Laying to Rest Some Doubts expressed by Maulawi Sayyed Muhammad ‘Abdul Wahid1

HIS STATEMENT—In the verse 2 there remains the question that if [ma salabuhu—‘they did not crucify him’] is taken to mean that the Jews did not kill Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, on the cross, then the phrase [ma qataluhu—‘they slew him not’] that precedes it is rendered superfluous. And if it is argued that the words [ma qataluhu—‘they slew him not’] are added to mean that his legs were not broken with a view to killing him, even granting this implication, the words [ma qataluhu—‘they slew him not’] should have followed the words [ma salabuhu—‘they did not crucify him’]; for, as a rule, legs are broken after the person is taken down from the cross. So, what is the reason for placing [ma qataluhu—‘they slew him not’] before [ma salabuhu—‘they did not crucify him’]? Please explain.

MY ANSWER—Bear in mind that the following are the verses of the Holy Quran in which the above is mentioned:

3

Translation: And their saying (i.e. of the Jews) that, ‘We have killed the Messiah, ‘Isa ibn Maryam [Jesus son of Mary], Messenger of God’, while in fact they neither killed him nor crucified him; rather, this matter became dubious for them. And as for the people who differ with regard to ‘Isa (namely, the Christians say that ‘Isa was raised alive to heaven, and the Jews say that they killed him), both of these groups are in a state of absolute doubt. They know nothing at all about the reality of the situation, and they do not have definitive knowledge, but are merely following their conjectures. In other words, ‘Isa neither ascended to heaven as is the thinking of the Christians, nor was he killed at the hands of the Jews as is the conjecture of the Jews, but the correct situation is a third one; namely, that he was saved [from the cross] and migrated to another country. And the Jews themselves are not certain that they killed him. In fact, God exalted him towards Himself, and God is Almighty and Wise.4

It is evident that these verses begin with this statement of the Jews who said:

5

Meaning: ‘We killed the Messiah, ‘Isa ibn Maryam.’ Hence, it was necessary that the statement that God Almighty cited from the Jews should itself be refuted first. This is why God Almighty gave precedence to the words ‘they killed’ over ‘they crucified’, because, that is the claim of the Jews that has been stated here:

6

Then, after this, it also needs to be made known that regarding the killing of Hazrat ‘Isa, as to the manner in which he was killed, there have been two schools of thought among the Jews since antiquity. One of them says that he was first killed with the sword and then his corpse was put on the cross or a tree to serve as a warning to the people. The second school of thought says that he was first placed on the cross, and then after he was put on the cross he was killed. Both of these groups were present at the time of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and are present even to this day.

Thus, since there was a difference of opinion among the Jews with regard to the manner of killing, and while one sect believed that he was killed first and then put on the cross, and the other hoisting upon the cross first, and the killing afterwards; therefore, God resolved to refute both of them. But since the sect on account of which these verses were revealed was the one that believed in the killing of ‘Isa before he was placed on the cross, the conjecture about killing was refuted first, and the thinking regarding the crucifixion was refuted afterwards.

Sadly, these doubts are born in the hearts only because—generally speaking—most Muslims are neither fully aware of the beliefs of the Jewish sects, nor are they well versed in the Christian beliefs. It is, therefore, befitting at this point that I quote from an ancient Jewish book on the beliefs of one of its sects regarding the killing of ‘Isa. This book was written about 1,900 years ago, and I have a copy here with me. The name of this Hebrewbook is Toledot Yeshu and it was written in ancient times by some Jewish scholars. On page 31 of this book we find written:

Then, taking him out to the place of punishment they stoned him to death. Then the wise men commanded him to be hung on a tree…

so that the beasts should eat the body and the corpse would thus be desecrated.

This statement is supported by this statement of the Gospel also wherein it is written, ‘Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.’ See Acts 5:30. 7

From this sentence of the Gospel it appears that he was first killed and then hung on the wood.8

But remember, as is the habit of the Christian clergy they have changed this sentence in some of their Urdu translations, but even up to this day, the words are the same in the English Gospels as I have quoted them here. In short, it is an established fact that the Jews have two [differing] beliefs regarding the killing of Hazrat ‘Isa.

One of these is that he was first killed and then [his corpse was] nailed to the cross, and it was essential to refute this belief. People of such thinking are also mentioned in the first verse, which is:

9

Hence, when the claim was that ‘We killed Jesus,’ it was necessary to first refute this claim. But in order to make the refutation comprehensive, God also rejected the view of the other sect—which claimed that he was first placed on the cross—by saying [‘They crucified him not’].

Thereafter, Allah the Exalted, says:

10

Translation: ‘Isa was neither killed nor crucified; rather, the situation was made dubious for the people. And the Jews and the Christians who differ with regard to ‘Isa’s crucifixion or his spiritual ascent are merely in a state of doubt about it; they have no definite knowledge thereof, but only follow a conjecture; and they are languishing in doubt and conjecture and are not themselves convinced that they indeed killed Jesus.’

This is the reason why some sects of the Christians believe that the second coming of the Messiah will take place figuratively, like that of Prophet Ilyas. In other words, the belief that the Messiah is physically alive in heaven is wrong, and that in fact he had died and the promise of the return of the Messiah in the Latter Days means the coming of someone who possesses the qualities and character of ‘Isa the Messiah, and not that ‘Isa himself shall return. Thus, in the book, A New Life of Jesus, by D.F. Strauss volume 1, page 410 is found this passage which I have already quoted on page 127 of my book Tuhfah Golarhviyyah, and here I will confine myself with giving its translation:11

Crucifixion, they maintain, even if the feet as well as the hands are supposed to have been nailed, occasions but very little loss of blood. It kills, therefore, only very slowly, by convulsions produced by the straining of the limbs, or by gradual starvation. So, if Jesus, supposed indeed to be dead, had been taken down from the cross, after about six hours, there is every probability of his supposed death having been only a death-like swoon, from which, after the descent from the cross, Jesus recovered again in the cool cavern, covered as he was with healing ointments and strongly scented spices. On this head it is usual to appeal to an account in Josephus, who says that on one occasion, when he was returning from a military recognizance on which he had been sent, he found several Jewish prisoners who had been crucified. He saw among them three acquaintances, whom he begged Titus to give to him. They were immediately taken down and carefully attended to, one was really saved, but the two others could not be recovered. (A New Life of Jesus, by D. F. Strauss, vol. 1, p. 410)

And on page 455, 457, and 347 in the book Modern Doubt and Christian Belief, there is a statement which I have reproduced on page 138 of Tuhfah Golarhviyyah, and its translation is given below:

