• Owner

The Anti-Ahmadiyya Deception

Updated: Sep 21, 2019


In the name of Allah. Most Gracious, Ever Merciful. 

The Rise of Lies: 

Please read the first 15 lines on this site: 

http://alhafeez.org/rashid/overview.htm

It is stated there: 

"A commission of inquiry consisting of Members of British Parliament, Church Officials and Journalists, came to India in 1868 to find out ways and means of controlling this spirit of jihad. In 1870 they submitted their report entitling "THE ARRIVAL OF BRITISH EMPIRE IN INDIA."

However, no evidence whatsoever for the existence of this alleged report anywhere is offered on the site, so let us carefully examine what we have been told. There should be a definite article 'THE' before the word 'BRITISH'. This is a violation of the basic rules of English grammar, indicating that it was not a regular English speaker who composed this title.  Moreover, the word 'ARRIVAL' is from an Indian perspective, a report for the British Government being more likely to have composed a title for such a report along the lines of:  "Establishment of the British Empire in India". 

The definite article THE (AL in Arabic) is missing from the Urdu language, indicating that the liar/s were probably Urdu speakers who weren't proficient in the English language, and resident in the Indian subcontinent. 

The same allegation is found on another anti-Ahmadiyya site: 

http://www.anti-ahmadiyya.org/en/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=77

People generally need to improve on the ability to discern truth from falsehood. The accusation of being a british agent reminds me to some extent of the following verse: 

[12:17] "And they came to their father in the evening, weeping. They said, ‘O our father, we sent forth racing with one another, and left Joseph with our things, and the wolf devoured him, but thou wilt not believe us even if we speak the truth.’ And they came with false blood on his shirt. He said, ‘Nay, but your souls have made a great thing appear light in your eyes. So now comely patience is good for me. And it is Allah alone Whose help is to be sought against what you assert.’" 

Though I am not aware of any literal 'weeping' by 'the leaders of disbelief' such as maulvi muhammad hussain batalvi sahib in the time of Ahmad a.s. in the 1890's or so, there was a suspicious show of weeping, supposedly for the love of Allah, whilst publicly repenting from sins, a century later, in the 1990's, by mirza tahir sahib. This may have been in accordance with the verse, and Allah knows best: 

[12:9] ‘Kill Joseph or cast him out to some distant land, so that your father’s favour may become exclusively yours and you can thereafter become a righteous people.’ Here is a link which may help one to start improving on one's ability to discern truth from falsehood, as envious liars and devious deceivers do arise from time to time:

https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=637508&p=4462356

It states there: "we are defining “fake news” as those news stories that are false: the story itself is fabricated, with no verifiable facts, sources or quotes."

Bias makes it easier for people to uncritically accept 'fake news' which confirms their biases. I have learnt that an attempt to find the alleged report was futile, as no trace of it could be found anywhere, just as one would expect. Allah s.w.t. has admonished us: 

[5:8] "O ye who believe! be steadfast in the cause of Allah, bearing witness in equity; and let not a people’s enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice. Be (always) just, that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah. Surely, Allah is aware of what you do." 


However, not acting upon this instruction, the fabricator/s perpetrated this act of manifest deception, and many non-Ahmadis continue to believe in such unfounded myths due to their bias against the Promised Messiah a.s. resulting from the fatwas of kufr and dajl issued by anti-ahmadiyya maulvis on the basis of an erroneous conception of the absolute finality of Prophethood, and erroneous beliefs such as the literal return by means of a physical descent of Isa a.s. from somewhere in the sky etc.

Anti-Ahmadis continue to promote false ahadith and erroneous, even criminal, commentaries and misinterpretations of the Noble Qur'an which incite the readers to hatred and lead to acts of violence against others. A large part of the problem is the 'incorrect labelling' of ahadith as 'sahih', as I explain in some detail in other articles. 

