani Jama‘at is in conformity with, or contrary
to, the teachings of Islam and the Promised Messiah).
The condition was that the debate must be in writing. On our side
Maulana Muhammad Ali alone would write, while Mirza Mahmud Ahmad would
be free to write by himself or with as many supporters as he wished.
In May 1940 Maulana Muhammad Ali repeated this proposal and in this
connection he announced:
“Remember well that it is on the issue of kufr and Islam
that the Qadianis will flounder. Their position on this issue is
entirely weak and unsound, beyond all limits. The ground has been
cut away from under their feet. No Qadiani knows what is his belief
about this. They say by word of mouth: ‘There is no god but Allah
and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, but in practice they have
cancelled this Kalima. It is obvious that if the Kalima
is not abrogated, then those who proclaim and profess it cannot
be called kafir and outside the pale of Islam. And if those
who do not accept Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, while professing the
Kalima, are kafir then this Kalima is abrogated.
But the Qadianis do not take either of these positions clearly,
or declare it plainly and boldly. The reason is that they have no
belief on this question. Whenever they have occasion to discuss
this issue with anyone, they express a belief depending on the views
and thinking of that person. On this question, and also on the question
of khilafat, the Qadianis cannot make a stand.
Remember, we will not let them get away. Either they have to
enter the field of combat and prove that all those on earth who
profess the Kalima are kafir and expelled from Islam,
or they have to admit defeat, and acknowledge that according to
the Quran, Hadith, and the teachings of the Promised Messiah every
person professing the Kalima is a Muslim — and this latter
is what we want because our aim is reform. The root of the difference
between us is, in fact, this issue of kufr and Islam. Once
that is settled, the issue of prophethood [the belief that Hazrat
Mirza sahib claimed to be a prophet] can be solved in one instant.”
Still in May 1940 Maulana Muhammad Ali put forth another proposal
before Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, in a letter published in Paigham Sulh
in its issue of 12 May, that both sides would specify a certain
number of questions or objections to be answered, to which the answers
would be published in the newspapers of both the parties. After
that every person could draw his own conclusions. No further debates
would take place, and the energy and time saved thereby would be
spent on doing constructive work. He also proposed that if Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad was prepared to have a written debate in the presence
of judges, then Maulana Muhammad Ali would appoint five such judges
from the Qadiani Jama‘at itself. However, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
was not willing even to have judges from among his own followers.
When there was no response to all his proposals and challenges,
Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote an open letter addressed to Mirza Mahmud
Ahmad, published in Paigham Sulh of 10 June 1940, in which,
after repeating those proposals, he wrote:
“I implore you for the sake of the Holy Quran, for whose
propagation in the world we have been established, for the sake
of the Holy Prophet, to make whose religion triumphant in the world
our Jama‘at was created, and lastly for the sake of the Promised
Messiah, who in this age assigned this magnificent task to us, that
you accept any one of these three proposals that you wish to, and
take a step towards ending these disputes. If you pay a little attention,
the two communities, instead of indulging in mud-slinging against
one another, can be instrumental in acquiring and spreading the
knowledge of the Holy Quran in the world, for which the way was
paved by the Imam of the Age.”
There was still no response whatsoever from Mirza Mahmud Ahmad,
except that in his khutba published in Al-Fazl on
12 July 1940, he said that first Maulana Muhammad Ali should point
out proof of acceptance of his prayers in comparison with the Qadian
Jama‘at. Then he put forward a bizarre sign to prove acceptance
of his own prayers. He said that the suffering Britain was undergoing
at that time in the Second World War was the result of the heart-felt
crying of the Qadian Jama‘at before Allah during 1935 to
1937, after two local British officials had created some difficulties
for Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. According to his statement it would appear
that his Jama‘at lost all sense of balance and they cried
before Allah with so much pain, forgetting that their vociferous
pleas were entirely out of proportion with the severity of the injustice
they had suffered. The result according to them was that God struck
all the British Empire with a terrible calamity, but in order to
remove these dreadful effects of the heart-felt cries of the Qadiani
Jama‘at if the British government were to officially request
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad for prayer then Hitler’s forces would be repulsed.{footnote
2}
In reply to this, Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote that we also believe
in the acceptance of prayers but we do not want to turn prayer into
a childish antic as Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has done. The greatest proof
of the acceptance of our prayers is that our Jama‘at, which
was created by a few men lacking all resources, and whose disintegration
was prophesied by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, has in 25 years made such
tremendous progress that the outside world admits it. The service
to His religion that God has enabled us to render is the result
of His acceptance of our prayers, for our principal prayer with
which we have been constantly imploring the Almighty over the years
is just that Allah may choose us for the service of His religion.
