Gressenhall Road: Mirza Masroor’s New Palace

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

The Ahmadiyya Community has applied for an extensive redevelopment of their site at Gressenhall Road, London, SW18 5QL. The site contains the oldest Ahmadi prayer house in the UK and the residence of the Ahmadiyya leader Mirza Masroor Ahmad.

The development description reads:

“Demolition of the west wing of the administration block and hall next to the London Mosque and office buildings, plant room, wash rooms, bin store and garage along western boundary. Erection of replacement hall with single-storey element containing kitchen, bookshop, bin store and garage; alterations to administration/residential building, including the addition of a fourth floor and new facade in connection with use as offices. Erection of three-storey building to provide three dwellings ancillary to the Mosque, fronting Melrose Road. Use of No.65 Melrose Road as ancillary residential accommodation. Landscaping works including the felling of 13 trees.”

Continue reading

On Baihaqi’s narration about the descent of Eisa (A.S.)

In my last post on categorical narrations about the descent of Eisa (AS) from the heavens above, I quoted a hadith (#3) from Imam Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat and promised to answer the Ahmadi chatter about it.

I am cognizant of the fact that it may well be too deep and not of too common interest but I feel there is need to document the things for general use if and when required.

The Hadith:

The Hadith in full along with the comments by Imam Baihaqi goes as under:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ، أنا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ إِسْحَاقَ، أنا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، ثنا ابْنُ بُكَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنِي اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ يُونُسَ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، مَوْلَى أَبِي قَتَادَةَ الْأَنْصَارِيِّ قَالَ: إِنَّ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «كَيْفَ أَنْتُمْ إِذَا نَزَلَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ فِيكُمْ وَإِمَامُكُمْ مِنْكُمْ» . رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ بُكَيْرٍ، وَأَخْرَجَهُ مُسْلِمٌ مِنْ وَجْهٍ آخَرَ عَنْ يُونُسَ. وَإِنَّمَا أَرَادَ نُزُولَهُ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ بَعْدَ الرَّفْعِ إِلَيْهِ

Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz (i.e. Imam Hakim) – Abu Bakr bin Ishaq – Ahmad bin Ibrahim – Ibn Bukayr – Laith – Yunus – Ibn Shihab – Nafi’ the freed-slave of Abu Qadadah al-Ansari — Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him – Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, said: “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you from the heavens and your Imam will be from amongst you?” Bukhari narrated it in al-Sahih from Yahya bin Bukayr. And Muslim also narrated it through another chain from Yunus (bin Yazid). And they (also) meant his descent from the Heavens after his ascension towards it.

(Asma’ wa Sifaat 2/331 Hadith 895. Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has classified the narration as Sahih)

Note: The difference in the reference to Hadith in the current and the previous post is because I am using a different edition now. This one is with research of the scholar mentioned above.

Answers to Objections

Ahmadis contend that the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” in this narration are not genuine but a later interpolation.

The author of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book has raised certain objections on this narration See Ahmadiyya Pocket Book pp.227-228. In the following lines I respond to each of them.

Comparison with Bukhari’s narration:

He says that Imam Baihaqi has written after the narration, “Bukhari narrated it,” and in Bukhari’s Sahih we do not find the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” so it means these words are not part of the narration.

This is a rather naïve argument for it shows absolute ignorance of the author.

1. Firstly Baihaqi’s book is not like Kanzul Ummal that he is quoting things on someone’s authority without giving a chain down to himself. Infact as one can see Imam Baihaqi has given the chain down to him and that is why he has clarified that Bukhari has narrated it from Yahya bin Bukayr. Even though the same fellow falls in the chain of Imam Baihaqi but between him and Ibn Bukayr there are two other fellows. This proves Baihaqi has not narrated it on the authority of Bukhari but has given a complete chain for himself.

2. Now as to the question that why it happens. I reproduce the words of Shaykh Shafi Usmani in response to this;

فإن من له أدنى معرفة بالحديث وكتبه يعلم أن المحدثين قاطبة – ولا سيما البيهقي – ربما يعزو رواية لبعض المحدثين إذا أخرجها بأكثر ألفاظها ، ولا يشترط استيعاب ألفاظ الرواية ، فإذا قال المحدث : رواه البخاري كان مراده أن أصل الحديث أخرجه البخاري

‘Whoever has even a slight knowledge of Ahadith and its compilations knows the all the Muhaddithin- especially Al-Baihaqi- whenever they ascribe a narration to some other Muhaddithin and they narrate it with more words, they do not mean to relate exactly the same words of the narration [as narrated by the Muhaddith to whom they ascribe it to]. So when the Muhaddith says ‘Bukhari narrated it’ his point is that the essence of the Hadith has been narrated by him.’