The former of these hypotheses, that of apparent death, was employed by the old Rationalists, and more recently by Schleiermacher in his Life of Christ.… Schleiermacher’s supposition, that Jesus afterwards lived for a time with the disciples, and then retired into entire solitude for his second death…

And in the Book of Prophet Isaiah, Chapter 53, there is also to be found an indication to the same thing. And the prayer of Jesus, may pace be on him, which is recorded in the Gospels also, shows this. It is written in it meaning that, ‘Jesus prayed with deep fervour and anguish and his tears flowed down his cheeks. And, on account of his piety, his prayer was heard.’12

And Corriere della Sera, the most well-known newspaper of Southern Italy has published the following strange news:

On 13 July 1879, an old monk by the name of Kor, who was known as a saint in his life, passed away, leaving behind some possessions. The governor sought out his next of kin and handed to them 200,000 franc (118,750 rupees) in various currencies that were found in the cave where the monk had lived for a long time. There were also found some old scripts together with the currency which the relatives could not read. Some Hebrew scholars got an opportunity to scrutinize these papers and were amazed that the writing on them was ancient Hebrew. When these papers were read they were found to contain the following lines: ‘Peter, the Fisherman, servant of Jesus son of Mary, so addressed the people in the name of God and according to His will.’

And it ends with the words:

I, Peter the Fisherman, in the name of Jesus, and in the 90th year of my life, have decided to write these loving words, three Passovers (i.e. three years) after the demise of my lord and master, Jesus, son of Mary, near God’s Holy Temple, at a place called Bulier.

The scholars have concluded that the manuscript dates back to Peter’s time. The London Bible Society holds the same view, and after thoroughly scrutinizing the manuscripts has offered to pay 400,000 lira (237,500 rupees) to the owners in exchange for it.

The prayer of Yasu‘ ibn Maryam [Jesus son of Mary], may peace be upon both of them—He said: ‘O my God, I do not deem myself able to overcome that which I see as evil. Nor have I acquired the virtue that I had desired. But while others have their rewards in their hands, I do not, and my pride is in my work. None is worse than me. O God— who art the Most High—forgive my sins. O God, do not make me a target for my enemies’ criticism, nor make me such as is disgraced by my friends. And do not cause my righteousness to become a trial for me. Do not make this world the centre of my joy or my ultimate objective. And do not subjugate me under someone who does not have mercy on me. O God, who art Most Merciful, in the name of Your mercy, do as I ask. You do indeed have mercy on those who are in need of it.’

HIS STATEMENT—In the verse 13 there remains the misgiving that the word [bal—i.e. ‘rather’] bestows a close affinity upon the two sets of words [‘Allah exalted him to Himself ’] and the words [‘They certainly did not kill him’]—which indicates proximity in time between the two events—this entails that the time of the ascent should be close to the time of the killing, and there should not be a lapse of time between the two. However, according to your statement there is a long span between the time of the killing and the time of the ascent. If the Holy Quran had instead said [‘They certainly did not kill him but Allah rescued him from their hands alive and then raised him towards Himself ’], then only would it bear this connotation.

MY ANSWER—This doubt arose in your mind because you only gave cursory thought to the matter. Otherwise, had you kept the entire scenario in mind, such doubt would never have arisen. The fact is that the Jews believed that, according to the Torah, if a claimant of prophethood is killed it proves that he is an impostor and not a true Prophet; and that if someone is crucified, he becomes accursed and is not exalted towards God. And since the Jews believed that Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, was both killed and crucified—some believing that he was first killed and then hung upon the cross, while others claiming that he was first hung on the cross and then killed—therefore, to this day, they deny that he was spiritually exalted. They say that he was killed and crucified; hence, he was not exalted towards God Almighty as the believers are.

The Jews believe that disbelievers are not exalted towards God, but the believers are exalted towards Him once they die. And since in their eyes Jesus became accursed as a result of crucifixion—God forbid— therefore, he was not exalted towards God. This was the matter that the Holy Quran had to adjudicate upon, and it did so in the verse that I have quoted.

Hence, the verse:

14

makes manifest this very verdict, because the words [‘exaltation to God’] signify—according to both, Jewish and Muslim beliefs— the death that comes upon a person while in state of belief so that his soul is exalted towards God. Through their belief in the killing and crucifixion of Jesus, the Jews implied that when Jesus died, his soul was not exalted towards God. So, the rebuttal to their claim of killing and crucifying Jesus could only be the one that God has given. What this verse says, in other words, is that the Jews cite the crucifixion and killing to prove that the soul of Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, was not exalted towards God when he died, and God in rebuttal to this says that his spirit was exalted towards God when he died.

To expand this verse, it would read [‘Rather, God raised him to Himself when he died’]. [Exaltation to Allah] occurs only at the time of death, and—in fact—death which occurs in a state of faith is referred to as [exaltation to Allah]. So, the Jews say [‘Jesus died as a disbeliever and was not exalted towards God’], while Almighty God replied: [‘Nay, he died as a believer and was exalted towards God’]. The word [bal—‘rather’] here is not used out of place but is in keeping with the idiom of the Arabic tongue.

The Jews were mistaken in thinking that Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, had actually been crucified, and this error led them into another error whereby they denied that he was exalted towards God when he died. But God Almighty said that he was never killed or crucified, and that when he died he was exalted towards God. Hence, there is no ambiguity in this choice of words, and the word [‘rather’] is not—I repeat, is not—used out of place. Since both Jews and Muslims believe that [exaltation to Allah] means rising of the spirit towards God at the time of death, there is no room for any other meaning in this context.

And this should also be remembered that the period, or age, about which there is this statement of the Holy Quran that ‘Isa, was neither killed nor crucified, it is about the same period, the same epoch, that it is stated that after his death he was spiritually exalted towards God Almighty. The word [‘rather’] here serves as a temporal conjunction rather than an immediate conjunction—a connection between the two periods of time, and not the sameness of the moment of occurrence. Therefore, the meaning of the verse is that Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, was not killed or crucified at that time, but that he died a natural death and was thereafter exalted towards Almighty God, and this was in keeping with the promise recorded in the Holy Quran:

15

And [tawaffi] means to cause someone to die a natural death. The author of Kashshaf has written in his commentary on this verse that means [‘I will cause you to die a natural death’].

This verse of the Holy Quran:

thus settles the matter once and for all, because while our opponents claim that Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, was raised [to heaven] while he was alive, God in this verse says that his exaltation occurred after his demise.

Alas for the people who claim what is contrary to the clear edict of the Book of Allah. The Holy Quran and all past Scriptures and the Hadith confirm that the ‘exaltation’ that takes place after one’s death is referred to as spiritual exaltation, and this is the same exaltation that every believer necessarily experiences after he dies.