What Mirza Mahmud Ahmad said about the actual point under discussion
was as follows, in a Friday khutba published in Al-Fazl
on 24 July 1940:
“As far as I remember, he [Maulana Muhammad Ali] has been
putting forward this method since probably 1915, and so 23 years
have elapsed over his proposal. During all this time I have not
accepted it.”
And he gave the following reason for it:
“In the matter of religious beliefs, I am not even prepared
to accept the verdict of my wife, my sons or my brothers. … My beliefs
are a matter for me. Why should I accept someone else’s decision
about them?”
The fact is that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was not at all being asked
to adopt the judges’ decision as his personal beliefs. But as he
had determined the beliefs of an entire community in his capacity
as its Head, and had misled it, he was being asked to produce arguments
to support his beliefs. The demand was for a written discussion
before some judges, who would then simply decide whose arguments
were stronger. After that an end would be put to all such discussions,
and henceforth both communities would be able to concentrate entirely
on the propagation of Islam.
Finding Mirza Mahmud Ahmad avoiding the real issues, Maulana Muhammad
Ali again addressed him in August by means of a direct letter, stressing
his demand as to why he was unwilling to debate the beliefs of the
Promised Messiah and the question whether other Muslims were to
be regarded as unbelievers. Similarly on various other occasions,
through his Friday khutbas and the newspaper Paigham Sulh,
Maulana Muhammad Ali did everything possible to convey the most
conclusive arguments to prove his standpoint to the Qadiani leader.
At the annual gathering in 1940, he published a leaflet entitled
Jama‘at Qadian kay aik aik adami ko salis ban nay ki da‘wat
(‘Each and Every member of the Qadiani Jama‘at invited to
be judge’), clarifying the standpoint of the Promised Messiah that
he allowed his followers to say the funeral prayers of other Muslims,
and did so himself as well, thus showing that he regarded them as
Muslims.
Efforts in 1941
Again during 1941, on many occasions, he addressed the Qadian Jama‘at
and Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. In Paigham Sulh dated 21 April 1941
he clarified the misconception spread about him from Qadian that
in his early writings he had regarded the Promised Messiah as prophet.
Maulana Muhammad Ali explained that he had never even imagined at
any time that the Founder of the Movement was claiming to be a prophet.
However, sometimes following the style of the Promised Messiah,
he too had used the word ‘prophet’ about him metaphorically and
figuratively, or in its linguistic sense of meaning a person who
makes prophecies. Moreover, this style of writing was not exclusive
to the Promised Messiah or to him, but is found in the writings
of many renowned Muslim saints in history. He repeated his challenge
to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad that he would never be able to provide any
quotation from his writings in which he had declared other Muslims
as being kafirs. In the Review of Religions itself,
from which Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had put forward some quotations in
which Maulana Muhammad Ali had used the word ‘prophet’ about the
Promised Messiah, the explanation of the use of this word can be
found several times. After giving some examples of such explanation
from the Review of Religions, Maulana Muhammad Ali writes
in his above statement:
“The above examples are from 1904. Then in 1914, there
was an occasion where a misunderstanding could arise, when there
appeared an article in the Review of Religions entitled ‘Ahmad
as a Prophet’, which was not written by me. I added to it the following
note:
‘The word prophet is used here not in the strict
terminology of the Muslim Law, the holy Prophet Muhammad, may
peace and the blessings of God be upon him, being the last of
the prophets in that sense, but in the broad sense of one endowed
with the gift of prophecy by Divine inspiration, a gift which
is promised to every true Muslim by the holy Quran, and one which
was possessed in an eminent degree by the late Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
of Qadian.’ ”{footnote 3}
After this he writes in this same reply:
“This interpretation was not an invention of mine. At
that time the Qadiani religious scholars were assuring all people
that they were not using the word nabi according to its meaning
in the terminology of the Shari‘ah but taking it only in
its linguistic sense of one who makes prophecies.”
