General explanation and answer to the allegation
Amongst the most popular allegations raised against Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib (peace be upon him) is that he abused Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) in his writings and did a heavy character assassination of one of the most beloved Prophets of Allah. The reality however is that during the times of the Promised Messiah, anti-Islam and pro-Christianity literature was on the rise in the Indian subcontinent. Christian priests and other writers launched a heavy assault on the character of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), calling him a "bandit", "rapist", "Child-molester", "mad" and what not! - Allah forbid! In answer to this, the Promised Messiah, attacked the character of Jesus Christ as presented in the Christian faith (as someone who claimed divinity for himself, was disrespectful towards his mother, died an accursed death on the cross etc. - Allah forbid!). However, he made it clear multiple times that his intentions never are to attack Prophet Jesus as believed in Islam. He took them as two different persons to answer the Christian critics of the Holy Prophet (before another misunderstanding rises, it doesn´t mean that there existed two Christs!).
"I state on oath that I bear that true love towards the Messiah which you do not possess and that you have not available to you the light with which I recognize him. There is no doubt that he was a dear and chosen Prophet of God" - Daawat-e-Haq, attached to Haqeeqat-ul-Wahi.
"Claiming as I do, that I am the Promised Messiah and that I bear a resemblance to Hadhrat Eesa, peace be on him, every one would understand that were I to revile him, I would not claim any resemblance to him, for by reviling him, I would confess that I myself was vicious" - Announcement from 27th December 1898.
"It should be remembered that I hold this view concerning the Jesus who claimed to be God and held previous prophets to be thieves and robbers and has said nothing about the Khatam-ul-Anbiya, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, except that he, Jesus, would be followed by false prophets. Such a Jesus is nowhere mentioned in the Holy Qur´an" - Anjaam-e-Aatham, page 13.
"So many books full of vile abuse and defamation of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, have been printed and published the perusal of which makes one’s body tremble. Our heart is so much in tribulation that if these people were to slaughter our children before our eyes and were to cut to pieces our sincere and beloved friends and were to kill us with great humiliation and were to take possession of our belongings, we call God to witness that even in such case we would not suffer so much grief and our heart would not be so severely wounded as we have suffered and endured under this abuse and defamation which has been directed against the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him" - Aaina-e-Kamalaat-e-Islam, page 51.
The point to ponder anyway is, that if indeed the Promised Messiah was bent on abusing Prophets (Allah forbid), then what prevented him from abusing the Holy Prophet (Allah forbid)? And yet, there´s not even a hint of anything such in his writings. We must also bear in mind here that a lot of other Muslim Ulema too employed this method to counter the anti-Islam literature published by Christian writers those days. The first link below contains a few of those examples in writing, and the YouTube link below that too contains examples from the writing of Muslim Ulema of those days......
https://ahmadianswers.com/ahmad/allegations/writings/disrespect/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQQd0JQ7xE4
Even today there´s an ever-present example of this method in the online world. Osama Abdallah, a very famous man of knowledge, originally from Lebanon I think (I used to know him personally a bit some years ago), runs one of the most, or perhaps the most, famous website which answers allegations of Christians and also Jews made against Islam. I quote a few examples from his website....
"Not that his physique in itself is the problem, but it certainly brings into question his harsh standards about giving up everything you have (Matthew 19:21), while he lives off of everything you have, and gets fat and also gets drunk??? It also supports that he really was between Satan and GOD during the his 40 days and nights of temptation. He suffered, and he got very weak that Angels had to come down to help him. And he also had "EVIL DESIRES" and he COVETED during this temptation."
"See how Jesus obeyed Satan and climbed the top of the temple (as tall as a castle) to jump and commit suicide. See also how Jesus coveted the sins of the world for 40 days and 40 nights during his temptation by Satan. Jesus also.... lusted after the sinful kingdoms of the world, and their harlots. He coveted all of them."
Link:
"So many books full of vile abuse and defamation of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, have been printed and published the perusal of which makes one’s body tremble. Our heart is so much in tribulation that if these people were to slaughter our children before our eyes and were to cut to pieces our sincere and beloved friends and were to kill us with great humiliation and were to take possession of our belongings, we call God to witness that even in such case we would not suffer so much grief and our heart would not be so severely wounded as we have suffered and endured under this abuse and defamation which has been directed against the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him" - Aaina-e-Kamalaat-e-Islam, page 51.
