Diya’ul-Haqq

The Torch of Truth

Background

The accusations and allegations of the Christians, as well as the Mullahs, continued unabated against the Promised Messiah(as) on the alleged non-fulfilment of the prophecy about Atham’s death within the specified period of fifteen months. The attacks were made jointly at a time when the Promised Messiah(as) was engaged in writing his monumental scientific work on Arabic language entitled Minanur-Rahman.

The Book

Though the Promised Messiah(as) had answered each and every objection, yet the Christians kept on harping upon the same tune that his prophecy was not fulfilled. Therefore, the Promised Messiah(as) wrote in May 1895, a book entitled Diya’ul-Haqq, in which he explained that the prophecy was fulfilled and reiterated that the refusal of Atham to take an oath was evidence of the fact that he had turned towards the truth.

Atham could have sought shelter from snakes and lancers by setting the law in motion against them, but he did not do so, in spite of the fact that his friends and colleagues did their best to persuade him to do so. It was a question of personal injury to the honour of Christianity. The faith itself was at stake. If the Promised Messiah(as) were exposed in court, Christendom would have won a decisive victory over Islam and hundreds of people would have been converted. But Atham never went to court, nor did he come forward to swear that he had not turned towards the truth.

The Christian journal, Nur Afshan, dated September 13, 1895 published an article in which it was said that 12 months had passed and Atham was still alive. So the Promised Messiah(as) issued a leaflet in which he explained that he had not yet fixed a time for Atham’s Death. Twelve months were the limit if he had taken the oath.

Specimen of Writing

The reason of writing this book is that even after issuing four leaflet, a simple fact is not yet clear to Christian missionaries. My prophecy about ‘Abdullah Atham had been fulfilled. It is unfortunate that Christian missionaries did not carefully read these leaflets and still using misleading language and repeatedly stressing the absurd claim that the Prophecy did not fulfill. But we have fulfilled the obligation that we had, that is, had Atham not recognized the truth, which was the integral condition of the prophecy (as it is claimed), then he is invited to take an oath in public meeting that he did not recoil and get his reward of four thousand rupees. But Atham Sahib has refused to take an oath. His claim is that his religion did not allow him to take the oath. This is based on pure fabrication and lie. His elders have always taken oath. However, Dr. Henry Martyn Clark issued a filthy leaflet in Amritsar which reflected his odious personality, in which he maintained that swearing in our religion is like eating pork by Muslim, then St. Paul who had taken oath all his life had been eating pork all his life and St. Peter did the same thing, how this had become illegal (haram) in case of ‘Abdullah Atham. Everybody knows that among Christian taking of oath is not only permissible but in some cases they are obliged to take oath. British Courts which did not coerce anyone going against their religion, did not keep Christians out of purview of taking of oath. And it is on record that even Atham Sahib had taken oath in Courts.

What would have been better that these Christian missionaries should have forced him to take an oath or force him to pay compensation for putting Christians in such an embarrassing situation or they should have issued a leaflet that in reality Atham Sahib was a liar.

But instead of adopting this course, they had come out in open using abusive language and they advanced this lame excuse that Atham Sahib did not accept Islam openly. But, any fair minded person could understand that the condition mentioned in the said prophecy did not contain this wording “if Atham Sahib accept Islam openly then he would escape the death otherwise not.” The said prophecy only contain the simple word: “recoil”, then this wording would have made him to accept the truth privately, so to maintain that the prophecy demanded accepting the truth openly is baseless.1