Accordingly, he gave quotations from the early writings of Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad and the Qadiani religious scholars Maulvi Sarwar Shah
and Mufti Muhammad Sadiq.{footnote 4}
Similarly, Maulana Muhammad Ali made other efforts of the same
kind repeatedly, which we do not fully detail here for the sake
of brevity. Anyone who wants further information can consult the
archives of Paigham Sulh for those years. However, all these
efforts proved fruitless. Prior to the annual gathering of 1941,
Maulana Muhammad Ali invited Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to come to Lahore
for a day and make a speech to the gathering of the Lahore Jama‘at,
and reciprocate by allowing Maulana Muhammad Ali to address the
gathering in Qadian on the last day of their annual gathering, giving
each party the opportunity at least to hear the arguments of the
other side. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad first responded by saying that Maulana
Muhammad Ali could come to Qadian for two days after the annual
gathering on the condition that he paid Rs. 3000 per day to meet
the expenses of the other people present there. Maulana Muhammad
Ali wrote in reply that to ask a guest to pay not only his own expenses
but also the host’s expenses was entirely against Islamic etiquette.
Secondly, after the annual gathering people attending from outside
Qadian would have departed, so who would the Maulana be addressing?
Therefore he insisted that he should be given time to speak during
the annual gathering itself. However, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad did not
accept it. Then Maulana Muhammad Ali offered that even if he was
not to be allowed to make a speech to the Jama‘at in Qadian,
his own invitation to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was still open. He should
come to Lahore and make a speech on the first day of our annual
gathering; all his expenses would be paid by us. There was no response
to this.
Challenge to take oath on beliefs, 1944
When these sustained efforts of two years failed to achieve any
result, Maulana Muhammad Ali put before Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in 1944
another easy mode of reaching a decision. He said:
“They believe that before the year 1901 Hazrat Mirza sahib
denied claiming prophethood and believed other Muslims to be Muslims,
but that in 1901 he made a change by acknowledging his prophethood
and calling those who professed the Kalima as kafir.
This can be decided on the following one basis. Let just one man
from the whole of the Qadiani Jama‘at make a statement on
oath as follows:
In the year 1901 my belief regarding the prophethood
of Hazrat Mirza sahib changed.
From our side, seventy men made a statement on oath [in 1915] that
in the year 1901 the idea never even entered their minds that Hazrat
Mirza sahib had changed his claim. If the Qadianis cannot find anyone
else, let Mirza Mahmud Ahmad himself make this statement under oath.”
The Maulana went one step further and invited Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
to make the statement under oath that his beliefs, as expressed
on page 35 of his book A’inah-i Sadaqat, were the beliefs
held by Hazrat Mirza sahib. The Maulana himself would state under
oath that those beliefs of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad were contrary to the
beliefs of Hazrat Mirza sahib. The Maulana added that if Mirza Mahmud
Ahmad took an oath in which he invoked God’s punishment upon himself
in case of making a false statement, the Maulana would also take
a similar oath, invoking God’s punishment upon his own self.
Those beliefs of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad are as follows:
- The belief that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was actually a Nabi;
- The belief that he was ‘the Ahmad’ spoken of in the prophecy
of Jesus referred to in the Holy Quran in 61:6;
- The belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered
into his [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s] 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.{footnote 5}
On none of these points did Mirza Mahmud Ahmad dare come forward
to meet the challenge. However, when Maulana Muhammad Ali, in a
Friday khutba published on 31 May 1944, stated that Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad had made the Kalima null and void, and that
this was a pollution with which he had contaminated the teachings
of the Promised Messiah, there was a furious and wrathful response
by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in an article published in Al-Fazl of
7 July 1944 which ended with the following words:
“Maulana Muhammad Ali is both a coward and a liar … but
if he does not desist from his calumnies … then a day will come
when he will be overtaken by God’s noose and the curse of God will
strangle him as it chokes liars. … He will see the curse of his
fabrications descend in front of his residence and will die the
death of a liar.”