The point to ponder anyway is, that if indeed the Promised Messiah was bent on abusing Prophets (Allah forbid), then what prevented him from abusing the Holy Prophet (Allah forbid)? And yet, there´s not even a hint of anything such in his writings. We must also bear in mind here that a lot of other Muslim Ulema too employed this method to counter the anti-Islam literature published by Christian writers those days. The first link below contains a few of those examples in writing, and the YouTube link below that too contains examples from the writing of Muslim Ulema of those days......
https://ahmadianswers.com/ahmad/allegations/writings/disrespect/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQQd0JQ7xE4
Even today there´s an ever-present example of this method in the online world. Osama Abdallah, a very famous man of knowledge, originally from Lebanon I think (I used to know him personally a bit some years ago), runs one of the most, or perhaps the most, famous website which answers allegations of Christians and also Jews made against Islam. I quote a few examples from his website....
"Not that his physique in itself is the problem, but it certainly brings into question his harsh standards about giving up everything you have (Matthew 19:21), while he lives off of everything you have, and gets fat and also gets drunk??? It also supports that he really was between Satan and GOD during the his 40 days and nights of temptation. He suffered, and he got very weak that Angels had to come down to help him. And he also had "EVIL DESIRES" and he COVETED during this temptation."
"See how Jesus obeyed Satan and climbed the top of the temple (as tall as a castle) to jump and commit suicide. See also how Jesus coveted the sins of the world for 40 days and 40 nights during his temptation by Satan. Jesus also.... lusted after the sinful kingdoms of the world, and their harlots. He coveted all of them."
Link:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/trinity_crucified.htm#king_kong
I´ve censored the above passage slightly and left out a word or two, as otherwise it might´ve been a little too unsuitable for our readers. So you can imagine the stuff that the website contains about Judeo-Christian Prophets. Have some more below.
"..... three-year old slave girls were also ordered to be raped by Moses."
Link:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/age3.htm
I´ve censored the above passage slightly and left out a word or two, as otherwise it might´ve been a little too unsuitable for our readers. So you can imagine the stuff that the website contains about Judeo-Christian Prophets. Have some more below.
"..... three-year old slave girls were also ordered to be raped by Moses."
Link:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/age3.htm
Clarifying a couple of particular passages from the Promised Messiah´s writings
Those of our opponents who at least to some extent understand our explanation on this, raise the objection that in a couple of particular passages of his writings, the Promised Messiah indeed has attacked the Christ as believed in Islam. Let´s turn to the passages......
"Jesus was not any more righteous than other righteous ones of his time. Indeed, Prophet John (the Baptist) was superior to him, because he did not consume alcohol, nor allowed any prostitute to massage his head with perfume purchased from her earnings or touch his body with her hands and hair, or that any unchaste woman should serve him. This is the very reason that God named John the Baptist as "Hasoor", but He did not give the Messiah such a title due to these kind of episodes. Hadhrat Eesa, peace be upon him, repented for his sins at the hands of John the Baptist and became one of his select disciples. This decides the superiority of John the Baptist over Jesus, since it is not proven that John the Baptist ever repented at the hands of anyone" - Dafi-ul-Balaa, Ruhaani Khazaain, volume 20, page 220.
"But, strangely enough, Hadhrat Eesa, peace be upon him, did not act upon his own moral teachings" - Chashma-e-Maseehi (Fountain of Christanity), page 16 of the English translation of the book.
The objection of the opponents is that since the Promised Messiah has used the Islamic word of respect "Hadhrat" here, also used his Islamic name Eesa (instead of Maseeh (Messiah) or Yassu - as the Arabic, Persian, Urdu etc. speaking Christians do) and put the prayer "Alaihi´Salaam (on whom be peace)", he is here referring to the Christ as believed in Islam as he has in these passages failed to draw a distinction between the two characters. However, regardless of what words have been used or what name has been chosen to refer to the Christ, it takes no rocket science to conclude that the person referred to is still the Christ as believed in Christianity - any sane person can conclude that through a brief look at the passages, unless one´s thinking process is agenda-driven.
Reference one: the facts that the Promised Messiah refers to - about the Christ consuming alcohol, allowing prostitutes to massage his head, allowing them to touch him, or being served by unchaste women - are these mentioned in the Qur´an or in any Hadith? Obviously not! The source of all these references itself is the Gospel, how then could his intentions be to insult the noble character of the Christ as presented in Islam? The intentions are as clear as daylight here too!