3. And the above statement can be substantiated by multiple examples. Following should suffice for now.

Baihaqi says:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ , وَأَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ إِسْحَاقُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ يُوسُفَ بْنِ يَعْقُوبَ السُّوسِيُّ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ الْقَاضِي , قَالُوا: ثنا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ خَالِدِ بْنِ خَلِيٍّ , نا بِشْرُ بْنُ شُعَيْبِ بْنِ أَبِي حَمْزَةَ , عَنْ أَبِيهِ , عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ , عَنِ الْأَعْرَجِ , عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ , قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «إِنَّ لِلَّهِ تِسْعًا وَتِسْعِينَ اسْمًا مِائَةً إِلَّا وَاحِدًا مَنْ أَحْصَاهَا دَخَلَ الْجَنَّةَ , إِنَّهُ وِتْرٌ يُحِبُّ الْوِتْرَ» رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ عَنْ أَبِي الْيَمَانِ عَنْ شُعَيْبِ بْنِ أَبِي حَمْزَ

Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz – Abu Abdullah Ishaq bin Muhammad bin Yusuf bin Ya’qub al-Susi and Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Hasan al-Qadhi – Abu al-Abbas Muhammad bin Ya’qub – Muhammad bin Khalid bin Khaliyy – Bishr bin Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza – his father (i.e. Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza) – Abi Zannad – A’raj – Abu Huraira – Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him said: “Verily for Allah there are ninety nine names, one less than hundred – whoever remembers them will enter Jannah. And indeed Allah is Witr (One) and loves Witr.” Bukhari narrated it in al-Sahih from Abi Yaman from Shu’aib bin Abi Hamza.

(Asma’ wal Sifaat 1/21 Hadith 5)

But if you search in Bukhari you find this narration as;

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو اليَمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبٌ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الزِّنَادِ، عَنِ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ: أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «إِنَّ لِلَّهِ تِسْعَةً وَتِسْعِينَ اسْمًا مِائَةً إِلَّا وَاحِدًا، مَنْ أَحْصَاهَا دَخَلَ الجَنَّةَ»

Abu Yaman – Shu’aib (bin Abi Hamza) – Abu Zannad – A’raj – Abu Huraira — Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him said: “Verily for Allah there are ninety nine names, one less than hundred – whoever remembers them will enter Jannah.” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2736)

Clearly it does not have the words, “And indeed Allah is Witr and loves Witr,” and no one can find these words in Bukhari with the chain a through Abi Yaman from Shau’aib bin Abi Hamza as Baihaqi said.

This supports the point 2 above that when Muhaddithin especially Baihaqi says “Bukhari narrated it” all they means is about the essence of the narration and not a verbatim parallel.

And it is never a problem for Baihaqi has not quoted from Sahih Bukhari but given a complete chain down to him as stated in point 1 above.

Weakness of the narrator Abu Bakr bin Ishaq:

Second objection that Malik Abdul Rahman, the compiler of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book has raised is a glaring example of Ahmadiyya scholars’ intellectual “honesty.”

He argues that Abu Bakr bin Ishaq is actually Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Muhammad al-Naqid and then he quotes scholarly views about his being negligent in Hadith narration.

Whatever the author has quoted from Lisan al-Mizan is true but the fact is he is not the narrator here. Narrator infact is Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Ishaq al- Nishapuri.

How do we know this? In Lisan al-Mizan (5/69) Hafiz Ibn Hajr has given the names of the common narrators from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaq bin Muhammad al-Naqid and Abu Abdullah al-Hafiz (i.e. Imam Hakim) i.e. the person narrating from him in the hadith under consideration, is not among them.

However, Imam Dhahbi gives the profile of Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Ishaq al-Nishapuri and counts Abu Abdullah al-Hakim among the people who narrate from him (see Sayr A’lam al-Nubala 15/483-484). This proves Ahmad bin Ishaq and not Muhammad bin Ishaq is the narrator in the chain.

And that is how Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi has said in his research on the book Asma’ wal Sifaat. See his footnotes to Hadith 895 and Hadith 4. Kitabul Asma’ wal Sifaat pub. Makteba al-Sawadi, Jeddah 1993

Weakness of the narrator Ahmad bin Ibrahim:

Next Malik Abdul Rahman, the Ahmadi author, says that Ahmad bin Ibrahim is also Da’if and he says, “See Lisan al-Mizan.” Now in Lisan al-Mizan 18 narrators by the name of Ahmad bin Ibrahim are given. Neither has he clarified as to which one he thinks falls in the chain in question nor has he given any comment that can help us sort the fellow out.