All this wrath and fury erupted because this belief was ascribed
to him that he does not consider that a person can now become a
Muslim by professing the Kalima, although the same had been
stated for the past thirty years. In answer to this, Maulana Muhammad
Ali wrote that since the beginning in 1914 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has
predicted the destruction of our Jama‘at, and he asked Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad what fabrication had been made against him which led
to this incensed outburst, since Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had himself
written in his book A’inah-i Sadaqat on page 35:
“… all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into
his [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s] 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.”
So Maulana Muhammad Ali once again, in an article published in
Paigham Sulh on 26 July 1944, exposed these wrong beliefs
which Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had attributed to the Promised Messiah.
Open publication of charge of falsehood
After the publication of this article Maulana Muhammad Ali made
the following demands upon Mirza Mahmud Ahmad which were published
in the form of a highlighted block in every issue of Paigham
Sulh from August to October 1944:
Let Mirza Mahmud Ahmad answer!
The fabrications that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has committed against
the Promised Messiah, I call them nothing but fabrications and
will continue to do so. If he considers me to be a liar, then
he must accept my invitation to make a statement on oath invoking
Divine punishment upon himself in case of being false, and I will
also take a similar oath invoking Divine punishment upon myself
in case of being false. Otherwise, my allegations against him
will prove to be established facts.
I again repeat my allegations in clear words:
1. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has made a false statement and committed
a fabrication against the Promised Messiah that in 1901 he changed
his claim in this way that, while previously denying a claim to
prophethood and sending curses upon anyone who would claim to
be a prophet, he now made a claim to prophethood himself, and
cancelled his former writings of several years containing denials
of a claim to prophethood.
2. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has made a false statement and committed
a fabrication against the Promised Messiah that he (Hazrat Mirza
sahib) himself used to say that prior to 1901 he was misinterpreting
the word ‘prophet’.
3. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has made a false statement and committed
a fabrication against the Promised Messiah that around the year
1901 it used to be said in the gatherings of the Promised Messiah
that his previous interpretation of prophethood was not correct.
If Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has the courage, he can hold a debate with
me about these allegations. I will appoint persons from among
his own followers as the judges. If he wishes, he can hold a mubahila
after the debate, that is to say, he would take an oath, invoking
Divine punishment upon himself in case of making a false statement,
testifying that his beliefs as given on page 35 of A’inah-i
Sadaqat are in agreement with the beliefs of the Promised
Messiah; and I will take a similar oath, invoking Divine punishment
upon myself in case of making a false statement, testifying that
his beliefs are entirely opposed to the beliefs of the Promised
Messiah. However, a debate will be necessary before the mubahila.
If Mirza Mahmud Ahmad remains silent even now, I will continue
to repeat these accusations until his followers are moved to ask
him to clear himself of these charges.
This statement was printed in the form of a block in Paigham
Sulh in every issue from 2 August to the end of October 1944,
but Mirza Mahmud Ahmad could not pluck up the courage to reply.
During this time Maulana Muhammad Ali suggested Sir Muhammad Zafrullah
Khan as judge and demanded of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to show Zafrullah
Khan the references from the Promised Messiah on the basis of which
he had imputed those beliefs to the Promised Messiah. If Zafrullah
Khan wrote in judgment that those beliefs have been established
from the records of the time of the Promised Messiah then Maulana
Muhammad Ali would admit his own error and make a public apology
to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad.
However, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s lips were sealed. In the Friday khutba
on 20 October Maulana Muhammad Ali informed the Jama‘at that
God had now shown us the sign during our lives that the wrong beliefs
and the falsehood attributed to the Promised Messiah had been proved
to be lies. He asked the Jama‘at to keep up these demands
and continue asking the Qadianis for proof of their wrong beliefs.
After this, at the annual gathering in Qadian in 1944, Mirza Mahmud
Ahmad in a speech appeared to express his willingness to participate
in a debate. So Maulana Muhammad Ali, in his Friday khutba
on 5 January 1945, again invited Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to a debate
on the three points of contention, which have been mentioned above,
whether with judges or without judges as he wished. But after this
there was again complete and utter silence from Qadian.