Some prejudiced people, having been silenced on this point, say that this verse should read like this [‘O Jesus, I will exalt you to Myself and cause you to die’]. They seem to imply that God made a mistake in giving precedence to [I will cause you to die] over [I will exalt you to Myself ] and saying [‘O Jesus, I will cause you to die and exalt you towards Myself ’] whereas He should have said [‘O Jesus, I will exalt you towards Myself and cause you to die’].

Alas, what a terrible thing bigotry is that in order to support it they distort the Book of Allah! This act of distortion is the same vile act that led the Jews to be called accursed and their features to be defaced. And now these people are ready to distort the Holy Quran! And had there not been the promise:

16

it would not be beyond them to change the verse of the Holy Quran [‘I will cause you to die and will exalt you to Myself ’] and instead write [‘O Jesus, I will exalt you towards Myself and cause you to die’]. However, such distortion also was not possible since Almighty God has made four promises in this verse, as He says:

17 (1)

18 (2)

19 (3)

20 (4)

These are the four promises that I have placed numbers on.

And as is evident from authentic ahadith [pl. hadith] and from the Holy Quran itself, the promise of [‘I will clear you from the charges of those who disbelieve’], which follows the promise of exaltation, was fulfilled with the coming of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, for it was he who defended Jesus against the baseless calumnies levelled against him by the Jews and the Christians. Similarly, the fourth promise, namely:

21

was fulfilled through the victory and ascendancy of Islam.

Thus, if the word [‘I shall cause you to die’] was to follow the word [‘I shall raise you towards Myself ’]—as our opponents would have it—then the clause Myself ’] could not precede the clause [‘I shall raise you towards Myself’] could not precede the clause [‘I shall clear you’], as the promise of [‘I shall clear you’] has already been fulfilled, whereas—according to our opponents—the promise of [‘I shall cause you to die’] has yet to be fulfilled. Likewise, the promise of [‘I shall cause you to die’] cannot precede the promise of:

22

because that promise, too, has been fulfilled and it endures to the Last Day. This being the case, if the word [‘cause you to die’] is removed from the beginning of the verse, there is nowhere else to place it prior to the Last Day. This would entail that Jesus would die after the Last Day since such the sequential order of the verse negates his death prior to the Last Day.

Now, it should be noticed that it is a miracle of the Holy Quran that even though our opponents were ready to alter the Holy Quran in the manner of the Jews, they could not find anywhere to place the phrase [‘I shall raise you’] after removing it from its original location. Each word has been placed so appropriately in its place that there is no room left for interpolation.

In truth, the verse:

23

should by itself suffice for a seeker after truth, for it shows that the ‘exaltation’ that our opponents are so vocal about, is to take place after death and not before, for this is proven by God’s own testimony, and it does not behove a believer to reject Divine Testimony. And since it is clear, on the explicit authority of the Holy Quran, that the ‘exaltation’ is experienced after one’s death, it proves that this is the same exaltation which God has promised to every believer upon his death.

It is indeed strange thّat while God has placed [‘I shall raise you to Myself ’] after [‘I shall cause you to die’], these people would like to reverse the order so that they might somehow portray Hazrat ‘Isa as sitting [somewhere] alive in the heavens. In this case how can they be different from the Jews in terms of interpolation? And if these people, like the Jews, have the right to change the Holy Quran arbitrarily, then the Holy Quran is not secure! Can they produce even one single hadith thaّt permits them to put [‘I shall raise you to Myself ’] before [‘I shall cause you to die’]? And when it is not permitted by either the Quran or the Hadith, why do they not fear the curse that has already befallen the Jews?

HIS STATEMENT—According to your statement, Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, after being saved from the cross, had gone to Kashmir. First of all, it was not easy at that time to reach Kashmir, especially travelling incognito. Then there is the objection why his disciples did not flock around him, and why Hazrat ‘Isa remained obscure like one buried alive?

MY ANSWER—The same God who directed Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, to move to Kashmir, had also become his Guide, so what is so strange about a Prophet reaching Kashmir? And if this is so strange, then a faithless person can also wonder how our Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, remained hidden from the eyes of the disbelievers when they had reached the very mouth of the Cave of Thaur during his migration to Madinah. Therefore, the answer to such objections is that God’s special grace that attends the Prophets extraordinarily saves them and guides them. As to the question, ‘If Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, had gone to Kashmir, why did the Disciples not reach him?’; the reply is that the lack of knowledge regarding something does not necessitate its non-existence. How do you know that they did not reach him?

However, since it was a secretive journey24—just as the journey of our Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, at the time of migration was secretive—it was considered unwise to travel with a large caravan, just as it is evident that when our Prophet may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, had migrated to Madinah he was accompanied only by Hazrat Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him; and undertaking the 200 kose25 journey to Madinah was not easy even at that time. Had the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, wished, he could have taken 60 or 70 people with him, but he only made Hazrat Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, his companion. To meddle into the mysteries of Prophets is an improper meddling.

And how do you know that the Disciples did not come to India to join Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, even afterwards? On the contrary, the Christians themselves believe that some of the Disciples did—indeed—visit India in those days. The arrival of the disciple Thomas in Madras and the gathering of Christians in a festival every year in Madras to this day in its commemoration is something which is no secret to any knowledgeable person. In fact, the tomb in Srinagar, Kashmir, which we call the tomb of Hazrat ‘Isa, is believed by some eminent Christian clergymen to be the tomb of some disciple. This is despite the fact that the person buried in that tomb wrote in his book that, ‘I am a Prophet and a prince, and the Injil [Gospel] was revealed to me.’ It is also written in the historical books pertaining to Kashmir, which I have had access to, that this Prophet was from among the Israelites, that he was called the Prince Prophet, and that he had migrated to Kashmir from his own land. Also, we learn from the time of his arrival as is recorded in these books, that nineteen hundred (1,900) years have elapsed since the time this Prophet came to Kashmir.

And we also indict the Christians that whereas you admit that the person in that grave who is buried in Mohalla Khanyar, Srinagar is a disciple of Jesus, but how could he be a disciple when it is written in his own book that he was a Prophet and was a prince and the Injil [Gospel] was revealed to him? Can a disciple say that he is a Prophet and a prince and the Injil had been revealed to him? Thus, there can be no doubt that this tomb, which is in Kashmir, is that of Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him. And let it be clear to those who believe him to be sitting in heaven that he, in fact, rests in Kashmir; that is, in Mohalla Khanyar, Srinagar. Just as God Almighty had kept the People of the Cave hidden for so long, so did He keep Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, hidden and finally disclosed the truth to me. There are thousands of such instances in the works of God Almighty, and it is not His way to seat anyone in heaven with a mortal body.