However our contention is that it makes no difference for the actual narrator intended here is not mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan. The actual narrator here is Ahmad bin Ibrahim bin Milhan. And we know it because under his profile Hafiz al-Dhahbi writes “Companion of Yahya bin Bukayr” (see Sayr A’lam al-Nubala 13/533-534) and in the Hadith in question he is narrating from Yahya bin Bukayr only.

And this fellow is indeed trustworthy. Imam Dhahbi writes that Imam Darqutni has graded him as “reliable.” Same is quoted by Khateeb al-Baghdadi, See Tarikh al-Baghdad 5/18 No. 1862. And they have not mentioned any criticism on him.

Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Hashidi in his research on Kitabul Asma’ wal Sifaat also says that the narrator is Ahmad bin Ibrahim bin Milhan. See his footnotes to Hadith 895 and Hadith 95.

Weakness of other narrators:

The author then goes further to criticize the narrators, Yahya bin Abdullah (Ibn Bukayr) and Yunus bin Yazid. He is simply trying to be smart by quoting some critical views about them but for general readers it is enough that they are the narrators of Bukhari and Muslim which is good enough of evidence for their reliability. We can insha’Allah answer all the lies but for the fear of making the discourse too lengthy I simply allude to their being the narrators of the Sahihayn (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim).

The two narrators I discussed above are not the narrators of Bukhari and Muslim and further the Ahmadi author was simply lying so the two-fold reason became a drive to discuss their cases in detail.

Are the words “from the Heavens” a later interpolation?

Next the Ahmadi “scholar” comes with an allegation that the hand-written edition of Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat was first published in 1328 A.H.[sic] and that Muslim scholars added it as an adulteration and interpolation.

There are two problems with the claim.`

1. It is false to say that first edition was published in 1328 A.H. Infact we have extant to this day the hand-written edition published in 1313 A.H.

See the front page

clip_image002

1313 A.H. is certainly not 1328 A.H. And on its page 301 one can find that the words are there.

clip_image004

Download the complete edition HERE

Moreover, this is not a proof that first edition was published in so and so year and the words were there. To prove the idea of interpolation one has to be show some manuscript or earlier edition in which words are not there. Burden of proof is on the one who claims!

The case of Durr Manthur:

Next he argues that Imam Suyuti has quoted the narration and has not given the words in question, proving that they were interpolated.

Imam Suyuti writes in Durr Manthur:

أخرج أحمد والبخاري ومسلم والبيهقي في الأسماء والصفات قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : كيف أنتم إذا نزل فيكم ابن مريم ، وإمامكم منكم؟

Ahmad, Bukhari, Muslim and Baihaqi in Asma wal Sifaat says: “What will be your condition when the son of Maryam (i.e. ‘Eisa) will descend amongst you and your Imam will be from amongst you?”

One can see that Imam suyuti has given the names of 4 books in which the narration is found and in case when one odd book gives slightly different wording he cannot account for that. This is easily understandable if we consider the fact that in Durr Manthur Imam Suyuti has given loads of narrations and often he quotes them on the authority of multiple compilations. This is the reason he could not take into account slight variation of wording but only considered the essence of the narration.

This is further clear from the following example.

Imam Suyuti in his same book, Durr Manthur writes;

وَأخرج أَحْمد وَالْبُخَارِيّ وَسلم وَالنَّسَائِيّ وَابْن مرْدَوَيْه وَالْبَيْهَقِيّ فِي الْأَسْمَاء وَالصِّفَات عَن ابْن عَبَّاس عَن النَّبِي صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم فِيمَا يروي عَن ربه من هم بحسنة فَلم يعملها كتبت لَهُ حَسَنَة فَإِن عَملهَا كتبت لَهُ عشرا إِلَى سَبْعمِائة إِلَى أَضْعَاف كَثِيرَة وَمن همّ بسيئة فَلم يعملها كتبت لَهُ حَسَنَة فَإِن عَملهَا كتبت لَهُ وَاحِدَة أَو يمحوها الله وَلَا يهْلك على الله إِلَّا هَالك

Clearly He attributed the narration to Bukhari along with Ahmad, Muslim, Nasai, Ibn Mardwiya and Baihaqi’s Asma’ wal Sifaat but the words in red towards the end are not to be found in Bukhari. Infact even for the rest of the narration wording in Sahih Bukhari is different.

Now the question is why this “anomaly”?

Did someone remove the last words from Bukhari after Suyuti and changes the rest of wording too?

Or it is simply that Muhaddithin did not rather could not consider all the variation in the wording from one Hadith collection to another when they referred to multiple works at a time?

For any reasonable person the issue is quite clear. They did so considering the essence of the narration only which remains the same.