"..... This is the very reason that God named John the Baptist as "Hasoor" (in the Qur´an), but He did not give the Messiah such a title due to these kind of episodes..... "
Much has been made of this particular phrase, and here too our opponents argue that the person attacked is the Christ as believed in Islam, given the reference to the Qur´an. However, the meaning of this phrase as well is simply this: that if the Christ is as is depicted in the Gospel and as believed in Christianity, then God did not bestow upon him a certain title of respect, which he did in the case of Prophet John (peace be upon him). The argument presented here too is based upon the stories from the Gospel, as from what I understand, "hasoor" is a title reserved for a man who totally stays secluded from ghair-mahram women. The Qur´an or Ahadith obviously do not contain stories of the Christ mixing freely with ghair-mahram women, or does it? So it´s a matter of common sense and of putting your understanding to good use.
I may clarify though, through this, that neither does the passage imply that Prophet John holds a more exalted status than the Christ in (Islam and) our view. On the contrary, the Promised Messiah has termed the Christ as being the Khatam-al-Khulafa (The Seal of the Successors) of Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), meaning that he was the greatest successor to appear amongst the followers of Prophet Moses (reference: English translation of book Haqeeqat-al-Wahi, page 600).
Reference two: again, regardless of what words have been used or what name has been chosen to refer to the Christ, the person meant is clearly the Christ as depicted in the Gospel. Reading the book on either sides of that passage establishes this beyond doubts.
"..... The Gospel, on the other hand, teaches unconditional forgiveness at all times, and thus tramples upon all sense of expediency on which the social structure is based. It only emphasizes the growth of one branch of the 'tree' of human ethics, and completely disregards all the others...... The only pure and perfect teaching is that of the Holy Qur´an, which nourishes all human faculties. It does not emphasize any one aspect, rather it teaches a judicious exercise of both forgiveness and chastisement..... " - Fountain of Christianity, page 16 to 17.
The above passages, separated by myself with full stops in the middle, occur on either sides of the references/phrase that we´re discussing. How on earth could he´ve been referring to the Christ as believed in Islam and then go on to assert the superiority/greatness of the Qur´an - a book which contains countless number of verses full of praise of Jesus Christ? Also, what makes it clear beyond doubts is the mention of the Gospel at the very beginning of the above passages.
*Note: I must give credit to Imam Rabbani sahib (Twitter: @Faran_Rabbani) for recommending me the book 'Refutation of the Allegation of Insult to Jesus Christ' the moment he got to know that I´m preparing to write an article about this issue, and also to Twitter user brother @Khalid_Nawaz1 for finding me the second reference of the two references in the original Urdu book of the Promised Messiah.*
An argument from Hadith
Following all these explanations, many of which are from the writings of the Promised Messiah himself, our non-Ahmadi Muslim opponents refuse to accept this and are still bent on proving that he abused a Prophet of God (Allah forbid!), which is obviously not the case. What their denial tells us, despite such convincing explanations, is that ultimately it comes down to in whom and in what people believe and in whose intentions they trust, or what is intended by someone to be precise. To prove exactly this point, I shall proceed with arguments from the sources in which our opponents too believe.......
"A caller will call from the heavens that the truth is with the Muhammad and a caller from the earth will say that the truth is with Eesa (Jesus)" - Prophet Muhammad, as quoted in Fatawa-i-Hadithiya, Signs of the Coming of the Mahdi.
*Note: I found this Hadith in book 'Unequivocal Clarification Exposing Anti-Ahmadiyya' by brother Raziullah Noman (Twitter: @StudentOfAhmad), where it is available with its original Arabic on page 216 to 217 - quoted there for a different purpose of course. The "Caller from earth" refers to the satan, given his lowly nature.*
It is obvious here that the words/names "Muhammad" and "Eesa/Jesus" stand here as two symbols of two religions, Islam and Christianity, and the meaning of this Hadith is that a caller will argue in the favour of Islam, whereas his opponent, standing on falsehood, will argue that Christianity, the divinity of the Christ and the concept of Trinity is the true creed - the point here being that the Hadith has a meaning, an interpretation attached to it - whichever one of them you come up with. Another possible interpretation here is that Eesa could here also stand for the Christ as believed in Christianity, as opposed to in Islam.