Challenge to debate and mubahila, 1945
In his Friday khutba on 9 March 1945 Maulana Muhammad Ali
invited Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to a mubahila on the question
whether the Promised Messiah ever said that before 1901 he was misinterpreting
the word nabi. The mubahila would have to be preceded
by a debate on this issue. After six months had elapsed upon this
invitation, Maulana Muhammad Ali reminded Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, on
8 August 1945, and asked if he was prepared to hold the mubahila.
He drew his attention to the announcements he had repeatedly made
for one year, in which he had declared that “Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
has made a false statement and committed a fabrication against the
Promised Messiah that he (Hazrat Mirza sahib) himself used to say
that prior to 1901 he was misinterpreting the word prophet”, and
asked him why he was not showing his proofs to Sir Muhammad Zafrullah
Khan (whom the Maulana had suggested as judge). If he could not
agree to have Zafrullah Khan as judge, then Mirza Mahmud Ahmad can
himself choose someone else from his Jama‘at as judge. Otherwise,
he should take legal action against Maulana Muhammad Ali for falsely
accusing him of fabrication and defaming his name.
Maulana Muhammad Ali said that he had already declared under oath
that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had made this fabrication and he invited
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad also to take an oath. He declared:
“I have no wish whatsoever to humiliate Mirza Mahmud Ahmad,
nor am I at all seeking to ruin him. But I cannot tolerate the humiliation
of the religion of Islam or the ruination of the true teachings
of the Promised Messiah. My demand is not a difficult one. It is
that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad make a sworn statement that in the year
1901 he changed his own belief as to whether or not the Promised
Messiah was a prophet, or else he should desist from this fabrication
against the Promised Messiah that he changed his belief in 1901.”
Summary of efforts
However, matters continued in the same vein. Then in Paigham
Sulh on 21 August 1946, in boldly printed words, Maulana Muhammad
Ali again repeated his demand for a debate and mubahila.
The heading of this article was as follows:
“I am prepared to hold with the leader of the Qadian Jama‘at:
(1) a debate, (2) a mubahila,
on the question: Did the Promised Messiah change his belief in the
year 1901 about whether he himself claimed prophethood or about
prophethood ending with the Holy Prophet Muhammad.”
As the accompanying announcement issued by him was a summary of
all the preceding events, it is reproduced below:
“1. We and the Qadian Jama‘at both agree that when
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be the Promised Messiah in
1891, he denied claiming to be a prophet. He announced his claim
as that of being a muhaddas, declared prophethood as having
ended with the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and denounced as an imposter
and liar anyone claiming prophethood after the Holy Prophet Muhammad.
The disagreement between us and the head of the Qadian Jama‘at
is that we hold that the Promised Messiah adhered to this position
for the rest of his life, but the head of the Qadian Jama‘at
writes that the Promised Messiah changed his belief in 1901 by laying
claim to be a prophet himself and opening the door of prophethood
after the Holy Prophet Muhammad.
2. It is obvious that the burden of proof regarding the change
in claim in 1901 lies upon the Qadiani leader. I have invited
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, again and again, to a debate on this issue.
I went so far as to say that I would nominate some five or seven
judges all from among his own followers. But he does not respond.
3. Seventy men from among us, including myself, made a sworn
declaration [in 1915] that we had taken the baiat
of Hazrat Mirza sahib before 1901, and the belief which we held
at the time of our pledge, namely, that prophethood ended with
the Holy Prophet Muhammad, was the belief we held unchangingly
for the rest of his life. He did not change his belief about prophethood
in 1901.
4. Today more than thirty years have elapsed that we have been
demanding that seventy members of the Qadian Jama‘at make
the sworn statement that they took the baiat before
1901 believing that Hazrat Mirza sahib claimed to be a muhaddas,
but that in 1901 they changed their belief and started to believe
that he was a prophet because in that year they came to know that
he had changed his belief. But the entire Qadian Jama‘at
has been silent upon this demand for thirty years.
5. I then had recourse to the last resort allowed in Islam, namely,
that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad should undertake a mubahila with
me, on the question whether Hazrat Mirza sahib changed his belief
in 1901 about claiming prophethood. But he still remained silent.
6. However, some followers of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad keep on demanding
from me if I am prepared to enter into a mubahila with
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. To dispel all doubts, I announce again the
following.
7. On the question whether the Promised Messiah changed his belief
in 1901, I am prepared to hold a debate with Mirza Mahmud Ahmad,
and I am willing to appoint as judges only persons from among
his own followers, one of whom would be Sir Zafrullah Khan.