So we find all the Ahmadiyya lies refuted Alhamdulillah!

Points to note:

With so much discussion on this narration, let’s not forget this is not the only narration with these words. We earlier saw more of them.

After giving the narration and saying that Bukhari and Muslim have also narrated it, Baihaqi said that they also meant his descent from the Heavens after his ascension. This shows the belief of Imam Baihaqi who has been recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadis. Moreover even without the narration in question this “mujaddid” of Ahmadis has established the meaning of Hadith from Sahih Bukhari.

Let’s turn the tables now!

Murabbis tell common Ahmadis to take exception to the fact that Imam Suyuti did not put the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens” even though it was infact not possible to take account of all the variation in wording a explained above. But how many times are they allowed to question as to why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani ate away these words from a narration of Kanzul Ummal when he quoted it.

In my last post I quoted a narration (# 5) from Kanzul Ummal which goes as;

قال ابن عباس: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: “فعند ذلك ينزل أخي عيسى ابن مريم من السماء على جبل أفيق إماما هاديا وحكما عدلا

Ibn Abbas narrated: the Messenger of Allah, on whom be the blessings of Allah, said: ‘And near it (Bait al-Maqdis) will descend from the Heavens my brother ‘Eisa ibn Maryam on Mt. Afiq as a guided leader and a just ruler.’ (Kanzul Ummal 14/619 Hadith 39726)

But when Mirza Ghulam Ahmad quoted it in Himamatul Bushra (p. 148 included in Rohani Khazain vol. 7 p.314) he ate away the words مِنَ السَّمَاءِ “… from the Heavens.”

Now mark the difference, Imam Suyuti quotes a narration from 4 different books with slight variation of wording and Ahmadiyya make an issue of it while their “prophet” quotes from a certain book and eats away the words. Does that not prove “something”?

I will request Ahmadi readers to take these points to Murabbis and Jamaat leaders and question them;

1. Why did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad not quote the Hadith honestly? Or is there any justification for this?

2. How to “explain” the gimmicks of the author of Ahmadiyya Pocket Book who plays with the common people using the proximity of names of different authors?

3. With all the Ahmadiyya arguments refuted what is now the significance of the narration?

And one question that our Ahmadi fellows need to ask themselves;

How it feels to be a part of the group whose leader and “scholars” display such intellectual dishonesty?

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Du’a for their Guidance

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلما كثيرا
و سلام على أبو بكر و عمر و عثمان

I just left a wonderful Qiyam al-Layl with our beloved and local Imam Mohamed Magid حفظه الله (who is also the president of Islamic Society of North America, ISNA). In his Khatirah he reminded us of the power of Du’a, and that while we must use our energy and effort for his sake, ultimately change is in the power of Allah. There is no change and there is no power except with Allah.

Many times in our da’wah efforts to Ahmadis, we approach them using reason, logic and facts. While this has proven to be effective, sometimes we forget that this alone has no power. As al-Ghazali opined in his Faysal Tafriq bayna al-Islam wa Zandaqa, reason is not the cause of belief, reason serves only to support a position that is already held by the adherent. (This is why we see some Ahmadi arguments as logical gymnastics). As Al-Ghazali also wrote in his Deliverance from Error, “Anyone who believes that the unveiling of truth is the fruit of well-ordered arguments belittles the immensity of divine mercy.”

In short: Reason alone does not change the hearts.

In addition to our efforts, we must make sincere and constant Du’a to Allah that he guides Ahmadis away from the misguidance of the false prophet to the correct beliefs of the true Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. Really, seriously, ask God from the bottom of your heart. Beg him. Humiliate yourself before your Lord. How many times have we shed tears of pain at the absolute misguidance they are in, yet believing themselves to be guided? How many times have we spent the night crying to Allah, mentioning Ahmadis by name, and asking Allah to guide them?

…so let us ask Allah right now, as you read this post…

Oh Allah, we ask you to send your peace, blessings and salutations upon your noble Prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah, and upon his family and those who follow him.

We ask Allah to guide the Ahmadis back to Islam. O Allah, the one who Guides, you alone are the turner of hearts, so guide us on your Deen and guide them to your Deen. O You who guides, most of them are but a generation or two away from Islam, so guide them back into the fold so that we may reunite with our sisters and brothers. O Allah, they were taken away from us by a false prophet, so bring them back to us. O Allah, many are sincere in their misguidance so make them sincere in guidance. We ask you Allah and you alone, associating no partners with you, to turn the hearts of the Ahmadis to leave the false teachings of the false prophet and to come back to the Truth.

We ask You to shower his peace, blessings and security upon our noble master Muhammad ibn Abdullah and upon his family and those who follow him until the day of judgment.