However, if I were to put on the thinking cap of the ignorant opponents of the Promised Messiah, the question here is, does falsehood stand with the Christ? Was he not a Prophet of God who preached the same message as the Holy Prophet? Why then has a distinction been drawn? Did the Christ preach false beliefs, given the implication that truth lies not with him? If we put all the interpretations aside, and also blindly overlook the honour and respect bestowed upon the Christ in other references from Islamic sources, then obviously the conclusion drawn will be exactly the same as is drawn by our opponents in the case of the Promised Messiah´s writings, because in his case too the opponents very cunningly overlook all the stuff written by him in praise and admiration of Jesus Christ. If the same standards to judge are used, then I´m afraid the conclusion drawn will be that in this Hadith, the Holy Prophet has insulted Prophet Jesus and said that falsehood, as opposed to the truth lies with him - Allah forbid!
Arguments from the Holy Qur´an
"They are surely disbelievers who say, 'Allah is the third of three;' ...... " - Qur´an 5:31.
"They have taken their learned men and their monks for lords beside Allah. And so have they taken the Messiah, son of Mary...... " - Qur´an 9:31.
Having highlighted these verses, I shall turn to another set of very strong two verses.
" 'Surely, you and that which you worship beside Allah are the fuel of hell. To it shall you all come.' If these had been gods, they would not have come to it; and all will abide therein" - Qur´an 21:98-99.
*Note: credit must go to Imam Rizwan Khan sahib (Twitter: @Rizwan1770) for helping me understand the interpretation of the above two verses.*
The non-Ahmadi opponents of the Promised Messiah who allege that he insulted Jesus Christ (as believed in Islam), the only logical conclusion for such people would be that, according to the Qur´an too, the Christ will burn in hell - Allah forbid! Now, obviously, this will be a grossly unfair, unjust and biased interpretation, but our opponents have no choice except for accepting an interpretation which will shake the very foundations of Islam, because if in the case of the Promised Messiah his other writings on this subject are not to be taken into consideration, then to turn to other verses of the Holy Qur´an will be a case of massive hypocrisy. For the simple-minded people out there, let me break it into steps.
1. The Holy Qur´an firstly confirms that Christians worship the Christ as a god, and then it also declares that the deities worshipped besides Allah and their worshippers are the "Fuel of hell" and that they shall both burn in hell.
2. The Promised Messiah answers Christian critics of the Holy Prophet by attacking the Christ as depicted in the Gospel.
1A. The Qur´an though clarifies this by declaring the Christ innocent of having any role to play in him being worshipped by his followers. He´s in fact upheld as a Prophet of Allah, a noble man and as one of the very beloved people of the Almighty. The Qur´an even clears him of the false charges of Jews (see verses 4:158-159).
2A. The Promised Messiah though clarifies this by declaring that he never intends to insult the Christ as presented in Islam (as the Christ as believed in Christianity is someone who never even existed to begin with). He´s in fact upheld as a Prophet of Allah, a noble man and as one of the very beloved people of the Almighty. The Promised Messiah even clears him of the false charges of Jews and, in his honour, he states......
So, O´ Moulvis! If you possess the strength to battle with God, then carry on. Was the humble Son of Mary, before me, spared any torment at the hands of the Jews? They even thought that they had crucified him, but God saved him from death upon the cross. So, while there was a time when he was considered no more than a fraud and a liar, another era dawned when his greatness was accepted in the hearts of people...... " - Tajjaliyaat-e-Ilaahiyya, Ruhaani Khazaain, volume 20, page 21-23.
Next up, to establish my point, I shall turn to another very strong set of arguments based on the Qur´an.
"And when the night darkened upon him, he (Prophet Abraham) saw a star. He said, 'This is my Lord!' But when it set, he said, 'I like not those that set.' And when he saw the moon rise with spreading light, he said, 'This is my Lord.' But when it set, he said, 'If my Lord guide me not, I shall surely be of the people who go astray.' And when he saw the sun rise with spreading light, he said, 'This is my Lord, this is the greatest.' But when it set, he said, 'O´ my people, surely I am clear of that which you associate with God. I have turned my face toward Him Who created the heavens and the earth, being ever inclined to God, and I am not of those who associate gods with God' " - Qur´an 6:76-79.
*Note: it should be an utter insult to the intelligence of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him), or any Prophet of Allah, to conclude from these verses that he indeed took a star, the moon or the sun as his gods. A mere thoughtful look on these verses helps us understand this. Even my nieces and nephews know that the stars, the moon and the sun are bound to set at some point of the night or the day. It can never dawn upon someone so suddenly, and certainly not a capable mind like that of Prophet Abraham. The sole purpose of him having done so was to drive home to his idolatrous people the folly of their beliefs, of worshipping created, physical objects that set or disappear etc. This is quite clear from verse 6:78 to 79.*
To make my point, here again I shall draw the parallels by breaking it into parts.