HIS STATEMENT—In ahadith, ‘Isa [Jesus], who is to descend, has been called Nabiyyullah [‘the Prophet of God’]. Can it be proven from the Quran and Hadith that a Muhaddath [recipient of discourse with God] has also been called a Nabi [‘Prophet’]?

MY ANSWER—In Arabic and Hebrew, the word Nabi [Prophet] merely means one who makes prophecies—one who makes a prophecy on the basis of revelation received from God. Thus, when—on the authority of the Holy Quran—the door of such Prophethood is not closed whereby a person, through grace of and submission to the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, may be granted the honour of converse and discourse with God and may be informed of hidden matters through divine revelation, then why would such Prophets not appear among the Muslims? What is the argument for it? I do not hold the belief that a seal has been placed on this kind of Prophethood. Only the door to that kind of Prophethood is closed that is accompanied by the ordinances of a new Shariah or that is a claim that moves away from submission to the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. But a claim to Prophethood by one whom divine revelation describes as an ummati [follower of the Holy Prophet (sas)] on one hand and also calls him a Nabi [‘Prophet’] on the other, is not in contradiction to the injunctions of the Holy Quran, inasmuch as such Prophethood—being that of an ummati—is a reflection of the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and is not an independent Prophethood.

Had you properly reflected on the ahadith, this objection would not have arisen in your mind at all. You say that ‘Isa [Jesus] who is to descend has been called Nabiyyullah [‘a Prophet of God’] in ahadith; I say that the same Jesus who is to descend has also been called an ummati in ahadith.26

Can you tell me from the Holy Quran or Hadith that ‘Isa ibn Maryam [Jesus son of Mary], the past Prophet, has been called an ummati at any place? It is thus quite clear that this ‘Isa who is called both a Prophet and an ummati is a different ‘Isa. He is not the ‘Isa [Jesus] who lived among the Israelites, who was an independent Prophet, and to whom the Injil was revealed. How can you make him an ummati [follower of Holy Prophet (sas)]?

In Sahih Bukhari, where the future ‘Isa is described as an ummati, his physical appearance is also described as distinct from the first ‘Isa. Of course, had the ahadith only used the word Nabi and not ummati, one might have been mistaken, but now that Sahih Bukhari has clearly written [‘your Imam from among you’] with regard to the coming ‘Isa: ‘O my followers, the coming ‘Isa is also only an and no more.’ Likewise, Sahih Muslim records these words meaning that, ‘Isa will be your leader and will be from among you.’ That is to say, he will be an individual from within this Ummah.

Thus, when it is proven from these ahadith that the ‘Isa to come is an ummati, it follows that him being called Nabi [Prophet] in the Word of God is not with the sense that is applicable to an independent Prophet. Rather, the only intent here is that God Almighty shall have discourse and converse with him and He shall reveal to him the news of the unseen. This is why, despite being an ummati, he will also be called a Nabi. And if it is asked, ‘How could any ummati be called a Nabi—it being essential for a Prophet that God speak to him—when the door of divine discourse and revelation is closed upon this Ummah till the Day of Resurrection?’; the reply is that this door is not closed upon this Ummah at all. Had this door been closed upon this Ummah, this Ummah would have been a dead ummah and would have become distant and estranged from God. Moreover, had this door been closed upon this Ummah, why would this prayer be taught in the Holy Quran:

27

The fact that the Holy Prophet (sas) has been called Khatamul-Anbiya’ [the Seal of the Prophets] does not mean that, after him, the door to divine converse and discourse is closed. Had this been the import, this would then be an accursed ummah which, like Satan, would be forever removed and alienated from God. Instead, what it means is that direct bestowal of the gift of revelation from Almighty God is barred and it is impossible and prohibited for anyone to receive this blessing without rendering obedience to the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. It is a point of honour for the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that obedience to him is so blessed that when a person renders the fullest obedience to him, he is granted the honour of converse and discourse of God.

What honour, stature, spiritual prowess, and holy power would a Prophet have in his person if the people who claim to render obedience to him are blind and devoid of sight, and God does not open their eyes through His converse and discourse. How absurd and futile is the doctrine that one should maintain that after the Holy Prophet (sas) the door to divine revelation has forever been closed, and that there is no hope for it in the future till the Day of Resurrection, and that one needs only worship the tales from the past. Can such a religion be worth its name in which no direct evidence of God can be found—all it has are tales? And even if one were to give up one’s life in His path, and totally lose oneself in seeking His pleasure, and give Him preference over all else, God would still not open the door to His recognition for him, and would not bless Him with His converse and discourse.

I swear by Almighty God that no one in this age would be as disgusted with such a religion as I would. I call such a religion a satanic religion—not Godly—and I am certain that such a religion leads to Hell. It keeps one blind and lets him die blind and takes him to the grave blind. But, at the same time, I swear by the Gracious and Merciful God that Islam in not such a religion. In fact, Islam is the only religion in the world that has the quality of investing one with divine discourse on the condition that one renders true and full measure of obedience to our lord and master, the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is the very reason why the hadith says:

Meaning: ‘The saintly ulema of my Ummah are like the Prophets of the Israelites.’ In this hadith, too, the saintly ulema are called ummati on the one hand, and are likened to the Prophets on the other.

It is self-evident that whereas Almighty God has continued to speak to His servants from ancient times—so much so that even women among the Israelites were honoured with divine converse and discourse, such as the mother of Musa and Mary the Truthful—then how unfortunate and wretched is this Ummah that its men are not equal even to Israelite women? Can it be expected that now is such an age that in this age God still hears but no longer speaks? If there is no dishonour for Him to hear the supplications of poor mortals, why is it a dishonour to speak to them?

Let it be remembered that attributes of God Almighty are never suspended. So, just as He shall always continue to hear, so shall He continue to speak. And what can be a clearer argument than this that the continuation of God’s speaking, like His hearing will never come to an end? And it proves that there will always remain a group of people with whom God will continue to have converse and discourse. And I cannot comprehend why people get so agitated by the word Nabi [Prophet]. Once it has been established that the coming Messiah will be from within this Ummah, what is the harm if God called him a Nabi? Such people do not see that he has also been called an ummati [follower of the Holy Prophet (sas)] and invested with all the attributes of an ummati. This compound name is quite distinct and Hazrat ‘Isa, the Israelite, was never known by this name. Further, Almighty God has repeatedly called me an ummati as well as a Nabi in His revelations. Hearing these names creates extreme ecstasy in my heart and I express my gratitude that I have been honoured with this compound name. The wisdom behind the granting of this compound name seems to be to strike the whip of castigation upon the Christians that whereas they portray Jesus, son of Mary, as God, our Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is a Prophet of such calibre that an individual from his Ummah can be a Nabi and can be called ‘Isa despite being an ummati.