Ameen!


I highly recommend current-Ahmadis read two books by Imam Al-Ghazali.
A) The Decisive Criteria Between Islam and Heresy: This text explains the criteria between who is considered a Muslim and who is not. The English translation was done by Dr. Abdul Hakim “Sherman” Jackson under the title On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance.
B) Deliverance From Error: This light read chronicles Al-Ghazali’s journey through the different spiritual and sectarian movements that existed in his lifetime and explains his conclusions. The English translation is available here.

The Scholarship of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiani

Guest Contribution by Muhammed Khan

There is a lively debate happening on the internet, between Muslims and Ahmadis, on the important topic of the finality of prophethood. The Muslim position is that there is no nabi (prophet) or rasul (messenger) after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم. This belief is held by Muslims throughout the world, from Morocco to Indonesia, from Bosnia to South Africa. The Ahmadis on the other hand tell us that we have got it wrong- that we are misguided. Ahmadis tell us that the Prophet Muhammed (saw) is not the last prophet. Muslim ‘mullahs,’ say the Ahmadis, are ignorant, insincere, misguided, backward and corrupt. Therefore they cannot or will not arrive at the right conclusion, but the evidence is there for all to see.

So who is right? The entire Muslim world or the murabbis? There is one way we can decide. Let us take someone who Ahmadis believe to be sincere, righteous, upright and the most learned man of his time, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. That’s right, let us use the research and conclusion of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani to arbitrate between Muslims and Ahmadis.

Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is the most learned man of the 14th century, they believe that he was so righteous and so learned that he achieved what no other human being in history achieved: He became a prophet through his personal rigorous effort.

So what did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad have to say after he examined the evidences stated in the Qur’an, hadith and Ijma‘ (scholarly consensus) about the subject of finality of prophethood?

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani made the following two statements which summarise his conclusions:

  • “I believe in all the items of faith as prescribed by the Sunni School of Islam and I accept everything that is according to the Quran and Hadith.  I fully subscribe to the doctrine that Muhammad is the last of all Prophets, and that any claimant to Prophethood after him is an impostor and a Kafir. It is my belief that the revelations of Prophethood started with Adam and closed with the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)”.
    (Majmuha-Estaharet, P. 230-231; Tableegh-i-Risalat, Vol 2, Page 20 –
  • Also appeared in a Qadiani poster dated Oct 2, 1891; 20 Shaaban, 1313 A.H.)
    “I consider that man who rejects the doctrine of Last Prophethood is a disbeliever and outside the pale of Islam.”
    (Tableegh-i-Risalat, Vol 2, Page 44 – Also read out in Congregation of Jama Masjid, Dehli, Oct. 23, 1891)

As you can quite clearly see that after years of learning and study, the most sincere, pious and learned man, according to Ahmadiyya, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani studied the Qur’an and hadith and came to the exact same conclusion as the rest of the Muslim world, that anyone who claims prophethood after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم is a liar and apostate.

It is worth pointing out that both Lahori and Qadiani Ahmadis do not dispute these statements but the two groups present us with two interpretations. The Lahori Ahmadis claim that these statements prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani did not claim to be a prophet and therefore these statements support their position very clearly. Unfortunately the Lahori Ahmadi position is not very credible in light of all Mirza’s other statements, where he describes himself as being a prophet. Even if this was merely a metaphor, as the Lahoris claim, this was an extremely irresponsible thing to do.

Are Lahori Ahmadis happy to accept that Mirza’s statements are directly responsible for the misguidance of thousands of Qadiani Ahmadis who believe he was a prophet and therefore removing themselves from the fold of Iman? That would be quite an achievement, given that Lahori Ahmadis are tiny in number compared to Qadiani Ahmadis. It means that Mirza sahib has misguided a larger number of his own followers away from Islam than towards a correct understanding of Islam, which is nothing short of a spectacular failure.

Now we turn our attention to the second party, the Qadiani Ahmadis who believe that when Mirza sahib made the above statements, (that he adhered to the Sunni beliefs, that there was no prophet after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and whoever held such beliefs was an apostate) he was unaware that he was going to be appointed a prophet in the future. The Qadiani Ahmadis tell us that since he was not aware that he was going to be appointed a prophet by God in the future his statements are not unreasonable.

At this point we ask Qadiani Ahmadis some questions;

  • Do you believe that Mirza sahib was a sane and intelligent man when he made those statements?
  • Do you believe that he was the most learned scholar on the earth not just in his life time but in the fourteenth century?
  • Do you believe that he had a firm grasp of the sciences, beliefs and principles of the Islamic faith?