1. The people of Prophet Abraham assert the divinity of idols and objects, and dismiss the idea of the Unity and Oneness of Allah.
1A. The Christian critics of Islam assert the superiority of Jesus Christ, their Son of God, over the Holy Prophet and even publish highly blasphemous stuff against the Holy Prophet.
2. To make his point, Prophet Abraham takes his idolatrous people´s beliefs as they´re and kind of adopts them (outwardly).
2A. To make his point, the Promised Messiah takes the Christian beliefs on the Christ as they´re.
3. Then comes the moment to strike: Prophet Abraham tells his people that if these heavenly bodies indeed are true deities, then they´ve deficiencies such the fact that they set.
3A. Then comes the moment to strike: the Promised Messiah tells Christians that if indeed the Christ is the person as Christians believe him to be, then such-and-such are the deficiencies in the Christ´s character as depicted in the Gospel.
4. Prophet Abraham, having made his point, is quick to disassociate himself from such beliefs and makes clear that he on the contrary believes in the One True God.
4A. The Promised Messiah, having made his point, is quick to point out that not only is the Holy Prophet Muhammad a far superior man than the Christ, but also that Prophet Jesus as presented in Islam is a much greater holy person than as believed in Christianity.
so all this proves that what the Promised Messiah did, the strategy that he employed to counter the attacks of Christian critics of the Holy Prophet, wasn´t any alien to a practice of a great Prophet from the past, and therefore he should never be singled out for having done something of this nature. If anything, the Promised Messiah never (even outwardly) adopted the Christian beliefs, whereas Prophet Abraham did (outwardly) adopt the beliefs of his idolatrous people in order to drive home his point. The former clarified in almost every writing that these are not his own (and neither Islamic) beliefs on Jesus Christ.
One question which I´ve often seen our opponents bring up is that "What was the need for Mirza sahib to resort to such tactics given that Jesus Christ was a Prophet of Allah after all?" Well, I ask, what was the need for the Qur´an to declare that deities worshipped besides Allah will burn in hell, given that the Christ is one of them? Or, what was the need for Prophet Abraham to resort to the tactics of embracing idolatry to convince his opponents, given that idolatry is the greatest sin that a human-being can commit (see Qur´an 4:48 and 4:116)? Whatever justifications and answers you come up with for my questions, just apply the same answer in the case of the Promised Messiah, and we´re done and clear all the way.
Either way, I´ve presented enough evidences and arguments for those who possess knowledge, understanding and a heart that fears Allah, to prove that if an objection can be raised against the Promised Messiah, then, using exactly the same set of arguments and logics, objection can also be raised against the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Prophet Abraham and the Holy Qur´an - and only an ignorant should do that in the case of all.
"Say, 'What think you? If Allah should take away your hearing and your sight, and seal up your hearts, who is the god other than Allah who could bring it back to you?' See how We vary the Signs, yet they turn away" - Qur´an 6:46.
Warm regards,
Rawal Afzal (Twitter: @R_A_Azaad and @The_Traveller27).Those of our opponents who at least to some extent understand our explanation on this, raise the objection that in a couple of particular passages of his writings, the Promised Messiah indeed has attacked the Christ as believed in Islam. Let´s turn to the passages......
"Jesus was not any more righteous than other righteous ones of his time. Indeed, Prophet John (the Baptist) was superior to him, because he did not consume alcohol, nor allowed any prostitute to massage his head with perfume purchased from her earnings or touch his body with her hands and hair, or that any unchaste woman should serve him. This is the very reason that God named John the Baptist as "Hasoor", but He did not give the Messiah such a title due to these kind of episodes. Hadhrat Eesa, peace be upon him, repented for his sins at the hands of John the Baptist and became one of his select disciples. This decides the superiority of John the Baptist over Jesus, since it is not proven that John the Baptist ever repented at the hands of anyone" - Dafi-ul-Balaa, Ruhaani Khazaain, volume 20, page 220.
"But, strangely enough, Hadhrat Eesa, peace be upon him, did not act upon his own moral teachings" - Chashma-e-Maseehi (Fountain of Christanity), page 16 of the English translation of the book.