HIS STATEMENT—With regard to the Promised Mahdi, there are found in some ahadith words such as [‘from among the progeny of Fatimah’], and [‘from my progeny’], and [‘from among the people of my household’], and it is also written [‘his name will be my name, and the name of his father will be that of my father’]. Please explain what is meant by each of them.

MY ANSWER—My claim is not that I am the Mahdi who conforms to [the progeny of Fatimah], [from my progeny], etc. Rather, my claim is that of being the Promised Messiah, and regarding the Promised Messiah, there is no statement of any muhaddith [scholar of hadith] that he would be from among the progeny of Fatimah etc. Nevertheless, at the same time—as every muhaddith says—I also say that all the ahadith regarding the Promised Mahdi are moot and suspect and not one of them is authentic. The degree to which fabrication has taken place in these ahadith has not taken place in any other hadith. During the time of the Abbasid Khulafa’ etc. the Khulafa’ were very fond of pronouncing themselves the Promised Mahdi. So for this reason, some ahadith describe the Mahdi as being from the progeny of ‘Abbas and some from the progeny of Fatimah. There are some ahadith which also say that ‘He will be a man from my Ummah.’ But essentially all of these ahadith are not worthy of any trust. This is not just my word; all eminent scholars of the Ahl-e-Sunnah have been saying the very same. As opposed to these ahadith, this hadith recorded by Ibn-e-Majah is very authentic: meaning, there is no other Mahdi; ‘Isa is the very same Mahdi who is to come.

HIS STATEMENT—The prophecies of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that even the divines have tried to interpret [rather than taking them literally], are mostly those that have been disclosed in the form of dreams.…

MY ANSWER: I could not understand this question; hence, I am unable to answer it.

HIS STATEMENT—Literal-minded people do not possess inner insight; hence, there is no wonder that they do not recognize the Promised Messiah. But the men of God and men of insight ought to recognize His Holiness through revelations etc. as the late Qadi Thanaullah of Panipat writes in regard to the Promised Mahdi, in his book Tadhkiratul-Ma‘ad: [‘The saints from Levant and the elite from Iraq will come to pledge allegiance to him’].

MY ANSWER—All these statements are made on the basis that the Promised Mahdi will appear from amongst the progeny of Fatimah or the progeny of ‘Abbas, and the Abdal [saints] and Qutb [spiritual guiding stars] will take the oath of allegiance to him. But I have just written that eminent muhaddithin [scholars of Hadith] have held that all such ahadith regarding the Mahdi are impaired and suspect; rather, most of them are fabricated, and not to be trusted even one bit. Some of the Imams (divines) have written special books to falsify such ahadith and have vehemently rejected them. Thus, when the coming of the Mahdi itself is doubtful and uncertain, how can there be any credibility to the notion that the Abdal will take the oath of allegiance to him?

When the basis is false, how can the offshoots be considered true? Moreover, Abdal do not have any inborn physical features to be distinguished from others. Abdal, in the eyes of God, are people who bring about a holy transformation in themselves. You too—if you were to bring about a holy transformation in yourself and were to devote yourself to the Truth with no regard for people’s curse and abuse—would be counted among the Abdal.

Most in my Jama‘at [Community] are people who have suffered much hardships for the sake of this Jama‘at, and have suffered much indignities, and have not hesitated to even give up their lives. Are they not the Abdal? Shaikh ‘Abdur-Rahman, who was strangled in front of Amir ‘Abdur-Rahman on account of [his allegiance to] this Jama‘at and chose to be slaughtered like a goat—was he not among the Abdal?

Likewise, Maulawi Sahibzadah ‘Abdul-Latif—who was a muhaddith, a jurist, and most eminent among the scholars of Kabul—was stoned to death for [embracing] this Jama‘at. He was counselled repeatedly that if he would break off his allegiance to this person [me] he would be honoured even more than before, but he chose to die, and did not even care about what would become of his wife and young children. For forty days his corpse lay buried in the stones.

Was he not among the Abdal? I am—by the grace of God—still alive, and God has made great promises to me. Who knows how many and from which countries, pure-hearted people will enter my Jama‘at? Besides, what is written in the chronicles with reference to the Promised Messiah is that the ulema would not accept him. There is no mention at all of any abdal pledging allegiance to him.

HIS STATEMENT—So far there has appeared no clear Sign in your favour. Only two or three hundred thousand people have entered your Jama‘at, and that amounts to no more than a drop out of an ocean. Therefore, if someone were to delay and defer entering the Jama‘at, without rejecting, until the appearance of manifest impact—would it be permissible or not?

MY ANSWER—Waiting and delaying is also a form of denial. As for the point that many have not yet believed, this cannot be a proof that the claim remains unsubstantiated. If one who has been ordained by God possesses arguments and Signs, his claim cannot become weak by someone not believing in him. Besides, one needs to consider that the people who accepted the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, with a sincere heart by the time of his demise numbered no more than 150,000. Would their small number render doubtful the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him?

The fact of the matter is that the prerequisite for the truth of a true Prophet is not that the majority should accept him. The prerequisite, indeed, is the incontrovertible evidence by irrefutable arguments. In this case, the requirements have been fulfilled incontrovertibly in consonance with the pattern of Prophethood. Thus, in keeping with the prophecy of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, the lunar and solar eclipses, that was to be a Sign for the advent of the Promised Messiah, did occur twice in the world.

Likewise, a new form of transport that was alluded to in the Holy Quran and Hadith has also come into existence; i.e. the railways which have taken the place of camels for transportation, as [foretold] in the Holy Quran:

28

Meaning that, the Latter Days, when the she-camel will be rendered useless.

And as is mentioned in this hadith of Sahih Muslim with regard to the Signs of the coming of the Promised Messiah: 29 Meaning: ‘Then the she-camel will become useless, and no one will ride them.’ Obviously, that time has come.

It was also written that earthquakes would strike at that time. Accordingly, those earthquakes have been witnessed by people, and those that remain, shall be witnessed. And it was written that the Promised Messiah would be born at the end of the sixth millennium after Adam, may peace be upon him. Accordingly, I have been born in the same time frame.

Similarly, the Holy Quran had alluded to it that, like Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, the Promised Messiah would also appear in the 14th century,30 and so my advent took place in the fourteenth century.

That is to say, just as Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, was born in the fourteenth century after Hazrat Musa, may peace be upon him, so have I appeared in the fourteenth century from the time of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Regarding these Latter Days, God had also given the news in the Holy Quran that books and magazines would be published extensively throughout the world at that time, ways of interaction between nations would open up, many canals would be dug out of rivers, new mines would be discovered, many disputes in religious matters would arise between people, and one nation would attack another.