The response from Ahmadi lay people, Jamia students, Murabbis and Khalifas to these questions is a resounding, “YES!” Ahmadis tell us “Mirza sahib was and is the most learned man in the fourteenth century, and the Muslim scholars (mullahs) who were his contemporaries and those after, are ignorant and insignificant in learning compared to the ‘Promised Messiah’ Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani.”

So we ask Ahmadis, how is it possible that a man with such immense learning, religious worship and devotion to God could arrive at the exact same (‘deviated and erroneous’) belief as the entire orthodox muslim world held?

How can a man, whose learning is so great that he is endowed with prophethood, not reach the ‘correct’ conclusion that there are going to be prophets after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم? He had the intelligence, the devotion, insight and access to all the primary sources of Islam law yet arrived at a position of complete ‘error and misguidance’.

You see it is immaterial to the argument that Mirza sahib at that point was unaware that he was going to be a prophet, the point is that given his deep learning, insight, sincerity and the ‘overwhelming proofs’ from the Quran and hadith that Ahmadis tell us exist, he should have still arrived at the conclusion that THERE WILL BE prophets after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and the fact of the matter is that he did not arrive at this conclusion.

We can understand that he would have been unaware that he himself was going to be appointed a prophet in the future, BUT, that does not prevent him arriving at the conclusion from his research that prophets WILL come after the Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم.

If he could not reach that conclusion, that there will be prophets after Prophet Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم what was the reason? Did he have a lack of intelligence? Or was he Ignorant? Or was he insincere?

In fact Mirza sahib’s fatwa demonstrates that the entire Muslim world (including Mirza sahib) held the belief that there is no prophet or messenger after Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم because that is exactly what the evidences, the primary sources of Islam (Quran, hadith and Ijma) demonstrate.

Ahmadis keep telling us that Sunni Islamic scholars are misguided from the true understanding of Islam, they dismiss them as ignorant and backward and they believe that it is because of these reasons that they have arrived at the wrong conclusions and fatwas. Yet if we take Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani as a litmus test, then we find that his conclusion was exactly the same as Orthodox Muslim scholars,  that there is no Prophet after Sayiddina Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and whoever rejects this, has left the fold of Islam.

Ahmadis, how is that possible?

The truth is that the primary sources of Islam are unambiguous there are no Prophets or Messengers after Sayyidina Muhammed صلى الله عليه و سلم and you don’t need ‘mullahs’ to tell you that!

The Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم in his own words

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم تسليما

No fancy arguments, no eloquent write-up – just the simple statements of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. As you read them, notice that there is no exceptions for “zilli”, “buroozi”, “non-law-bearing” or “law-bearing” prophethood.

In other words, the following statements are unconditional.


Salawat

The Hadith:

‏ ‏حدثني ‏ ‏محمد بن بشار ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن جعفر ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏فرات القزاز ‏ ‏قال سمعت ‏ ‏أبا حازم ‏ ‏قال قاعدت ‏ ‏أبا هريرة ‏ ‏خمس سنين ‏ ‏فسمعته يحدث ‏
‏عن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏كانت ‏ ‏بنو إسرائيل ‏ ‏تسوسهم الأنبياء كلما هلك نبي خلفه نبي وإنه لا نبي بعدي وسيكون خلفاء فيكثرون قالوا فما تأمرنا قال فوا ببيعة الأول فالأول أعطوهم حقهم فإن الله سائلهم عما استرعاهم ‏

Sahih Bukhārī, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 661
Narrated Abū Huraira:
The Prophet said, “The Israelites used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Caliphs who will increase in number.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What do you order us (to do)?” He said, “Obey the one who will be given the pledge of allegiance first. Fulfill their (i.e. the Caliphs) rights, for Allah will ask them about (any shortcoming) in ruling those Allah has put under their guardianship.”

حدثنا ‏ ‏مسدد ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏يحيى ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الحكم ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏مصعب بن سعد ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏
‏أن رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏خرج إلى ‏ ‏تبوك ‏ ‏واستخلف ‏ ‏عليا ‏ ‏فقال أتخلفني في الصبيان والنساء قال ‏ ‏ألا ترضى أن تكون مني بمنزلة ‏ ‏هارون ‏ ‏من ‏ ‏موسى ‏ ‏إلا أنه ليس نبي بعدي

Sahih Bukhārī, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 700
The Messenger of Allah went out for Tabūk, appointing ‘Ali as his deputy (in Medina). ‘Ali said, “Do you want to leave me with the children and women?” The Prophet said, “Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.

