An Answer to the Paper Islam and Ahmadism by Dr. Muhammad Iqbal

The Ahmadiyya Muslim community came into existence in 1889, when Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (d. 1908) initiated a Jamaat for the resuscitation of Islam. He claimed to be the Promised Messiah who has been commissioned directly by God Almighty for that very purpose.Regrettably, this noble movement was most bitterly opposed by the obscurantist Mulla who left no stone unturned in a malicious attempt to malign both the movement and its eminent founder. The common Muslim, illiterate and ignorant, has been in the firm grip of the Mulla for so long, who feeds off of the formers ignorance and naivety. The result is that almost overnight, the entire Muslim public of Punjab and India became bitterly opposed to the Ahmadiyya movement, holding them to be heretics or worse.The so called Poet of the East and 'great' Islamic thinker, Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal, claiming to spearhead the cause of the Muslim masses, not surprisingly inherited their hostile attitude toward the Ahmadiyya movement. He writes: Some writers of these letters want me to ...justify the attitude of the Indian Muslims towards the Ahmadis...I propose first to meet these demands which I regard as perfectly legitimate. (p.7) In other words, Iqbal has stated at the very outset of his paper that he is indeed biased against the Ahmadiyya community, and he regards the attitude of the common ignorant Muslims toward the movement as 'justified' and 'perfectly legitimate'.His first accusation against the Ahmadiyya movement is that it seeks to carve out from the Ummat of the Arabian Prophet a new Ummat for the Indian prophet (p.9-10). Nothing could be further from the truth!The fact of the matter is that the Ahmadiyya Movement is a Jamaat (congregation) and sect within the broader Muslim Ummah, and has never claimed otherwise. It is well known that there are as many as 73 different sects among the Muslims, but none of them claim to be a separate Ummah from the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Likewise, the Ahmadiyya Movement claims to be a single sect from among the 73 sects that currently exist within the broader Muslim nation. While it is true that according to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), only 1 of those 73 sects will attain salvation, and the Ahmadiyya Movement asserts that it alone is the saved sect in accordance with the prophecy and the divinely manifested Signs that God has shown in its favor, nonetheless, neither has the Ahmadiyya sect nor any other of the 73 sects claimed to comprise a separate Ummah carved out of the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).If Iqbal argues that the commissioning of a Jamaat or Sect constitutes separation from the Ummah, then justice demands that he admit that there is not in existence a single Muslim Ummah, but rather, 73 distinct Ummats!

The next argument brought by Iqbal to justify the hostile and excommunicating attitude of the general Muslim body toward the Ahmadiyya Movement is deeply revealing of Iqbals irreligious and worldly motivation and psychology for opposing the Ahmadiyya. He gives the example of the Jewish community in Amsterdam excommunicating Spinoza from their ranks, for the purpose of preventing communal disintegration and preserving unity and survival of the community.If only Iqbal had gotten to the point and cited the example of how the Jewish Sanhedrin pronounced the Messiah and Prophet Jesus of Nazareth (peace be upon him) as a force for disintegration and disunity in order to justify their demand for his crucifixion. In first century Palestine, the Jewish leadership feared the emergence of new prophets or the Messiah, because they knew it would put them in an awkward position before the Romans. Furthermore, the appearance of a new prophet or the Messiah meant that the common Jew would prefer divinely revealed guidance over the worldly and temporal leadership of the Sanhedrin and the rabbis. Therefore, in the name of preserving the Jewish community, the Jewish elders denounced Prophet Jesus of Nazareth and excommunicated his followers. Till today, this remains the greatest intellectual argument of the modern Jew for resisting belief in Jesus as the Messiah. The Jewish rabbi warns his flock that to accept Jesus as Messiah would spell death for the Jews as a community. It is an existential issue for them.