And while all this is happening, a trumpet will be blown from Heaven; i.e. God—through sending the Promised Messiah—will manifest Himself for the propagation of Islam. Then an inclination towards Islam will develop in the pure-hearted people of every country throughout the world, and God will gather the blessed people of the entire earth into Islam to the extent He wills. Then will be the end. So, all the above have come to pass. Similarly, it was written in ahadith that the Promised Messiah would appear at the head of the century and that he would be the Mujaddid [Reformer] of the fourteenth [Hijri] century. So these Signs, too, have been fulfilled in this age.

It was also written that, by virtue of his birth, he would have a share of two centuries. And that he would be bestowed two names. And his birth would have a share of two lineages. And the fourth dual quality is that in his birth, too, he would be born as a twin. So all these Signs have become manifest. My sharing the two centuries—i.e. my being Dhul Qarnain—is so established that there is no calendar of any nation of which my life has not spanned its two centuries.

Similarly, I received two titles from God Almighty: One I was named ummati [follower of the Holy Prophet (sas)], as is indicated by my name Ghulam Ahmad (sas) [i.e. the Servant of Ahmad (sas)]; second, I was named, by way of reflection, Nabi [‘Prophet’], as God Almighty named me ‘Ahmad’ in the earlier parts of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya and addressed me repeatedly by this very name.

This, indeed, was an allusion to the fact that I am a Nabi by way of reflection.31

Thus, I am an ummati too and also—by way of reflection—a Nabi. This is what is alluded to by the divine revelation set out in the earlier parts of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya:

That is, every blessing is from the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Thus, greatly blessed is the person who taught—the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—and, thereafter, greatly blessed is the one who was taught—this humble one. Therefore, due to perfect obedience, I was named an ummati and having acquired the full reflection of Prophethood, my title became Nabi. Thus, I acquired two titles.

Those who object again and again that in Sahih Muslim the ‘Isa to come has been called Nabi, it is incumbent upon them that they should read this exposition of mine with care, because the same Muslim in which the ‘Isa to come has been called a Nabi, the ‘Isa to come has also been called an ummati therein. And it is not just the ahadith, but it is also inferred from the Holy Quran because it is explicitly stated in Surah at-Tahrim that some individuals of this Ummah have been named ‘Maryam’ [Mary], and—on account of their perfect obedience to the Shariah—a Spirit was breathed into this ‘Maryam’ by God, and after the Spirit was breathed, ‘Isa was born from this ‘Maryam’.

It was on this basis that God named me ‘Isa ibn-e-Maryam, because for a time I lived only in a Mary-like state. And then when God was pleased with that Mary-like state, a Spirit was breathed into me by Him. After this Spirit was breathed into me I progressed from the Mary-like state to become ‘Isa. A detailed account of this is present in the earlier parts of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya; for, in the earlier parts of Barahin-eAhmadiyya I was initially named ‘Maryam’, as God says:

Meaning: ‘O Mary! You and the one who is your companion, enter both into Paradise.’

And then in the same Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya, giving me the title of Maryam, He has said:

Meaning: ‘O Mary, I breathed into you the Spirit of truth.’ This breathing of the Spirit was a kind of metaphor similar to Mary, the Truthful’s conception. And then after this ‘conception’, at the end of the book I was named ‘Isa, as He said:

Meaning: ‘O ‘Isa, I will cause you to die and will raise you to Myself like believers.’ Thus, I was named ‘Isa ibn Maryam [Jesus son of Mary] in the Book of God. Since Maryam is an ummati individual and ‘Isa is a Nabi, therefore, by giving me the names Maryam and ‘Isa it was shown that I am both an ummati and a Nabi—but a Nabi who is a Nabi only by way of reflection in the estimation of God due to the blessing of obedience [to the Holy Prophet (sas)].

My being ‘Isa ibn Maryam is a matter that the ignorant people object to; namely: ‘According to ahadith the ‘Isa who was to come has been named ‘Isa ibn Maryam, whereas this man is not Ibn Maryam as his mother’s name was not Maryam.’ Little do they realize that, as was the promise contained in Surah at-Tahrim, I was first named Maryam, and then God’s grace breathed the Spirit into me; i.e. by His special manifestation created a new state from that Maryam-like state and named it ‘Isa.

And since that state emanated from a Maryam-like state, God called me by the name of ‘Isa ibn Maryam, and this is how I became ‘Isa ibn Maryam. Hence, the Maryam referred to here is not Maryam, the mother of Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him; rather, God named me Maryam in the previous Parts of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya on account of a spiritual resemblance that I had with Maryam, mother of ‘Isa. And then He brought upon me another manifestation and compared it to the breathing of the Spirit. And then when that Spirit became manifest and reflected, He named me ‘Isa by virtue of that Spirit. So, it is on this very account that I was named ‘Isa bin Maryam.

Here, this point also needs to be understood that whereas the Quranic verse:

32

referred to ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, the verse as it appears in the previous parts of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya was revealed in my favour. The reason is that just as the Jews believed, on the basis of their edicts of disbelief against Hazrat ‘Isa, that his soul was not raised towards God, the same belief is held by the opponents of (my) people with regard to me; i.e., they say this man is a disbeliever and his soul will not be raised towards God.

It is to refute them that Almighty God says to me, ‘I will raise your spirit toward Me after your death.’ And in the words [‘I will cause you to die’] is concealed another prophecy, and it is that [tawaffi] in the Arabic language means causing someone to die a death which is a natural death, and not through murder or crucifixion. This is just as ‘Allamah Zamakhshari in his Tafsir Kashshaf with regard the same verse— [‘O Jesus, I will cause you to die’]—has given the following explanation: Meaning that, I will give you a natural death. Since God knew that the same attempt will be made to kill and crucify me as was made with regard to Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him, He—therefore—told me by way of prophecy the very same:

Meaning: ‘O Jesus, I will cause you to die.’ It had the hint that He would save me from being killed or crucified. It is obvious that many efforts were made to get me killed or crucified and the ulema of the [Muslim] nation issued edicts for my murder. A false case was also made against me to get me hanged, in which Dr. Martyn Clark was the plaintiff, and Maulawi Abu Sa‘id Muhammad Husain Batalawi was among the witnesses.

And the charge was that I had sent a man named ‘Abdul Majid33 to kill Dr. Martyn Clark. Accordingly, witnesses against me were duly processed, but God had already told me even before the case that such a case will be brought, and that He would save me. That revelation from God Almighty was conveyed to about sixty, seventy, or eighty people prior to the case. Hence, in keeping with His holy revelation, God caused me to be honourably acquitted from this false charge. Thus, all that endeavour was to get me hanged as was made by the Jews with regard to Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him.