‏حدثني ‏ ‏زهير بن حرب ‏ ‏وإسحق بن إبراهيم ‏ ‏وابن أبي عمر ‏ ‏واللفظ ‏ ‏لزهير ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏إسحق ‏ ‏أخبرنا ‏ ‏و قال ‏ ‏الآخران ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏سفيان بن عيينة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏الزهري ‏ ‏سمع ‏ ‏محمد بن جبير بن مطعم ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏

‏أن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏أنا ‏ ‏محمد ‏ ‏وأنا ‏ ‏أحمد ‏ ‏وأنا ‏ ‏الماحي ‏ ‏الذي ‏ ‏يمحى ‏ ‏بي الكفر وأنا ‏ ‏الحاشر ‏ ‏الذي يحشر الناس ‏ ‏على عقبي ‏ ‏وأنا ‏ ‏العاقب ‏ ‏والعاقب ‏ ‏الذي ليس بعده نبي ‏

Sahīh Muslim, Chapter 30, Chapter 31, Book 30, Number 5810:
Jubair ibn Mut’im reported on the authority of his father that he heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) saying, “I am Muhammad and I am Ahmad, and I am al-Mahi (the obliterator) by whom unbelief would be obliterated, and I am Hashir (the gatherer) at whose feet mankind will be gathered, and I am ‘Aqib (the last to come) after whom there will be no Prophet.

حدثني ‏حرملة بن يحيى ‏أخبرنا ‏ابن وهب ‏أخبرني ‏يونس ‏عن ‏ابن شهاب ‏عن ‏محمد بن جبير بن مطعم ‏عن ‏أبيه ‏
‏أن رسول الله ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏قال ‏إن لي أسماء أنا ‏محمد ‏وأنا ‏أحمد ‏وأنا ‏الماحي ‏الذي يمحو الله ‏بي الكفر وأنا ‏الحاشر ‏الذي يحشر الناس على قدمي وأنا ‏العاقب ‏الذي ليس بعده أحد ‏وقد سماه الله ‏رءوفا ‏رحيما

Sahīh Muslim, Chapter 30, Chapter 31, Book 30, Number 5811:
Jubair b. Mut’im reported on the authority of his father that he heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I have many names: I am Muhammad, I am Ahmad, I am al-Mahi through whom Allah obliterates unbelief, and I am Hashir (the gatherer) at whose feet people will be gathered, and I am ‘Aqib (after whom there would be none), and Allah has named him as compassionate and merciful.

و حدثنا ‏إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي ‏أخبرنا ‏جرير ‏عن ‏الأعمش ‏عن ‏عمرو بن مرة ‏عن ‏أبي عبيدة ‏عن ‏أبي موسى الأشعري ‏قال ‏
‏كان رسول الله ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏يسمي لنا نفسه أسماء فقال ‏أنا ‏محمد ‏وأحمد ‏والمقفي ‏والحاشر ‏ونبي التوبة ‏ونبي الرحمة ‏

Explaining the word ‘Aqib, in the commentary of this narration, Sahīh Muslim reads:

حديث ‏شعيب ‏ومعمر ‏سمعت رسول الله ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏وفي حديث ‏عقيل ‏قال قلت ‏للزهري ‏وما ‏العاقب ‏قال الذي ليس بعده نبي ‏وفي حديث ‏معمر ‏وعقيل ‏الكفرة ‏وفي حديث ‏شعيب ‏الكفر

This hadīth has been transmitted on the authority of Ma’mar (and the words are): I said to Zuhri: What does (the word) al-‘Aqib imply? He said: One after whom there is no Prophet, and in the hadīth transmitted on the authority of Ma’mar and ‘Uqail there is a slight variation of wording.

Sahīh Muslim, Chapter 30, Chapter 31, Book 30, Number 5813:
Abu Mūsā Ash’ari reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioned many names of his and said: I am Muhammad, Ahmad. Muqaffi (the last in succession), Hashir, the Prophet of repentance, and the Prophet of Mercy.

أخبرني أحمد بن محمد بن عمرو الأخمسي حدثنا الحسن بن حميد حدثنا موسى بن إسماعيل حدثنا حماد بن سلمة عن جعفر بن أبي وحشية عن نافع بن جبير بن مطعم عن أبيه قال سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول أنا محمد وأحمد والمقفى والحاشر والخاتم والعاقب
هذا حديث صحيح على شرط مسلم ولم يخرجاه

In the Mustadrak of al-Hākim, Volume 2, Hadīth number 4186:
From Nafi` ibn Jubair ibn Mut`am from his father, said, “I heard the Messanger of Allāh may Allāh bless him and give him peace say, ‘I am Muhammad (The praised one), Ahmad (The praiseworthy), Al-Muqaffā (The last in succession), Al-hāshir (the gatherer), Al-Khātim (The Last), and Al-‘Aqib (The last).