In essence, Iqbal has come forward and admitted quite plainly that he holds the same mentality of the Jews, who for that very attitude have been severely reprimanded in the Holy Quran. Iqbal unapologetically implies that his opposition to the Ahmadiyya movement is purely political: It is true that when a person declared to be holding heretical doctrines threatens the existing social order an independent Muslim State will certainly take action; but in such a case the action of the State will be determined more by political considerations than by purely religious ones (p.16)Once again, Iqbal exposes his Jewish trait of opposing the religious truth out of a political consideration to preserve the existing social order. Is it not true that virtually every Prophet sent by God was opposed by his people for this very reason? They used the rallying cry of preserving the existing social order as justification for persecuting a true Prophet of God, whether that prophet was Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus or Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon them all).Next, Iqbal attempts to lay the foundation for a half-baked theological attack on the Ahmadiyya movement. He claims that Islam is a simple faith which in its essence has two core beliefs: The simple faith of Muhammad is based on two propositions that God is One, and that Muhammad is the last of the line of those holy men who have appeared from time to time in all countries and in all ages to guide mankind to the right way of living (p.17).Regrettably, Iqbal has attempted to utterly twist the second of the two core beliefs of Islam as enshrined in the Shahada 'I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah (God), and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah'. Note that the second part of the Shahada makes absolutely no mention whatsoever of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) being the last of anything. All it says is that it is critical for a person to be considered a true believer and Muslim to bear witness to the fact that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a Messenger of God period.

Realizing that he is writing to justify the exclusion of the Ahmadiyya from the fold of Islam, while there are many other sects among the Muslims who diverge on numerous points of doctrine and practice, Iqbal says: It is true that mutual accusations of heresy for differences in minor points of law and theology among Muslim religious sects have been rather common. In this indiscriminate use of the word kufr, both for minor theological points of difference as well as for these extreme cases of heresy which involve the excommunication of the heretic, some present-day educated Muslims, who possess practically no knowledge of the history of Muslim theological disputes, see a sign of social and political distintegration of the Muslim community...The question of what may be called major heresy arises only when the teaching of a thinker or reformer affects the frontiers of the faith of Islam. Unfortunately, this question does arise in connection with the teachings of Qadianism (p.19-20).In summary, Iqbal has argued that the numerous, historical theological disputes among various sects and schools of Islam were over minor theological points. Far from acting as a force of disintegration, Iqbal claims these minor theological disputes ironically strengthened the intellectual foundations of Islamic theology, since the latter possesses a synthetic spirit (p.19). But as far as the Ahmadiyya (or 'Qadianism') is concerned, than it is an exception, since the Ahmadiyya movement is apparently trespassing against the 'frontiers of the faith'.But so far, Iqbal has utterly failed to prove exactly how and why the Ahmadiyya sect is guilty of major heresy. We have already demonstrated to the reader how Iqbal could not even properly translate the second core belief of Islam belief in Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as being the Messenger of Allah. But let us turn our attention now to the first and most basic teaching of Islam the Oneness of Allah or Tawhid. Iqbal acknowledges that this is the first of the two core beliefs of the faith, rejection of which is tantamount to major heresy. He further claims, quite erroneously, that Such heresy must be and has been rare in the history of Islam (p.17).But a quick survey of the present theological and sectarian controversies which are thriving in the Muslim world will convince the reader that far from being rare in the history of Islam, major theological disputes among the Muslims over fundamental and core principles of the faith is quite commonplace.Take for example the Brelwi sect, which boasts a major following in the Indian subcontinent. According to the Brelwis, it is encouraged and virtuous to invoke the dead apart from Allah, and seek assistance from the inmates of the graves. The Brelwis and some other Sufi sects venerate the tombs of saints and pirs, some of their common people even prostrating before graves and crying out in anguish to a deceased shaykh as a Muslim of any other sect would cry out to Allah alone. Yet far from being considered guilty of major heresy and trespassing against the first core principle of Islam (Tawhid), the Brelwis and likeminded sects actually form the majority of the Muslim community!Another significant branch of Islam are the Shiites. This historic sect believe that the Twelve Imams who succeeded the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are, like him, absolutely infallible and receive divine revelation from God. Furthermore, many of them believe that the present Quran which all Muslims read from has been altered, and that the true and real Quran is now in the possession of the hidden Twelfth Imam, who lies supernaturally concealed in a cave, and shall emerge sometime in the future before the end of the world!Apparently for Iqbal, the belief widely held among many Shiites that the Quran which all Muslims read from and have been reading from for the past fourteen centuries is in fact a fabrication and has been grossly altered by the Sunni caliphs, does not constitute major heresy.In fact, there are all sorts of different Muslim sects which exist at present holding bizarre and unorthodox views which are of a fundamental nature. Some believe that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is omnipresent, that he is physically alive, and that he is in reality made from a portion of Gods own Light! Others believe that the fourth Caliph Hadrat Ali (Allah be pleased with him) was God incarnate. There are sects which believe God resembles a human body, while the Deobandi sect believes He (God) is capable of lying! Yet none of this is considered major heresy for Iqbal, who is singlely focused on the alleged heresy of the Ahmadiyya alone, because, as we have mentioned earlier, they somehow pose an existential and political threat to Muslim solidarity.And while Iqbal is content to say that the existing and historic theological disputes among the Muslims are minor, the reality is that virtually every sect has declared its rival as being outside the fold of Islam. The Sunnis declare the Shiites as being outside the fold of Islam, and vice versa. Likewise, the Brelwis and the Deobandis have both excommunicated each other. They refuse even to pray behind each other or offer funeral prayers for someone of the opposing sect. The so called 'Wahhabis' of Saudi Arabia are anathematized by most of the Muslim Ulama of the rest of the world. They instruct their followers to avoid praying behind the imam of the Kaba because he is apparently a Wahhabi appointed by the Saudi government. Whether Iqbal cares to admit it or not, his imagined political solidarity and unity of the Muslim world is quite non-existent, a fact which has nothing at all to do with the Ahmadiyya movement.