And what is strange is that Pilate, the Roman, (Governor of the territory where the Messiah was), had said to the Jews that he found no fault with that man—that is, ‘Isa—for which he should put him on the cross. In the same way, the official who had my case in his court, whose name was Douglas and who was the Deputy Commissioner of our District, addressed me saying, ‘I make no charge of murder against you.’ Stranger still, just as a thief was crucified alongside Hazrat ‘Isa, similarly, the day the case of murder against me was decided, a Christian thief from the Salvation Army, who had stolen some money, was also brought before the same court the same day.

In short, when Almighty God said:

34

with regard to me, this was a prophecy in which a hint was given that, as it happened in the case of Hazrat ‘Isa [Jesus], some schemes would also be hatched to have me killed, and that the enemy will remain frustrated in these schemes.

The third matter which makes me dual is the issue of my nationality. As is apparently reported, I am a Mughal by ethnicity on the basis of my paternity but some of my grandmothers were from among the Sadat [progeny of the Holy Prophet (sas)]. But Almighty God declares me to be of Persian ethnicity on my paternal side, and a Fatimite on the maternal side, and only what He says is the truth. The fourth matter that makes me dual is that I was born a twin—with me there was a girl who was born before me.

Again, reverting to my earlier point, I say that it is totally false and amounts to deceiving oneself to suppose, from the word Nabi used with regard to the Promised Messiah in ahadith, that he indeed is Hazrat ‘Isa, may peace be upon him. For, while it is true that the ‘Isa to come has been named Nabi [Prophet], it is accompanied by such a prerequisite that by virtue of that prerequisite it is impossible that Hazrat ‘Isa [Jesus] the Israelite could be that Nabi, inasmuch as—notwithstanding that he is called Nabi—the same ahadith refer to this ‘Isa as an ummati too.

Anyone who reflects upon the significance of ummati will clearly understand that it is heresy to declare Hazrat ‘Isa to be an ummati, because an ummati is one who is imperfect, misguided, and faithless, prior to following the Holy Prophet, peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, and prior to following the Holy Quran, and then, he acquires faith and perfection by following the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and by following the Holy Quran. Clearly, it is kufr [disbelief ] to entertain such a thought concerning Hazrat ‘Isa because, regardless of how much lesser he might be in status as compared to the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, it cannot be said that he—God forbid—is misguided and faithless, or that he is imperfect, and that his divine cognition is incomplete unless he returns to this world and enters the Ummah of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Thus, I say to my opponents with conviction that Hazrat ‘Isa is not an ummati at all. Although he—and indeed all the Prophets—believed in the truth of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, they were still followers of the teachings that were revealed to them. God had manifested Himself to them directly, and it was not that, by following the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, or through his spiritual teaching, that they had become Prophets or that they were called ummati. God had bestowed upon them distinct Books, and they were instructed to follow those Books and teach others to do the same, and this is testified to by the Holy Quran. In view of this categorical testimony, how can Hazrat ‘Isa be regarded the Promised Messiah? Since he is not an ummati, he can also not be the kind of Nabi who has to be an ummati. Similarly, Almighty God manifested hundreds of Signs for me, a portion of which has also been recorded in this part of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya.

HIS QUESTION—What is the blessed age of your eminence at the moment? As for your tidings that your eminence gives that Islam will make great progress through your eminence, whether all that progress will happen within the lifetime of your eminence or what? I seek its elucidation.

MY ANSWER—True estimation of the age is known, of course, to God, but as far as I know at this time, which is 1323 of the Hijrah, my age is close to seventy (70) years. [And Allah knows best]. I cannot say whether the full progress of Islam will take place within my lifetime or after me. However, I reckon that the full measure of progress of faith never occurred within the lifetime of any Prophet. Rather, the task of the Prophets was that they were able to show somewhat of a sample of the progress, and then, after them, further progress came to fruition.

For instance, our Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was sent to the entire world—for everyone—dark or fair-skinned—but within his lifetime, the fair-skinned; i.e. European nations, did not get any share of Islam—not a single person became a Muslim. And as for those who were dark-skinned, out of them Islam spread only within the Arabian Peninsula, and the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, died after the fall of Makkah.

Therefore, I reckon the same will happen in my case as well. I have been vouchsafed by God this Quranic revelation repeatedly:

35

I expect, from this, that some part of the success will come about during my lifetime.

HIS QUESTION: In the ahadith there is stern warning concerning the drawing of a picture of any living thing, but the photographs of your eminence that have been published suggest that you deem it lawful.

MY ANSWER—I am vehemently opposed to anyone taking a photograph of me and keeping it with him like idolaters do, or publishing it. I have absolutely not given any such instruction that someone should do this. No one could be more opposed to idol-worship and image-worship than me. However, I have noticed that when the people of Europe want to read someone’s book, they desire to see a picture of its author first. This is because knowledge of physiognomy is quite developed in Europe, and most of them can tell just from looking at a picture whether the claimant is truthful or a liar.

Those people, on account of the distance of thousands of miles, cannot come to me nor can they look at my face. Therefore the sagacious of that land reflect upon my inner condition by looking at my picture. There are many who have written letters to me from Europe and America and in their letters they have written that they had looked at my picture carefully and on the basis of the art of face reading they were forced to admit that it was not the picture of a liar. One American woman, upon seeing my picture, said that it was the picture of Yasu‘ [Jesus]; that is, ‘Isa, may peace be upon him. It is for this purpose, and to this extent, that I have purposely remained silent about the initiation of this practice. [And actions are judged by their intentions].

Also, I do not believe that prohibition of drawing of a portrait is absolute. It is evident from the Holy Quran that the sect of Jinn used to draw portraits for Hazrat Sulaiman [Solomon]. The Israelites, for a long time, possessed portraits of Prophets, including that of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Also, Gabriel, may peace be upon him, showed the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, a portrait of Hazrat ‘A’ishah on a silk cloth. And the images of animals become naturally imprinted on some stones under water. Moreover, the instrument that is now used for taking photographs had not been invented in the time of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. It is a very useful instrument by which some diseases can be diagnosed. Another instrument has been introduced by which the image of all the bones of a person is taken to help diagnose diseases such as rheumatism and gout, and determine the nature of the illness. Similarly, many scientific benefits have been realized by means of photographs. Some Europeans have published the images of all the known living things, including many kinds of insects, and all variety of birds and animals, etc. in their books which has fostered knowledge. Is it then conceivable that God—who encourages the acquisition of knowledge—would prohibit the use of an instrument that helps to diagnose difficult diseases and which helps sagacious people to attain guidance?