The objection of the opponents is that since the Promised Messiah has used the Islamic word of respect "Hadhrat" here, also used his Islamic name Eesa (instead of Maseeh (Messiah) or Yassu - as the Arabic, Persian, Urdu etc. speaking Christians do) and put the prayer "Alaihi´Salaam (on whom be peace)", he is here referring to the Christ as believed in Islam as he has in these passages failed to draw a distinction between the two characters. However, regardless of what words have been used or what name has been chosen to refer to the Christ, it takes no rocket science to conclude that the person referred to is still the Christ as believed in Christianity - any sane person can conclude that through a brief look at the passages, unless one´s thinking process is agenda-driven.
Reference one: the facts that the Promised Messiah refers to - about the Christ consuming alcohol, allowing prostitutes to massage his head, allowing them to touch him, or being served by unchaste women - are these mentioned in the Qur´an or in any Hadith? Obviously not! The source of all these references itself is the Gospel, how then could his intentions be to insult the noble character of the Christ as presented in Islam? The intentions are as clear as daylight here too!
"..... This is the very reason that God named John the Baptist as "Hasoor" (in the Qur´an), but He did not give the Messiah such a title due to these kind of episodes..... "
Much has been made of this particular phrase, and here too our opponents argue that the person attacked is the Christ as believed in Islam, given the reference to the Qur´an. However, the meaning of this phrase as well is simply this: that if the Christ is as is depicted in the Gospel and as believed in Christianity, then God did not bestow upon him a certain title of respect, which he did in the case of Prophet John (peace be upon him). The argument presented here too is based upon the stories from the Gospel, as from what I understand, "hasoor" is a title reserved for a man who totally stays secluded from ghair-mahram women. The Qur´an or Ahadith obviously do not contain stories of the Christ mixing freely with ghair-mahram women, or does it? So it´s a matter of common sense and of putting your understanding to good use.
I may clarify though, through this, that neither does the passage imply that Prophet John holds a more exalted status than the Christ in (Islam and) our view. On the contrary, the Promised Messiah has termed the Christ as being the Khatam-al-Khulafa (The Seal of the Successors) of Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), meaning that he was the greatest successor to appear amongst the followers of Prophet Moses (reference: English translation of book Haqeeqat-al-Wahi, page 600).
Reference two: again, regardless of what words have been used or what name has been chosen to refer to the Christ, the person meant is clearly the Christ as depicted in the Gospel. Reading the book on either sides of that passage establishes this beyond doubts.
"..... The Gospel, on the other hand, teaches unconditional forgiveness at all times, and thus tramples upon all sense of expediency on which the social structure is based. It only emphasizes the growth of one branch of the 'tree' of human ethics, and completely disregards all the others...... The only pure and perfect teaching is that of the Holy Qur´an, which nourishes all human faculties. It does not emphasize any one aspect, rather it teaches a judicious exercise of both forgiveness and chastisement..... " - Fountain of Christianity, page 16 to 17.
The above passages, separated by myself with full stops in the middle, occur on either sides of the references/phrase that we´re discussing. How on earth could he´ve been referring to the Christ as believed in Islam and then go on to assert the superiority/greatness of the Qur´an - a book which contains countless number of verses full of praise of Jesus Christ? Also, what makes it clear beyond doubts is the mention of the Gospel at the very beginning of the above passages.
*Note: I must give credit to Imam Rabbani sahib (Twitter: @Faran_Rabbani) for recommending me the book 'Refutation of the Allegation of Insult to Jesus Christ' the moment he got to know that I´m preparing to write an article about this issue, and also to Twitter user brother @Khalid_Nawaz1 for finding me the second reference of the two references in the original Urdu book of the Promised Messiah.*
An argument from Hadith
Following all these explanations, many of which are from the writings of the Promised Messiah himself, our non-Ahmadi Muslim opponents refuse to accept this and are still bent on proving that he abused a Prophet of God (Allah forbid!), which is obviously not the case. What their denial tells us, despite such convincing explanations, is that ultimately it comes down to in whom and in what people believe and in whose intentions they trust, or what is intended by someone to be precise. To prove exactly this point, I shall proceed with arguments from the sources in which our opponents too believe.......
"A caller will call from the heavens that the truth is with the Muhammad and a caller from the earth will say that the truth is with Eesa (Jesus)" - Prophet Muhammad, as quoted in Fatawa-i-Hadithiya, Signs of the Coming of the Mahdi.