8. By having judges, it does not imply that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
must personally accept their verdict and change his own beliefs.
But the misconception in people’s minds will be cleared. If he
considers it beneath his dignity to have judges, I will withdraw
this condition, and hold an unconditional debate with him, whether
it is in a public gathering or in writing. He can set any other
conditions as he wishes. My only proviso is that the topic of
the debate will be restricted to the question whether Hazrat Mirza
sahib changed his belief in 1901 or not.
9. I am prepared to hold a mubahila on this issue with
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, if he so wishes. The mubahila can be
between just himself and me, or other people from both sides can
be included who joined the Movement before 1901.
If Mirza Mahmud Ahmad does not regard 1901 as the date of change
of claim, then whatever other date he proposes for this change
I am prepared to hold a debate and mubahila with reference
to that date. I ask Mirza Mahmud Ahmad himself to reply to this
announcement.”
Challenge by a Qadiani for oath
However, there was no response from Mirza Mahmud Ahmad himself
to this announcement and demand, but one of his followers, Seth
Abdullah Allahdin of Sikanderabad, who had been spreading misconceptions
earlier by announcing challenges with offers of great rewards, made
the following announcement in Al-Fazl, dated 26 October:
“Maulvi Muhammad Ali sahib believes that Hazrat Mirza
sahib was a mujaddid and the Promised Messiah but not a prophet,
nor can any person become a kafir by denying him, and this
was also the belief of Hazrat Mirza sahib. We have challenged him
that if he announces his belief in a public meeting under oath,
then we will pay him Rs. 5000 in cash in the same meeting, and if
within a year there does not befall him some examplary wrath from
God, in which human hands play no part, then a sum of Rs. 50,000
will be paid in addition. Anyone who can persuade him to accept
this challenge will also receive Rs. 5000 in cash.”
After that Seth Allahdin wrote to Shaikh Muhammad Inam-ul-Haq,
the Anjuman’s missionary there, that if he would have this announcement
published in Paigham Sulh, then he (Seth Allahdin) was prepared
to deposit the total of Rs. 60,000 with Abdul Karim Babu Khan of
Sikanderabad.
Upon this, Shaikh Inam-ul-Haq wrote to Maulana Muhammad Ali, and
he responded by announcing in Paigham Sulh of 11 December
1946 that he would take the required oath during the forthcoming
annual gathering and therefore Seth Allahdin should deposit the
promised sum with Abdul Karim Babu Khan. But Seth Allahdin never
fulfilled his promise.
M. Muhammad Ali takes oath in speech, December 1946
On 25 December 1946, which was the first day of the annual gathering,
Maulana Muhammad Ali delivered a speech on the topic ‘The demand
for oath by the Jama‘at of Qadian’. In this speech he fully
expounded the issues of prophethood and of unbelief (kufr)
and Islam, and went over all the events which have been mentioned
above. He said that when he invited Mirza Mahmud Ahmad for the last
time in August 1946 to hold a debate or a mubahila, Mirza
Mahmud Ahmad gave no reply directly, but his private secretary wrote
letters to some of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s followers in which it was
said:
“Let him quote any writing in which I have said that the
Promised Messiah had changed his belief (‘aqída)
about prophethood. I only wrote that the Promised Messiah changed
the definition (ta‘ríf) of prophethood.”
At this, Maulana Muhammad Ali had immediately published in Paigham
Sulh examples of quotations from Mirza Mahmud Ahmad in which
he had written many times that the Promised Messiah, either in 1901
or in 1902, had changed his belief about prophethood.{footnote
6} But there was no answer from Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. Then
Maulana Muhammad Ali, mentioning in detail the demands of the khalifa
of Qadian and his adherent Seth Abdullah Allahdin, related the
following history.