All these are senseless notions that have become widespread. Why don’t the maulawis [religious clerics] of our country throw away from their pockets and homes all the coins, rupees, two annas, four annas, and eight annas that bear the image of the royal visage? Do not these coins bear pictures on them? It is a pity that, by uttering unreasonable things wantonly, they give the opponents an opportunity to laugh at Islam. Islam has forbidden frivolous pursuits and such pursuits as foster idolatry; and not the pursuits that foster human knowledge, help in diagnosing diseases, and draw sagacious people closer to guidance. Despite all this, however, I do not like it at all that people of my Jama‘at should, without an unavoidable desperate need, make it an occupation of publishing my photo routinely because this is how innovations slowly take root and culminate into idolatry.

I, therefore, admonish my Jama‘at here, too, to refrain from such deeds as far as is possible for them. I have seen cards of some people on the back of which I have noticed my picture in a corner. I am vehemently against such publication. I do not want anyone in my Jama‘at to be guilty of such an act. It is one thing to do something for a legitimate and useful cause, and quite another to be like the Hindus who hang the pictures of their elders on the walls everywhere. It has always been observed that such frivolous deeds end up in idolatry and grave errors, like those which found their way among the Hindus and the Christians.

And I expect that anyone who views my admonitions with honour and deference and is my true follower will henceforth abstain from such acts; otherwise, he will be deemed to conduct himself against my instructions and interfere in the Shariah with insolence.

Some people who neither have any knowledge of faith nor of my circumstances have also published, merely out of narrow-mindedness and lack of appreciation, such allegations against me that only go to prove, if anything, that, in contrast to the efforts they put forth to acquire for this world and to achieve worldly offices and ranks, they do not have even a thousandth of that focus on faith. Hearing their objections, one is wonderstruck as to how ignorant these people are of Islam despite being called Muslims!

Well! Let us consider the nature of their objections. For example, they say that this is a ruse for collecting money and his helpers are on the payroll. Now, let anyone who has some fear of God in his heart consider whether this is not the same evil suspicion that people who are blind at heart have always entertained against the past Prophets, peace be upon them. Pharaoh also thought ill of Musa and, addressing his own people, said that ‘The real objective of this man is to dispossess you of your land and occupy it for himself.’ Similarly, the Jews formed the same opinion concerning Hazrat ‘Isa that he was a conniving person and, under the pretext of Prophethood, wanted to rule over them.

The disbelievers of Quraish had the same misgiving with regard to our Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, as the Holy Quran records their saying:

36

Meaning: ‘There has to be some ulterior motive in this claim.’ So why should I feel disappointed by these objectors! They are displaying the trait of the deniers of the past. A seeker after truth should be in the habit of examining the claim critically and reflecting on the arguments impartially, and speaking only that which is sanctioned by reason, fear of God, and justice; rather, than proclaiming—before any scrutiny— that it is all a ruse to accumulate wealth.

Another objection they have is that prophecies were not fulfilled. In answer to this objection, it is sufficient to say [‘May the curse of God be upon the liars’]. Had they read my books carefully or queried the learned and knowledgeable of my Jama‘at, they would have known that thousands of prophecies have been fulfilled to date, and the witnesses to their fulfilment are not one or two, but in their thousands. What is the benefit of uncalled for denial? Will it make the return of Hazrat ‘Isa any more plausible?

One ought to—once and for all—give up the notion of the second coming of Hazrat ‘Isa. Let every opponent know for sure that he will reach the time of the agony of death at his appointed time and will die, but he will not see Hazrat ‘Isa descending from the heavens. This is also my prophecy which every opponent will testify to at the time of his death. Every maulawi and mullah and everyone who bears enmity towards me and writes against me, should know that they will die disappointed so far as they hope to see Hazrat ‘Isa coming down from the heavens.

They will not see him descend at all while they will get sick and reach the stage of death rattles and will leave the world in great bitterness. Is this not a prophecy? Can they say that it will not be fulfilled? It will surely be fulfilled! And then if they have children, they too should remember that they will also die similarly frustrated and no one will descend from heaven! And then if their children have children, they too will share in their frustration and none of them will see Hazrat ‘Isa [Jesus] descending from heaven!

And some ignorant people say that the prophecy with regard to Ahmad Baig’s son-in-law was not fulfilled. They do not understand that this prophecy—like the one regarding ‘Abdullah Atham—was conditional. In this prophecy, Almighty God’s revelation, addressing the maternal grandmother of his betrothed was:

Meaning: ‘O woman, repent! Repent, for a calamity is to befall the daughter of your daughter!’ So when Ahmad Baig died within the appointed time frame—in keeping with the prophecy of which this prophecy is one limb—fear developed in the hearts of all concerned as is the wont of human nature, and being fearful they humbled themselves. Therefore, God delayed the fulfilment of this prophecy.

And this, indeed, was a conditional prophecy, just as the prophecy regarding the death of ‘Abdullah Atham—who died nearly 11 years ago—was also a conditional prophecy. But the prophecy that Prophet Yunus [Jonah] had made with regard to the destruction of his people, had no conditions attached to it, and yet that nation was saved on account of their repentance and their asking for forgiveness. I have said it again and again that prophecies of warning can be delayed or even averted by repentance and asking for forgiveness, just as the promise of destruction concerning Yunus’s people was averted simply due to their repentance. Alas! How blind the people of this age are that the reply is given to them in accordance with the Book of God—again and again—yet they fail to understand!

Was Prophet Yunus not a true Prophet in their estimation—whose prophecy was without any condition and was a categorical prophecy that his people would be destroyed by a calamity within forty days, and yet that nation was not destroyed? In the case of the prophecies under discussion, however, the objection does not even arise as it would with regard to Yunus’s prophecy. Here the prophecies about the death of ‘Abdullah Atham, Ahmad Baig, and his son-in-law were conditional. It is surprising that, of the four prophecies, three have already been fulfilled. And ‘Abdullah Atham, Ahmad Baig, and Lekh Ram are long dead in keeping with the prophecies, but these people still do not desist from raising objections.

And they also object as to why an effort was made for the hand of Ahmad Baig’s daughter in marriage by offering inducements of different kinds. They do not understand that the effort was only with the intent that the divine decree be thereby put off and the calamity be averted. The same effort was made with regard to ‘Abdullah Atham and Lekh Ram. How do they know that it is forbidden to make any legitimate effort for the fulfilment of any prophecy?

Just ponder over it carefully and honestly whether it was not promised to the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, in the Holy Quran that idolatry of Arabia would be wiped out and Islam would be established in place of idolatry, and a day would come when the keys of the Ka‘bah would be in the hands of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. He would give them to whoever he chose. And that God would do all this Himself. And yet efforts were made for the spread of Islam that need not be detailed here. In fact, there is an authentic hadith that if someone sees a dream and that dream can be fulfilled by his effort, he should fulfil that dream by his own effort.