*Note: I found this Hadith in book 'Unequivocal Clarification Exposing Anti-Ahmadiyya' by brother Raziullah Noman (Twitter: @StudentOfAhmad), where it is available with its original Arabic on page 216 to 217 - quoted there for a different purpose of course. The "Caller from earth" refers to the satan, given his lowly nature.*
It is obvious here that the words/names "Muhammad" and "Eesa/Jesus" stand here as two symbols of two religions, Islam and Christianity, and the meaning of this Hadith is that a caller will argue in the favour of Islam, whereas his opponent, standing on falsehood, will argue that Christianity, the divinity of the Christ and the concept of Trinity is the true creed - the point here being that the Hadith has a meaning, an interpretation attached to it - whichever one of them you come up with. Another possible interpretation here is that Eesa could here also stand for the Christ as believed in Christianity, as opposed to in Islam.
However, if I were to put on the thinking cap of the ignorant opponents of the Promised Messiah, the question here is, does falsehood stand with the Christ? Was he not a Prophet of God who preached the same message as the Holy Prophet? Why then has a distinction been drawn? Did the Christ preach false beliefs, given the implication that truth lies not with him? If we put all the interpretations aside, and also blindly overlook the honour and respect bestowed upon the Christ in other references from Islamic sources, then obviously the conclusion drawn will be exactly the same as is drawn by our opponents in the case of the Promised Messiah´s writings, because in his case too the opponents very cunningly overlook all the stuff written by him in praise and admiration of Jesus Christ. If the same standards to judge are used, then I´m afraid the conclusion drawn will be that in this Hadith, the Holy Prophet has insulted Prophet Jesus and said that falsehood, as opposed to the truth lies with him - Allah forbid!
Arguments from the Holy Qur´an
"They are surely disbelievers who say, 'Allah is the third of three;' ...... " - Qur´an 5:31.
"They have taken their learned men and their monks for lords beside Allah. And so have they taken the Messiah, son of Mary...... " - Qur´an 9:31.
Having highlighted these verses, I shall turn to another set of very strong two verses.
" 'Surely, you and that which you worship beside Allah are the fuel of hell. To it shall you all come.' If these had been gods, they would not have come to it; and all will abide therein" - Qur´an 21:98-99.
*Note: credit must go to Imam Rizwan Khan sahib (Twitter: @Rizwan1770) for helping me understand the interpretation of the above two verses.*
The non-Ahmadi opponents of the Promised Messiah who allege that he insulted Jesus Christ (as believed in Islam), the only logical conclusion for such people would be that, according to the Qur´an too, the Christ will burn in hell - Allah forbid! Now, obviously, this will be a grossly unfair, unjust and biased interpretation, but our opponents have no choice except for accepting an interpretation which will shake the very foundations of Islam, because if in the case of the Promised Messiah his other writings on this subject are not to be taken into consideration, then to turn to other verses of the Holy Qur´an will be a case of massive hypocrisy. For the simple-minded people out there, let me break it into steps.
1. The Holy Qur´an firstly confirms that Christians worship the Christ as a god, and then it also declares that the deities worshipped besides Allah and their worshippers are the "Fuel of hell" and that they shall both burn in hell.
2. The Promised Messiah answers Christian critics of the Holy Prophet by attacking the Christ as depicted in the Gospel.
1A. The Qur´an though clarifies this by declaring the Christ innocent of having any role to play in him being worshipped by his followers. He´s in fact upheld as a Prophet of Allah, a noble man and as one of the very beloved people of the Almighty. The Qur´an even clears him of the false charges of Jews (see verses 4:158-159).
2A. The Promised Messiah though clarifies this by declaring that he never intends to insult the Christ as presented in Islam (as the Christ as believed in Christianity is someone who never even existed to begin with). He´s in fact upheld as a Prophet of Allah, a noble man and as one of the very beloved people of the Almighty. The Promised Messiah even clears him of the false charges of Jews and, in his honour, he states......
So, O´ Moulvis! If you possess the strength to battle with God, then carry on. Was the humble Son of Mary, before me, spared any torment at the hands of the Jews? They even thought that they had crucified him, but God saved him from death upon the cross. So, while there was a time when he was considered no more than a fraud and a liar, another era dawned when his greatness was accepted in the hearts of people...... " - Tajjaliyaat-e-Ilaahiyya, Ruhaani Khazaain, volume 20, page 21-23.
Next up, to establish my point, I shall turn to another very strong set of arguments based on the Qur´an.