He said that he had already declared under oath in 1915, as one
of a group of seventy members of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at,
that the Promised Messiah did not change his belief in 1901. In
response, not even one member of the Qadian Jama‘at had dared
take an oath stating the contrary to this. The second time, in 1944,
when the Lahore and Qadian communities of the village of Data (District
Hazara) came to an agreement that each would ask its head to take
an oath about his beliefs, he had again taken the oath, with wording
formulated by them, as follows:
“I, Muhammad Ali, head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at,
knowing Allah the Most High to be witness to this, Who holds
my life in His hands, do swear that to my knowledge the belief
of the Promised Messiah from 1901 to 1908 was that a person
not believing in him is still a Muslim and within the fold
of Islam, and his denier is not a kafir or excluded from the
fold of Islam. The same has also been my belief, from 1901
till this day, on the basis of the belief of the Promised Messiah.”{footnote
7} |
But Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had not responded to the same demand upon
him by that branch of his Jama‘at to take a corresponding
oath about his beliefs. Then his follower Seth Abdullah Allahdin
started publishing, again and again, demands for an oath with offer
of financial reward. Now that Maulana Muhammad Ali had published
in the paper that he was prepared to accept the challenge to take
the oath, Seth Allahdin became silent and did not deposit the reward-money
as he had promised to do. In short, concluded Maulana Muhammad Ali,
as Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was not willing to take part in a debate or
a mubahila, it must have become clear to everyone that those
who attribute this change of claim to the Promised Messiah are making
a fabrication.
In this speech Maulana Muhammad Ali took the oath in the words
demanded by Seth Allahdin as follows:
“I, Muhammad Ali, head of the Lahore Ahmadiyya Jama‘at,
do swear that my belief is that Hazrat Mirza [Ghulam Ahmad]
sahib of Qadian is a mujaddid and the Promised Messiah,
but not a prophet, nor can any person become a kafir
or excluded from the fold of Islam by denying him. This was
also the belief of Hazrat Mirza sahib.
O God, if I have uttered falsehood in this oath taken in
Thy name, then send upon me from Thyself such exemplary punishment
as has no human hand in it, and from which the world would
learn how stern and terrible is God’s retribution for one
who deceives His creatures by swearing falsely in His name.”{footnote
8}
|
These events have been recorded here in some detail to make it
abundantly clear that Maulana Muhammad Ali, within his lifetime,
established his arguments comprehensively and conclusively upon
the leader of the Qadian Jama‘at, proving the utter falsity
of the Qadiani beliefs, but the other side never had the courage
to confront him.
Epilogue 1954: Mirza Mahmud Ahmad retracts his extremist beliefs
in court
Before closing this section it is also essential to refer to Maulana
Muhammad Ali’s prophetic-like statement which has been published
many times before:
“They (the Qadianis) would either, at last, give up the
belief in the prophethood of the Promised Messiah or formulate a
separate kalima and a separate religion for themselves.”{footnote
9}
This prediction, which Maulana Muhammad Ali made based on his complete
trust in Allah’s support and full faith in the truth of his beliefs,
was fulfilled after his death in a most remarkable manner that is
now a part of history. In March and April 1953 there erupted a strong
wave of opposition against the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan,
leading to serious disturbances and rioting. By the middle of April
the situation had became so dangerous that the Central Government
imposed martial law in Lahore. After that, not only did the Provincial
Government of the Punjab fall but a group of anti-Ahmadiyya religious
leaders was arrested and put behind bars. To investigate the causes
of these disturbances, Chief Justice Muhammad Munir was appointed
to head a Court of Inquiry. The report of this court was published,
and is commonly known as the Munir Report.{footnote 10}
To change one’s beliefs while testifying in court is a matter of
much disgrace and humiliation, as the Promised Messiah has written
about his opponent Maulvi Muhammad Husain Batalvi in his book Tiryaq-ul-Qulub.
It was the plan of Allah the Most High that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s
extremist beliefs be exposed in court. Previously he used to claim
that:
“all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into
his [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s] 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.”
(See his books: A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 35; The Truth About
the Split, pages 55–56).
But now in court he stated:
“No one who does not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib
can be taken as out of the pale of Islam.”{footnote 11}
The conclusions of the Court of Inquiry on this matter are given
in its Report in the following words:
“The question, therefore, is reduced to this whether Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad ever claimed to be the receiver of such wahi
as amounted to wahi-i-nubuwwat. … whether he claimed for
his wahi the status of wahi-i-nubuwwat, omission to
believe in which involves certain spiritual and ultramundane consequences.