Next Iqbal exposes his gross ignorance of the teachings and position of the Ahmadiyya movement. Why, one must ask, does this poet/philosopher seek to write about a movement he knows barely anything about? Iqbal says: Since the Qadianis believe the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement to be the bearer of such a revelation, they declare that the entire world of Islam is infidel (p.21). When has the Ahmadiyya movement ever declared the 'entire world of Islam' as being infidel? It is true that the Ahmadiyya movement holds as a firm conviction the belief that the Messiah Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian received divine revelations the content of which confirmed and testified to the veracity of the divine revelations of his Master the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). However, while rejection of the promised Messiah (whose advent was prophecised by the Prophet Muhammad himself) is surely a reprehensible matter, never has the Ahmadiyya movement declared Muslims who reject the Messiah whose coming was foretold by our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as being 'infidels'. The Ahmadiyya movement does not seek to assume the role of God and declare who is a Muslim and who is not unlike the fanatic Mulla.Yes, it can surely be said that for a Muslim to reject belief in someone or something which the Prophet (peace be upon him) specifically instructed us to accept must be described as contrary to true faith.The real issue with Iqbal is that he refuses to consider this question from its proper, Islamic perspective. Rather than examining whether or not Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad truly is the promised Messiah whose advent was foretold by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and making his decision accordingly, he has sought to repudiate the Ahmadiyya movement using political and existential arguments which are contrary to the methodology and premise of Islam.In effect, Iqbal is saying: I don't care to find out whether or not Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad really was sent by God as the promised Messiah, because in my heart of hearts I cannot be bothered with such matters of faith and truth. Rather, I shall reject him because to reject him is necessary for the Muslim community to preserve its political cohesion and solidarity, and that trumps all other considerations. Does the reader need anymore convincing of why Iqbals attack on the Ahmadiyya movement is so self-destructive for Islam itself? Even the Mulla is superior to Iqbal because he at leasts tries to justify his rejection of Ahmadiyya from a spiritual point of view that is ultimately concerned with the love of truth and not mere political expediency.