Incidentally, it ought to be pointed out that Khalifatul Masih II r.a. had advised the members of the Community that we should not make the mistake of considering all non-Ahmadi muslims as our enemies. He mentioned jama'at-e-islami in particular as our enemies. Though there were others, the situation became worse following the scholars from the reported 72 sects uniting in opposition to the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at in 1973/74 to declare us as 'non-Muslim'. This unfortunately led to new generations of muslims growing up with the indoctrination of the false label of 'kafir' being applied to Ahmadi Muslims. 

Thus, those who were born just before and after the beginning of the 15th century of Islam in 1979, even more so in pakistan, and are about 50 years of age or less, have being brought up with more intense indoctrination against Ahmadi Muslims, with the joint declaration, in 1973, by 72 'muslim' sects, as reported, of Ahmadis being 'non-Muslims' being made a part of the pakistani constitution since 1974. However, this situation does not have to continue for a long time: 

[60:7] "It may be that Allah will bring about love between you and those of them with whom you are now at enmity; and Allah is All-Powerful; and Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful." Allah s.w.t. states: 

[Q. 33:70,71]  O ye who believe! fear Allah, and say the straightforward word. He will reform your conduct for you and forgive you your sins. And whoso obeys Allah and His Messenger, shall surely attain a mighty success.

[Q. 9:119]  "O you who have believed! Fear Allah and be among those who are truthful.

[Q. 3:17]  "The patient, the true, the obedient, those who spend [in the way of Allah], and those who seek forgiveness before dawn." 

[Q. 2:283]  "…And do not conceal testimony, for whoever conceals it – his heart is indeed sinful…." 

[Q. 2:42]  "And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it]." 

[Q. 24:7] "…The curse of Allaah be upon him if he should be among the liars." 

[Q. 40:28] "And a believing man from among the people of Pharaoh, who concealed his faith, said, “Will you slay a man because he says, ‘My Lord is Allah,’ while he has brought you clear proofs from your Lord? And if he be a liar, on him will be (the sin & consequence of) his lie; but if he is truthful, then some of that which he threatens you with will surely befall you. Certainly Allah guides not one who is a transgressor, a liar."

The above verse is cited by Ahmadi Muslims to argue that there is no need to try to kill a claimant to being a Prophet. If he is a liar, he will bear the consequences of it, and if true, then people ought to fear the consequences of their rejection. Both of these consequences are covered in Suratul Haaqqah [Q. 69] among others.  The Demise of Tawheed:

The Jewish objections against the Israelite Messiah Isa a.s. relate to his alleged illegitimate birth and his alleged accursed death on a cross, along with some others. This is based on their scripture stating that those who die and are hung on a cross are accursed of God [Deut 21:23]. There is some similarity with the Muslim Messiah. His rise is alleged to be due to british patronage, and his writings mentioning the relative merits of the british government in comparison with others of his time, as well as reference to his non-Ahmadi family helping the British against the Sikhs, and his teaching of not rebelling against a government which gave citizens the right to practice ones' religion of choice, are used against him, even though other muslim scholars also wrote similar things, and did not initiate any effective muslim 'Jihad' against the British rule. 

Interestingly, despite his writings of a peaceful nature, his chief ahlul-hadith opponent Maulvi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi Sahib had tried to incite the government against him by falsely alleging that he would rise against them like the so-called 'Sudanese mahdi' had done, defeating the British in Khartoum 1885. Due to the concerns of the government, Ahmad a.s. had to write so as make his views on Jihad clear, to dispel their fears. For about a century, his writings against offensive Jihad without meeting the stipulated Qur'anic conditions/reasons to justify fighting, have falsely used as evidence by those who uphold the unislamic and corrupt teaching of 'offensive Jihad' to support the false allegation that he was a British agent. 

Now, there is a somewhat similar allegation relating to the demise of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a.s., which is also alleged to be an accursed one. His Ahmadi Muslim Companions r.a. truthfully reported that he had suffered from diarrhoea prior to his demise, and this did not bother them as they did not idolise him. They were Monotheists, even if the ahmadis of our time, especially those running the current nizam (organisation), are not Monotheists, idolising leading personalities, and being untruthful, as I have shown in my article on 'Ahmadiyya Conflicts'. This is so even though the Promised Messiah a.s. had earnestly prayed to Allah that he should not become idolised as Isa a.s. had being idolised: 

[2:133] "Were you present when death came to Jacob, when he said to his sons, ‘What will you worship after me?’ They answered, ‘We will worship thy God, the God of thy fathers, Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac, the One God; and to Him we submit ourselves.’" 

