Narrated in Sahih Bukhari, Book 31, Hadith 6177

“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If the din were at the Pleiades, even then a person from Persia would have taken hold of it, or one amongst the Persian descent would have surely found it.“

The Ahmadis often argue that this hadith refers to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.  How, you ask?  Because he revived Islam and was of Persian ancestry.  So, does this hadith refer to him?  Lets analyze.

Historically, the Persian people carried the banner of Islam for hundreds of years.  Many of the great scholars of Islam, in its various sciences from Fiqh (codified law), to ‘aqidah (theology), to Arabic grammar, to spirituality were Persian.  For example, Imam al-Ghazali, Al-Zamakhshari (The great scholar of the Arabic language) and many many others.

Now, they argue, that another Persian man has come to revive Islam.  Whether or not he really revived Islam aside, was Mirza Persian?  …was he really?  Lets analyze.

According to the modern definition of nationality, the Ahmadis might have a valid argument.  If they can show that his ancestry hailed from Persia, then he is Persian.  But, this understanding of race and nationality is not in accordance with the Islamic understanding.  It is based off of the nationalistic European understanding of race and ethnicity that crept into the collectively Muslim psyche during the periods of colonization.  But, this is not how Muslims historically understand nationality.

Traditionally, nationality was based on where someone lived, not where their ancestry hailed. For example, the great companion Suhayb ar-Rumi’s background was Arab from the village of al-Thani.  At a young age, he was captured and sold as a slave into the Byzantine empire and lived amongst them, but eventually returned to Arabia.  Even though he was ethnically Arab, he was called a Roman.  Likewise, Ahmad ibn Ibrahim “Ibn Nuhaas” the author of Kitab al-Jihad [not of the pen!], was called Al-Dimashqi (the Syrian) because he was originally from Syria and when he relocated to Egypt, he was called al-Dumyati (a city in Egypt).  His nationality changed based on his area of residence.

Were people cognizant of their ancestory?  Yes, of course.  But, that was less important, more of a minute- a trivial detail.  Nationality was based on your place of birth and/or your place of residence (depending on who you asked).  If your great great grandparents were from Samarqand (modernday Uzbekistan), but you were born and raised in Iraq, you were Iraqi.  If you moved to Al-Andulus (Spain) and settled there, you were Aundulusi.  At most, your ancestry mattered two to three generations back.

How does Mirza measure up to this standard?  Mirza never left India for any significant amount of time [not even to perform Hajj].  He lived and died in India.  His father Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, grandfather Mirza Ata Muhammad and great grandfather Mirza Gul Muhammad were all from India.  He even referred to himself as ” Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani“  Based on this classical understanding, Mirza was 100% Hindi (Indian), not Persian. Therefore, the narrations about the Persian people and how they will revive Islam have nothing to do with him.

And we put our trust in Allah that He made guide the Ahmadis to Islam.