Before us the Ahmadis and their present head{footnote
12} have, after careful consideration, taken the stand
that he did not … and that an omission to believe in Mirza Sahib’s
wahi does not take a person outside the pale of Islam.” (Pages
188, 189)
“On the question whether the Ahmadis consider the other Musalmans
to be kafirs in the sense of their being outside the pale
of Islam, the position taken before us is that such persons are
not kafirs and that the word kufr, when used in
the literature of the Ahmadis in respect of such persons, is used
in the sense of minor heresy and that it was never intended to
convey that such persons were outside the pale of Islam.” (Page
199)
Similarly, regarding the question of saying funeral prayers for
non-Ahmadi Muslims the Report says:
“The position finally adopted by the Ahmadis before us
on the question of funeral prayers is that an opinion of Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad has now been discovered which permits the Ahmadis to join
the funeral prayers of the other Muslims who are not mukazzibs
and mukaffirs of Mirza Sahib.” (Page 199)
As regards the statement of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad before the Inquiry
mentioned in the above extract, that “an opinion of Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad has now been discovered which permits the Ahmadis to join
the funeral prayers of the other Muslims”, it must be pointed out
that Maulana Muhammad Ali had been putting forward this opinion
of the Promised Messiah, and many references like it, to Mirza Mahmud
Ahmad ever since the Split took place in 1914, but he had never
given any satisfactory response.
Likewise, previously the Qadian Jama‘at had declared that
the differences of belief between Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis are fundamental.{footnote 13} But when this question was asked
of him in the Court of Inquiry Mirza Mahmud Ahmad replied: “The
differences are not fundamental but secondary”.{footnote
14}
To conclude, Maulana Muhammad Ali’s pronouncement that the Qadianis
will either have to create a different religion and separate themselves
from the Muslim community, or they will have to change their beliefs,
was fulfilled word for word, after his death.
Footnotes
(To return to the referring text for any footnote,
click on the footnote number.)
[1]. This was a term they used for members of the Lahore
Jama‘at, coining it from the name of the Anjuman’s Urdu
organ Paigham Sulh.
[2]. It appears that while the fault was of two local
British officials of the Punjab Government, yet destruction was
wrought not only upon Britain but also upon countless innocent
men, women and children of Poland, Belgium, Holland, Denmark,
Norway, and other European countries!
[3]. We have reproduced here the original English wording
of this note as it appeared in the Review of Religions,
February 1914 issue.
[4]. These have been quoted earlier in this book in
the closing section of Chapter 3.1.
[5]. We have quoted the wording of these three beliefs
from the Qadiani group’s own English translation of Mirza Mahmud
Ahmad’s book A’inah-i Sadaqat, entitled The Truth About
the Split, pages 55–56.
[6]. For example, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote: “…as regards
his belief (‘aqída) about prophethood which he expressed
in Tiryaq-ul-Qulub, later revelation made him change it”
(Al-Qaul-ul-Fasl, p. 24), and “…the issue of prophethood
became clear to him in 1900 or 1901, and as Ayk Ghalati Ka
Izala was published in 1901, in which he has proclaimed his
prophethood most forcefully, this shows that he made a change
in his belief (‘aqída) in 1901” (Haqiqat-un-Nubuwwat,
p. 121).
[7]. This oath was published in Paigham Sulh,
21 September 1944.
[8]. This speech was published in Paigham Sulh,
dated 15 January 1947. The oath had also appeared earlier in Paigham
Sulh dated 11 December 1946.
[9]. See Maulana Muhammad Ali’s Urdu book Tahrik-i
Ahmadiyyat, chapter 4, pages 165–166, and the English translation
of this chapter published as True Conception of the Ahmadiyya
Movement.
[10]. Its full title is: Report of the Court of
Inquiry constituted under Punjab Act II of 1954 to enquire into
the Punjab Disturbances of 1953, published in Lahore by the
Superintendent, Government Printing, Punjab, 1954.
[11]. Statement of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad before the Court
of Inquiry, 14 January 1954. It is reproduced in Urdu in the Qadiani
publication Tahqiqi ‘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, page 28.
[12]. The Qadiani Jama‘at and Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
are meant.
[13]. Al-Fazl, 21 August 1917.
[14]. The Qadiani publication Tahqiqi ‘adalat main
Hazrat Imam Jama‘at Ahmadiyya ka Bayan, p. 16.
|