The Messengers were humans who ate food (5:76, 21:9, 25:9,22) and had to answer calls of nature. The firm monotheist Ibrahim a.s. said that Allah 'gives me food and gives me drink, and when I fall ill, it is He Who cures me' [26:82,83]. There is (probably) no human who is exempt from stomach illness, even when and where fridges and filters abound. Diarrhoea is a rather common illness even in our time. And whilst the Jews had a verse in their Torah stating that being hung is an accursed death, there is no such verses in the Qur'an. There are however some ahadith stating that those who die from stomach illness are martyrs.

  The anti-Ahmadiyya objectors of his demise only manifest their lack of understanding of Monotheism (Tauheed), confirming that real Tauheed manifests itself amongst truthful Ahmadi Muslims. Any so-called muslim scholar who raises an objection concerning his demise is unworthy of being trusted on matters relating to religious guidance. However, the exaggeration, some lies (e.g. about him allegedly dying on the toilet, without providing evidence for this, whereas the eyewitnesses all state that he passed away on the bed), and widespread mockery of him due to his illness, may itself been seen as an indication that he was a true Prophet, as several verses inform us of the mockery of Messengers, as for instance: 

[36:30] "Alas for My servants! there comes not a Messenger to them but they mock at him." 

One may want to question his Companions r.a. for apparently not taking into consideration the fact that most people are ignorant of the requirements of Islamic Tawheed, so they ought not to have reported the events surrounding his illness in as much detail as was done:  [12:106] "And most of them believe not in Allah without (also) attributing partners (to Him)."  But it may all be for the best in the final analysis, as it may serve to separate true monotheists from the idolators. And Allah knows best.  The Kafir Controversy: 

This is a dispute which occurs between Ahmadis of our Jama'at with the members of the 'lahore ahmadiyya movement', and also used by anti-Ahmadis for the purpose of generating a smokescreen objection. 

Let us first consider some revelations of the Promised Messiah a.s. in which non-Ahmadis are referred to as 'muslims': 

"... I will cause an increase of your true and sincere friends and shall bless their lives and their properties and they will grow in number and they will prevail over the other muslims - who are jealous of you and are hostile to you - till the Day of Judgment ... " [Announcement of February 20, 1886, Majmu‘ah Ishtiharat, vol. 1, pp. 102–103]

"... Do not turn away from Allah’s creatures and be not tired of people and deal kindly with the muslims. ..." [Karamat-us-Sadiqin, p. 54, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 7, p. 96]

[Persian] When the reign of the Messiah, the monarch begins, the muslims who were muslims in name only will be reconverted to Islam. [Haqiqatul-Wahi, p. 107, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 22, p. 110.] 

[Urdu] Khwajah Hasan Nizami has a long time to live and will do great work for the muslims. [al-Fadl, vol. 40/6, no. 238, October 11, 1952, p. 2, with reference to newspaper Munadi, September 1952, p. 4–7]

However, there is also a revelation of the Promised Messiah a.s. referring to other muslims not being (true or perfect) Muslims [citation needed].

Khalifa-tul-Masih II r.a. stated: 

“Our view is that if a person conforms to the tenets and teaching of Islam to a given extent, he is entitled to be called a muslim. But when he falls below even that point, then although he may be called a muslim, he cannot be regarded as a perfect Muslim.” (Political Solidarity of Islam, Page 9)

Thus, it is not our attitude to highlight and emphasise differences unnecessarily, but when called upon to state our view on a matter, it becomes incumbent upon us to declare the truth honestly and with straight-forwardness. Central to this debate is the issue of the type of Prophet that the Promised Messiah and Imam Mahdi a.s. was, for according to the Qur'an, rejection of a Prophet/Messenger falls in the category of disbelief [4:145], viz: 

[4:150-2] "Surely, those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers and desire to make a distinction between Allah and His Messengers, and say, ‘We believe in some and disbelieve in others,’ and desire to take a way in between, these indeed are veritable disbelievers, and We have prepared for the disbelievers an humiliating punishment. And as for those who believe in Allah and in all of His Messengers and make no distinction between any of them, these are they whom He will soon give their rewards. And Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful." 