Next Iqbal makes a bold attempt at refuting the premise of the Ahmadiyya claim of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad being a prophet and Messiah. He writes: The founder's [Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] own argument, quite worthy of a mediaeval theologian, is that the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam must be regarded as imperfect if it is not creative of another prophet. He claims his own prophethood to be an evidence of the prophet-rearing power of the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam (p.21). Here Iqbal has quite accurately described the central argument of the Ahmadiyya movement and its Founder. Iqbal himself admits that this is a strong argument, though in couched terms, saying that such an argument is 'quite worthy of a mediaeval theologian'. The problem is that, and the reader should bear witness to this fact, that if he reads Iqbals entire paper Islam and Ahmadism, nowhere once does Iqbal attempt to refute or even address this powerful argument. Instead, Iqbal cleverly pulls the wool over the readers eyes by diverting to another point a purely diversionary tactic on his part. He says: But if you further ask him whether the spirituality of Muhammad is capable of rearing more prophets than one, his answer is No. This virtually amounts to saying: Muhammad is not the last Prophet; I am the last. (p.21-22).In fact, Iqbal has created from his own imagination a hypothetical dialogue, in which he presumes to speak on behalf of the Founder of the Ahmadiyya movement a person whom he utterly rejects and is writing against!The fact of the matter is that the spiritual excellence of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) excels and supercedes that of all other prophets who have ever been sent. It is for this reason that he bears the unique designation Seal of the Prophets. Far from detracting from his excellence and superiority, the advent of great saints, reformers, and even subordinate prophets from within the Ummah of Muhammad, who act in complete compliance to his teachings serves to glorify and demonstrate practically that excellence and superiority. In the number of such great saints and reformers is not one or even a few. Throughout the history of Islam, there have been thousands upon thousands of such eminent saints and reformers. And even in the future, there shall continue to arise, as Allah sees fit, such eminent saints and reformers, especially from within the Ahmadiyya movement. But this fact must be borne in mind that out of all these great saints and reformers of the Ummah, there are even among them different ranks and positions. The position of the promised Messiah, whose advent was specifically foretold by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the most elevated among the category of great Islamic saints and reformers who would be given birth to by the prophet-rearing spirituality of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). In other words, there are thousands perhaps millions of great saints and reformers of this Ummah who can even be compared to the ancient prophets, but they are all in subordination to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and among them the highest and most perfect subordinate of the Prophet Muhammad is none other than the Promised Messiah. No one from this Ummah before or after him can attain that position of being the closest in affinity to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as the Prophet Muhammad himself said: I am the closest to Jesus son of Mary and There is no prophet between me and him, and How can my Ummah be destroyed when I am at its beginning and Jesus son of Mary is at its end. All of these traditions prove that among the great eminent figures of this Ummah, the most eminent will be the promised Messiah who has been given the name of Jesus son of Mary.Therefore, Iqbals futile argument that the Ahmadiyya claim that the prophet-rearing spirituality of the Prophet (peace be upon him) could only produce a single subordinate Prophet is a result of ignorance and misunderstanding.Once again I reiterate...there shall continue to arise from this Ummah great and eminent figures, saints and reformers, who can be compared to the ancient Prophets, but none of them shall attain the high rank attained by the Promised Messiah, because no one before or after him was such a completely perfect follower of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). When we gaze into the heavens, we see the blazing and glorious sun, and we see the radiant moon which is reflecting its light, and then we see countless stars twinkling in the distance. This is the parable of the Ummah. The sun is the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the moon is the promised Messiah, and the countless stars are the millions of saints and reformers. The moon and the countless stars are all lesser in status to the sun, but no star can match our perception of the beauty of the moon, and the moon can never match the glory of the sun.

The aqidah of Ahlus Sunnati wal Jamaah with respect to the Hayat (life) and Nuzul (descent) of Masih alaihis salam:

I have come across a narration in the Tafsir Durr al-Manthur of Imam Suyuti in which he brings forth a narration from Imam Hasan al-Basri (rahimahullah) in which he describes the wafaah of Masih (alaihis-salam) as being the wafaah of sleep. Now, as the Quran has stated, during sleep only the soul (Nafs) is taken by Allah and not the physical body. Apart from the Quran, our own empirical observation shows us that the body is not up the Heavens during sleep.This leaves us with a dilemma. If only the soul of Masih (alaihis salam) was taken by Allah, then the questions remains concerning the location of his physical body. If someone says that Masih (alaihis salam) is sleeping somewhere, and that before the Apocalypse, his soul shall return to his body, thus he shall re-awaken, and that this is the significance of his Nuzul (second coming) then the question remains about the location of his body. The only logical path for this claim would be to say that his body is hidden somewhere in the world, perhaps concealed in a cave or some other remote area.