"And when the night darkened upon him, he (Prophet Abraham) saw a star. He said, 'This is my Lord!' But when it set, he said, 'I like not those that set.' And when he saw the moon rise with spreading light, he said, 'This is my Lord.' But when it set, he said, 'If my Lord guide me not, I shall surely be of the people who go astray.' And when he saw the sun rise with spreading light, he said, 'This is my Lord, this is the greatest.' But when it set, he said, 'O´ my people, surely I am clear of that which you associate with God. I have turned my face toward Him Who created the heavens and the earth, being ever inclined to God, and I am not of those who associate gods with God' " - Qur´an 6:76-79.
*Note: it should be an utter insult to the intelligence of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him), or any Prophet of Allah, to conclude from these verses that he indeed took a star, the moon or the sun as his gods. A mere thoughtful look on these verses helps us understand this. Even my nieces and nephews know that the stars, the moon and the sun are bound to set at some point of the night or the day. It can never dawn upon someone so suddenly, and certainly not a capable mind like that of Prophet Abraham. The sole purpose of him having done so was to drive home to his idolatrous people the folly of their beliefs, of worshipping created, physical objects that set or disappear etc. This is quite clear from verse 6:78 to 79.*
To make my point, here again I shall draw the parallels by breaking it into parts.
1. The people of Prophet Abraham assert the divinity of idols and objects, and dismiss the idea of the Unity and Oneness of Allah.
1A. The Christian critics of Islam assert the superiority of Jesus Christ, their Son of God, over the Holy Prophet and even publish highly blasphemous stuff against the Holy Prophet.
2. To make his point, Prophet Abraham takes his idolatrous people´s beliefs as they´re and kind of adopts them (outwardly).
2A. To make his point, the Promised Messiah takes the Christian beliefs on the Christ as they´re.
3. Then comes the moment to strike: Prophet Abraham tells his people that if these heavenly bodies indeed are true deities, then they´ve deficiencies such the fact that they set.
3A. Then comes the moment to strike: the Promised Messiah tells Christians that if indeed the Christ is the person as Christians believe him to be, then such-and-such are the deficiencies in the Christ´s character as depicted in the Gospel.
4. Prophet Abraham, having made his point, is quick to disassociate himself from such beliefs and makes clear that he on the contrary believes in the One True God.
4A. The Promised Messiah, having made his point, is quick to point out that not only is the Holy Prophet Muhammad a far superior man than the Christ, but also that Prophet Jesus as presented in Islam is a much greater holy person than as believed in Christianity.
so all this proves that what the Promised Messiah did, the strategy that he employed to counter the attacks of Christian critics of the Holy Prophet, wasn´t any alien to a practice of a great Prophet from the past, and therefore he should never be singled out for having done something of this nature. If anything, the Promised Messiah never (even outwardly) adopted the Christian beliefs, whereas Prophet Abraham did (outwardly) adopt the beliefs of his idolatrous people in order to drive home his point. The former clarified in almost every writing that these are not his own (and neither Islamic) beliefs on Jesus Christ.
One question which I´ve often seen our opponents bring up is that "What was the need for Mirza sahib to resort to such tactics given that Jesus Christ was a Prophet of Allah after all?" Well, I ask, what was the need for the Qur´an to declare that deities worshipped besides Allah will burn in hell, given that the Christ is one of them? Or, what was the need for Prophet Abraham to resort to the tactics of embracing idolatry to convince his opponents, given that idolatry is the greatest sin that a human-being can commit (see Qur´an 4:48 and 4:116)? Whatever justifications and answers you come up with for my questions, just apply the same answer in the case of the Promised Messiah, and we´re done and clear all the way.
Either way, I´ve presented enough evidences and arguments for those who possess knowledge, understanding and a heart that fears Allah, to prove that if an objection can be raised against the Promised Messiah, then, using exactly the same set of arguments and logics, objection can also be raised against the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Prophet Abraham and the Holy Qur´an - and only an ignorant should do that in the case of all.
"Say, 'What think you? If Allah should take away your hearing and your sight, and seal up your hearts, who is the god other than Allah who could bring it back to you?' See how We vary the Signs, yet they turn away" - Qur´an 6:46.
Warm regards,
Masha'Allah very detailed explanations provided, well thought out ans structured article indeed!
ReplyDeleteJazak'Allah for writing this in defense of the Promised Messiah (a.s).
Jazaakum´Allah, Imam sahib. Your appreciation is of a great value. Thanks a bunch for taking out the time for reading this and also for submitting your comments.
Delete