It is established from Ahmadiyya sources that the Promised Messiah a.s. had, initially, and for some time, refused to declare that anyone who rejected him became a kafir i.e. disbeliever, but only so if the other person had declared him a kafir first, upon which a hadith of the Prophet s.a. would apply that he himself would become a kafir by declaring him a liar and us as disbelievers and non-Muslims. This justifiable retort would not be an objectionable declaration, as it is deters people from hastening towards doing takfir against those who affirm the Islamic Kalima Shahadah. Whilst Tawheed is the primary aspect of the Kalima Shahadah, and even the 'Quranis' declare this, I would still consider them as muslims even though they don't openly declare the second aspect of the Kalima Shahadah, because they do believe it in their heart, and Allah looks at the heart. However, belief in and acting on the message of every Prophet is essential for right guidance and doing away with the major errors of the time. Those who act righteously and reform themselves are enabled to increase in right guidance, whilst those who reject them lag behind and are liable to lapse into wrongdoing. 

However this initial position had changed sometime after non-Ahmadi maulvis had incorrectly labelled him and his followers as 'kafir' in their hostile fataawa. Whilst the hostile mullahs are entitled to dissociate themselves from us and declare us kuffaar due to our belief in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a.s. as the Promised Messiah a.s., we are also entitled to apply the same label on them. We are merely stating a fact, that we accept something as a matter of belief (in an unseen truth), which others reject, and rejection is kufr in Arabic. What other name can we give that truthfully describes this state of affairs? Whilst we simply state the evident truth that someone else has rejected the message of Ahmadiyyat, it turns out that the hostile anti-Ahmadi mullahs who gathered together to declare Ahmadi Muslims as kuffaar did so incorrectly. Ahmadi Muslim believers don't reject anything which is made evident from the Qur'an and the established Sunnah, and our aqeedah is in line with it, so the declarations in 1973/74 that we were kuffaar and non-Muslims, according to the representatives of 72 sects (as reported by newspapers of the time), were false, both in the eyes of Allah, as well in the eyes of those who have/had proper knowledge of Islam. The description of kufr in itself is not always a negative thing, for true believers in Allah are those who reject all that which falls in the category of taaghut (the devil, idols, false deities, powers of evil, tyranny) or kufr bit taaghut in Arabic [2:256]. Moreover, the Ahmadi position is a nuanced one, as there are different types or levels of kufr, and if a person rejects a truth because he or she didn't even hear it, or was presented it in a false and misleading manner, it might be argued that he or she had only rejected what was false, and not the actual message or Islam or the Ahmadiyya interpretation of Islam. How far this argument is acceptable in the eyes of Allah, He alone knows best. However, one may suffer from some of the consequences of not investigating the matter properly by oneself.

There is another perspective to consider on this issue. It is important, when making decisions, such as about marital relations, to know the religious beliefs of the prospective spouse. Those outside of the Ahmadiyya Jama'at are often not suitable for marriage for several reasons, such as their animosity to Ahmadiyyat, and their views and attitudes not being reformed by Ahmadiyya teachings. Even if they are not themselves hostile to Ahmadiyya Jama'at and its' teachings, they may come under the influence of those who are. They will in practice have to be treated as unbelievers for such purposes if they are not within the Community of Ahmadi Muslim believers. There is thus a practical need to make a distinction between Ahmadi Muslim believers and non-Ahmadis, but not so as to cause offence. Khalifatul-Masih II r.a. issued an instruction to members of the Ahmadiyya Jama'at back in 1923 not to go about openly addressing non-Ahmadis as 'kafir', as doing so unnecessarily hurts their feelings, and is a source 'mischief'.

