Addendum to this Treatise
For the Attention of the Government

After completing this treatise I received an English treatise authored by the editor of Isha’at-us-Sunnah, Muhammad Husain of Batala, published by the Victoria Press Lahore on 14 October 1898. I was greatly dismayed to see this treatise because of the manner in which the author has very shamelessly lied about me and about his belief regarding the advent of the Mahdi. He very deceptively attempts to discredit me as a rebel in the eyes of the eminent government. But, as the old adage has it—and how true indeed—truth ultimately prevails. Therefore, I am confident that this enlightened and perceptive government will swiftly discover the truth of the matter.

The first untruth of Muhammad Husain mentioned in his treatise, which he presents before the distinguished government is that I am a danger to the government; that is to say, I harbour rebellious aspirations at heart. But, I strongly state that if this were true, I would prefer death to a life of disloyalty and treachery. With all due respect, I call on the esteemed government to investigate my state of affairs and teaching as minutely as possible. Further, they ought to question under oath those of my community members who are respected officials, Indian officers, chieftains, and other honourable and educated persons, and who number in the hundreds, as to the instructions I have given to them with reference to this benign government and the vigour with which I have advocated obedience to the state.

Moreover, the government should closely reflect on the testimony of Maulvi Muhammad Husain—which he himself wrote in Isha’at-us-Sunnah as a review of my book Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah and which has been alluded to in this treatise as well—about the views of both my father, Mirza Ghulam Murtaza and myself, with regard to the British government. Moreover, the eminent government ought to carefully study those writings of mine which have been published over the past nineteen years in their support; in fact, investigate me from every angle. If, after this, the government considers my state of affairs to be questionable then it is my ardent desire that the government ought to give me the severest of punishments. However, if the reports of Muhammad Husain given to the government are found to be contrary to the facts, then as a loyal, well-wishing, and devoted citizen, I respectfully call on this benign government to admonish him for his false representations to the government, which contradict his own admission in his review of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah and which contradict the original view he held for twelve years without fail.

Now that he is my enemy, he accuses me of treachery, even though for nineteen years I have expressed my well wishes for this benign government through my pen and have conveyed my praise for the justice of this government in far-off countries, to such an extent that I can confidently say that no similar example can be found in the accomplishments of others. I am at a loss for words with which to humbly submit before the government how greatly the slanders fabricated by this individual have grieved and wounded me. How pitiful that he has intentionally and knowingly lied cruelly about me to the government and has sought to discredit all of my services. I have sound reasons and strong testimony in support of my claim. I am hopeful that because I belong to a loyal family that has proven its obedience to the government by offering its wealth and lives in its support, my painful request will be carefully heard by this beneficent administration and whoever is deemed a liar will be reprimanded.

The second thing which Muhammad Husain has written in this treatise is that I have published a revelation to the effect that the empire of this esteemed government will be destroyed in eight years. I can only respond to this calumny by calling on God to ruin the one who lies; I have never published any such revelation. All my books are present before the government. I respectfully call on them to inquire from this individual in which book, letter, or announcement of mine have I published such a revelation? I am hopeful that the honourable government will remain cautious of his deception in case he contrives a plan to reinforce his false statement and calls on some of his community and associates, who harbour deep animosity towards me on account of religious difference, to produce false testimony to the government. I have no relations and contact with this individual or those who share his ideas, so it cannot be said that I told them anything in person. It is in my books and announcements that I publish whatever I desire to articulate; therefore, my books and announcements are sufficient to inquire about my ideas and revelations. The honourable members of my community are also witnesses. Therefore, I respectfully request our revered government to interrogate Muhammad Husain about the deceitful informer who told him of this revelation. The former Deputy Commissioner of District Gurdaspur, Captain Douglas, has already noted during the case brought against me by Dr Martyn Clark that Muhammad Husain harbours enmity against me and this is why he does not refrain from lying about me.

The third matter which Muhammad Husain has written in this treatise is that I have falsely claimed to be the Promised Messiah. Here it is sufficient to write that just as the Prophets, peace be upon them, have had their prophethood proven over time, so too my God has proven my claim. Furthermore, the heavenly signs of God Almighty have given testimony in my support. All that remains to be answered is why Muhammad Husain and his like-minded associates call me a liar and harbour such enmity against me? As I have already mentioned in this treatise, their enmity stems from the fact that my teaching goes against their aims and objectives; namely, against the belief that the Promised Messiah will descend from heaven and join forces with the Mahdi to war with the Christians.1 They consider the existence of the Mahdi necessary because in their view, the Promised Messiah cannot be a Khalifah as he does not hail from the Quraish. And Muhammad Husain has expressed his own belief as such in volume 12, page 380 of his magazine in commemoration of Sultan Abdul Hamid II ascending the throne of the Ottoman Empire. Therefore, such people have presented this very argument to establish the need for a Mahdi from the Quraish at the time of the second advent of the Messiah and have also mentioned many battles. I am certain that such creeds are extremely dangerous because a person who holds this belief always harbours thoughts of rebellion in their heart. I, however, oppose such beliefs. I do not believe in any such Messiah or Mahdi who will war with the disbelievers and distribute their wealth among the Muslim clerics and their people.

So it is for this reason that in their eyes I am a liar as my beliefs spell the ruin of all their hopes. I recognise that this teaching of mine has done untold damage to their aspirations, but this is no fault of mine. Rather, the fault lies in their own wrongdoings and misconceptions. Muhammad Husain’s statement in his treatise that he does not believe in the Mahdi who is awaited by all of his like-minded clerics and in whose support the Messiah will descend from the heavens as per their belief, is a completely hypocritical assertion, which he does not hold at heart.