According to the narrations regarding the Nuzul it is said that Masih (alaihis salam) shall descend upon the wings of two Angels. According to a narration brought forward by Baihaqi, the word sky is used: How shall you be when the Son of Mary descends among you from the sky, and your Imam is from among yourselves? (Al-Asmaa wal-Siffaat lil-Baihaqi)

The narration in Sahih al-Bukhari, however, must be given precedence. That narration omits the word sky. Furthermore, the phrase Wa Imaamukum minkum meaning your Imam shall be from among yourselves is given two interpretations. The more popular view is that it is a reference to the Mahdi, and proves that at the time of the descent of the Messiah, the Mahdi shall already have emerged as a leader of the Muslim ummah.The second view, which is undoubtedly weighty, is that it is a reference to the Messiah himself. Meaning, what will be your condition when the Messiah shall descend among you and he (the Messiah) shall be your Imam from among yourselves. The wording of the Hadith makes the latter position sound bizarre, unless one thing is taken into consideration. It is the view of the Ahmadiyya sect that the second phrase of the Hadith is describing the modality of the first phrase. That is to say, the phrase Wa Imaamukum minkum is clarifying the reality of the Nuzul of Ibn Mariam. The Messiah shall indeed descend among you, but the manner of his descent is such that he shall be a man born and raised from among you serving as your Imam.

Another point needs to be considered in this discussion. What is the reality of the prophecy regarding the descent of the Messiah near the white minaret in the east of Damascus?Imam Albani has refuted the popular view that it means that the Messiah shall descend from Heaven directly on top of the white minaret. Instead, he claims that the meaning is that the Messiah shall descend to a place which is in proximity to the white minaret.

There are other narrations which indicate the Messiah shall descend to Jerusalem, specifically the Mount Afiq. Another narration says that he shall descend to the east of the Gate of Damascus. That could be a possible reference to Jerusalem as well, since it is referencing a specific 'Gate ofDamascus' and not the actual city of Damascus in Syria.

What is undoubtable is that our Prophet (Sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) has certainly given us the glad tidings of the second advent of the Messiah. Though the exact details and reality of that descent are open for discussion and debate. What a true Believer cannot question is the truth of the prophecy of the coming of the Messiah as one of the major Signs of the Apocalypse. This prophecy is mutawaatir in the essence of its meaning but not in its precise wording.

Some modernist thinkers and Hadith-rejecters have altogether denied this prophecy and refuse to accept the second coming of the Messiah. They claim that the Qur'an does not support such a belief; rather it confirms the natural death of the Messiah. The Ahmadiyya sect are superior to such modernists and Hadith-rejecters, for although they say that the Messiah has passed away as proven from the Qur'an, they do not altogether dismiss the prophecy and glad-tidings of the coming of the Messiah. Rather, they have established their very movement on the foundation of that prophecy, though obviously differing from the majority of the Ummah as regards to its true interpretation.

The modernists and Hadith-rejecters deny many affairs, such as the coming of Messiah, the coming of Mahdi, and the tribulation of Dajjal (Antichrist).

However, they have no choice but to accept other Signs of the Apocalypse, such as the spreading of Gog and Magog and the coming of the 'Beast of the Earth'.

With respect to the Daabat al-Ard (Beast of the Earth), there are very few authentic Hadith which describe it's reality. I have come across a rare but authentic Hadith which correlates the Beast of the Earth to a mark that shall appear on the faces of the people and that this mark has some relation to buying and selling. This would appear to confirm the Biblical view of the Beast of the Earth, as mentioned in the Books of Daniel and Revelation.

With respect to Gog and Magog, there are some authentic Hadith which explain their reality. According to a Hadith, the Prophet (alaihis-salaam) once saw a vision concerning them which very much alarmed him. He proclaimed: Woe to the Arabs from a coming trial! A hole has appeared in the dam built to block the way of Gog and Magog (and he gestured with his hand to describe the size of the whole). The Hadith appears to be saying that the dam which was built by Zul-Qarnain to prevent the invasion of Gog and Magog was on the verge of being destroyed during the very lifetime of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alaihi wasallam). The fact that we do not find even a trace of that barrier in the present day as it is described in the Qur'an is further proof that perhaps it has already been destroyed. Thus the calamities which befell the Arabs centuries ago with the Turkic and Mongol hordes that descended upon them from Central Asia was essentially the first attack of Gog and Magog spoken of in the Hadith. A Hadith even describes the physical features of Gog and Magog is identical to other Hadith which describe the Turkic races that they shall have round faces like shields and small, beady eyes.

Another Hadith describes Gog and Magog as being such a large number that they shall account for nine-hundred and ninety-nine out of every thousand of mankind. That is to say, 99.9% of humanity is described as being from Gog and Magog. Yet perhaps this Hadith has broadened the definition of Gog and Magog to include those people who are attached to them and follow them into corruption and misguidance. For a Hadith of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) states: Whoever resembles a people is to be considered as one of them.