Also, one should keep in mind that even if and when an Ahmadi Muslim considers another person to be in the category of unbelievers, he/she does not hold to the view that the unbelievers should be treated unkindly or unjustly [60:8], or be killed for disbelief, apostasy or blasphemy etc. Rather, Ahmadis would tend to act on the motto of 'love for all, hatred for none', which also applies to non-Ahmadi muslims as well as non-Muslims. Thus there is no poison or venom in an Ahmadi holding or even stating such a view or opinion. However, when a non-Ahmadi views and declares someone as a 'kafir', he/she may, or may not, entertain such views, and it may lead to hatred and intolerance, and even turn criminal. Hence the attitude of 'takfirism' is a far bigger issue in the non-Ahmadi muslim world, and does need to be addressed dispassionately, as some muslims try to do. 


The issue of preventing people from considering and referring to themselves as Muslims or Believers is a somewhat separate one, as there is absolutely no compulsion in religion [2:256]. The hypocrites are not prevented from referring to themselves as muslims by the Qur'an, nor did the Prophet Muhammad s.a. prevent them from doing so in Medina, to my knowledge. Moreover, whilst we may believe that Ahmadis alone 'can' now be 'true Muslims' (on conditions, of course), as per one recorded revelation (in Tadhkirah), there are also other recorded revelations referring to non-Ahmadis as 'muslims' (in Tadhkirah). I personally understand this to mean that they are referred to as 'muslims' in the sense of someone who utters the Kalima Shahadah and adheres to some of the requirements of Muslim faith and practice, but not to 'all' the religious requirements of true Islam, both in terms of correct beliefs, as well as in terms of correct practices. 


This is my view on this matter at the moment, which is subject to correction in the light of better information, as always. 


Harsh Language: 

The Promised Messiah a.s. wrote: 


"We seek refuge with God against defaming righteous divines and civilised respectable people, whether they are Muslims or Christians or Aryas. We consider all of them worthy of honour. We are not concerned even with foolish people. Our severe language is employed only against those who have become notorious on account of their vile language and foul-mouthed utterances. We always mention in good terms those who are good and are not given to abuse and we honour them and love them like brothers." (Lujjatun Nur, p. 61)

"In this book and in my other books there is no harsh word or indication against those respectable people who do not descend to abuse and meanness." (Ayyamus Sulh, title page)


"My words had assumed some severity against my opponents in my writings, but I was not the one to start such severity. Those writings were undertaken in reply to the severe attacks of my opponents. They had used such harsh and abusive language as called for some severity. This can be perceived by the comparison which I have instituted between the harsh language used by my opponents - and that used by me in the foreword of my book which I have called ''Kitabul Bariyyah'. As I have just stated the harsh language used by me was by way of retort. 


It was my opponents who first used such language against me, I could have endured their harsh language without making a retort to it but I had recourse to a retort on account of two reasons: One, so that my opponents, being faced with severity in reply to their harsh strictures, might change their tactics and might revert in future to the use of civil language; and two, that the general Muslim public should not be aroused by the defamatory and provocative language used by my opponents." (Kitabul Bariyyah, p. 10,11)


In any case, we should try not to be habitually aggressive even towards those who are aggressive towards us, only if it becomes appropriate for their reform, in a bid to check their aggression. Equitable retaliation with the tongue, even if occasionally appropriate and called for, should never become a habit. We should not provoke others, or allow ourselves to be provoked, as a habit. Our habit should be to pray for those who oppose us, that Allah may guide them aright, especially since many or most have erred or have been deliberately misled by wrongdoers, even some of those who may be sincere. In any case, if people don't accept and act upon the much needed guidance that Allah s.w.t. sends for their own benefit, and don't reform their ways and thoughts accordingly, they will naturally suffer the consequences, as for example what is apparent in the condition of muslims in the world today. 


(this article is being developed) 


[19:76] Allah increases in guidance those who follow the guidance. [20:47] Peace be upon those who follow the guidance.

0 views

07795437651

©2019 by Inviting to God. Proudly created with Wix.com