Hundreds of Muslim clerics in the Punjab and India can testify that he believes in a bloodthirsty Mahdi, but he duplicitously hides the truth of his beliefs from the government. Like-minded clerics such as Maulvi Ahmadullah of Amritsar, Maulvi Rasheed Ahmad of Gangoh, Maulvi Abdul-Jabbar of Amritsar, Maulvi Muhammad Bashir of Bhopal, Maulavi Abdul-Haqq of Delhi, Maulvi Ibrahim Arah, Maulvi Abdul-Aziz of Ludhiana and particularly Maulvi Nazeer Husain of Delhi, who is a teacher of Muhammad Husain, ought to be asked under oath whether they believe that the Promised Mahdi will come and wage war and whether or not Muhammad Husain of Batala, the editor of Isha’at-us-Sunnah, is from among them and shares in their beliefs or not; also whether he believes that the Khilafat of this time can be occupied by anyone other than a person from the Quraish. These testimonies will reveal the extent of Muhammad Husain’s hypocrisy before the government in the same way that the bones and innards of a corpse are revealed during their exhumation from a whitewashed and embellished grave.

I assure my wise and enlightened government that this individual holds the same belief about the Mahdi as do his like- minded friends, i.e. other Muslim clerics from the Punjab and the rest of India. The government can understand that it would be impossible for Muhammad Husain to hold a different view from the other Muslim clerics regarding such a widely accepted Islamic belief, and yet remain their friend and leader. A further proof of this is that in volume 12, page 380 of his Isha’at-us-Sunnah, he has clearly stated that ‘Khilafat is the due right only of the Quraish; and no one from any other people can be a Khalifah.’ It must then be pondered how he can suggest that the Messiah would be a king at the time of his second advent—because he is an Israelite and not from the Quraish. Furthermore, in the absence of the Khalifah, how can wars be waged? Therefore, all of the Muslim clerics have been forced to accept that at the time of the second advent of the Messiah, it is essential that there should be a Khalifah from the Quraish who should be a king of the time. If the coming of the Awaited Mahdi were to be denied, all of the beliefs of these people would be shattered. The descent of the Messiah from the heavens would also become futile because there would be no rightful Khalifah on earth in whose company the Messiah, peace be upon him, would fight the disbelievers.

It is for this reason that Muhammad Husain firmly believes that when the Messiah descends, the Promised Mahdi will surely be raised from among the Quraish; he will be the Khalifah of the age and the Promised Messiah will serve him along with those who pledge allegiance at his hand. For tُhis reason, in their view the Hadith in Sahih Bukhari, i.e. 2, alludes to the Promised Mahdi due to the words َِ [imam] and ْ [minkum]; whereas, in my estimation, the word imam here refers to the Messiah who has been conferred spiritual authority. My view on this stands in stark contrast to that of Muhammad Husain and all his like-minded clerics who reside in the Punjab and throughout India. According to them the word imam in this Hadith alludes to the Awaited Mahdi who will be from the Quraish and who will wage war; and the Promised Messiah will serve him as an adviser and counsellor, but the Khalifah of the time will be the Mahdi. In short, due to an incorrect understanding of the Hadith 3 which is firmly grounded in their hearts, they believe that: Khilafat would ultimately return to the Quraish, the name of this Khalifah would be Muhammad Mahdi, he would descend from the Children of Fatimah and shed rivers of blood in the cause of religion.

If Muhammad Husain is simply asked: ‘According to your belief, the Messiah would not be a Khalifah when he descends from the heavens as he would not be from the Quraish; who, then is the Khalifah who would wage war against the disbelievers? Furthermore, who is the Imam mentioned in the Hadith of Bukhari, These people will never say that the word Imam applies to the Promised Messiah, rather they will only respond by saying that the reference is to the Mahdi—namely, the one who will be from the Quraish. Thus, this question will expose their hypocrisy. It is worthy of note that Muhammad Husain does not consider the Hadith 4 to be valid and interprets the Hadith of Bukhari ْ to refer to the Khalifah from the Quraish, and not to the Promised Messiah. Thus, it is established that he believes in the Mahdi and awaits his advent. How shameful, then, is the perjury of this man who conveys one belief to the British government, but privately holds a contrary belief.

If the respected authorities allow me to speak with him about this issue and if, during the course of discussion, his fellow clerics are also brought before us, it will become readily apparent that this individual has thus far been deceiving the British government by stating that which is contrary to his deeply rooted belief.

When this question is posed, I have some of his writings in my possession that are sufficient to bring about his disgrace, which I prayed for to God Almighty regarding the one who is a liar in my announcement of 21 November 1898.

It is improper for anyone to utter such brazen lies before the government. Had he truly rejected the advent of the Khalifah from the Quraish—generally referred to as the Mahdi—and like me believed in a non-belligerent and non-violent Messiah, he too would perforce have had edicts declaring him to be a disbeliever as I have.

I assure the government that in this particular case, Muhammad Husain says one thing but believes another. In the company of his like-minded clerics he claims to hold the same belief as them. Yet when he writes something to please the government he simply states, ‘I do not believe that a Mahdi who wages war will appear.’ However, if he does not believe in such a Mahdi, why does he claim to be the chief and advocate of those clerics that do? Justice in these matters now rests in the hands of the government. In my view, the government can easily ascertain the true beliefs of both of us if we are made to state our beliefs in their presence and in the presence of other Muslim clerics. At such a time, the whole truth regarding the one who is a hypocrite will be exposed. Thus, I very respectfully request that a judgement be made, especially since he has spoken such a blatant lie, how then can it be guaranteed that he speaks the truth in other matters he brings before the government? — Author

END