وأخرج ابن مردويه عن ثوبان رضي الله عنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إنه سيكون في أمتي كذابون ثلاثون كلهم يزعم أنه نبي، وأنا خاتم النبيين لا نبي بعدي

Ibn Mardawī narrated that Thawban, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and give him peace, said that there will be in my nation thirty arch-liars, each of them claims that he is a prophet, and I am the seal of the prophets; there is no prophet after me.

أخرج أحمد عن حذيفة رضي الله عنه عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال في أمتي كذابون ودجالون سبعة وعشرون، منهم أربع نسوة وإني خاتم النبيين لا نبي بعدي

And Ahmad narrated that Hudhayfah, may Allah be pleased with him, said that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and give him peace, said, “In my nation, [there are] twenty-seven arch-liars and deceivers, among them are four women, and I am the seal of the prophets; there is no prophet after me.

‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏ابن نمير ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن بشر ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏إسماعيل ‏ ‏قلت ‏ ‏لابن أبي أوفى ‏
‏رأيت ‏ ‏إبراهيم ‏ ‏ابن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال مات صغيرا ولو قضي أن يكون بعد ‏ ‏محمد ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏نبي عاش ابنه ولكن لا نبي بعده ‏

Narrated by Isma’īl:
I asked Abi Aufa, “Did you see Ibrahim, the son of the Prophet?” He said, “Yes, but he died in his early childhood. Had there been a Prophet after Muhammad, then his son would have lived, but there is no Prophet after him.


Our Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم said he is the last in multiple different ways. If you still do not believe that any of these statements actually mean that Muhammad is the unexceptionally the last and final prophet, do you even believe such a thought is effable in Arabic?

The meaning of what our Prophet said is clear and requires little explanation. But in order to accept Mirza Ghulam’s religion, one is required to distort what the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم said and come up with new interpretations that he did not intend.

No, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم did not speak in riddles, he was forward and unambiguous. We call upon Ahmadis to leave the false teachings of Mirza Ghulam and return to the main community of Islam, upon the way of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم – You are our brothers in Islam. Mirza stole you from us. We want you back!

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و سلم

That’s a Fabricated Hadith!! : A Primer on Hadith Authentication

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم تسليما

We have all heard the statement, “Seek knowledge even if you have to go to China“. While the meaning is true, did you know that this is a fake hadith? The Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم never said this!

Br. Waqar’s recent posts here at TheCult argue that Ahmadiyya religious authorities frequently resort to citing weak or fabricated hadith. This draws their arguments into question. Why are they using questionable narrations instead of authentic ones?

However, from the perspective of the layman, both Muslim and Ahmadi, this approach might come off mere sophistry, a convenient “cop out” to escape what is an otherwise decisive Ahmadiyya argument; that we Muslims just call their hadith “weak” or “fabricated” just to run away from the argument without having to accept the point. While it may seem that way, nothing could be further from the truth.

In this essay, I hope to explain to our readers what it means for a hadith to be classified as Authentic, Sound, Weak or Fabricated. This article is not intended to be”juicy” and theatric, with arguments left and right. Instead, it is a very basic introduction to an area of Islamic sciences that, while crucial, is far too seldom studied in our modern times. I should also mention that this article will raise more questions than answers, as this subject is very in depth and cannot be covered in a single blog post. But, at the least it should provide you with enough to understand why Br. Waqar’s criticism of Ahmadiyya source material as “weak” and “fabricated” is absolutely valid.

Contrary to popular belief, the hadith are not a mix-mash of unreliable hearsay reports, each contradicting the next, that were only written down 200~ years after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم. This is far from accurate. For example, few know that the companion Abu Hurayrah رضى الله عنه was writing hadith during the lifetime of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم!But after the initial pure generations of the Muslims, the authenticity of these recorded and memorized statements became subject to question. How do you know if a hadith is real or fake? How do you know if it was distorted? Many factors brought about suspicion, including:

  • Peoples’ memory of the exact wordings of a hadith began to falter;
  • So some would narrate false traditions to gain money or prominence;
  • The first break-away sects and political movements arose, many of whom felt that they could advance their agenda by inventing hadith in their favor;
  • And some even narrated fake hadith to sell their merchandise (ie, a tomato seller might fabricate that the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم said tomatoes are beloved by Allah).

In response to this new phenomena, Muslim scholars of the time began to authenticate the integrity of hadith. They wanted to ensure that any particular narration really was uttered by the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم exactly as it was reported. The Muslim scholars set out to accomplish this momentous task. Over time, a processes developed to validate and classify the authenticity of prophetic traditions. This area of Islamic Sciences is titled Mustalah al-Hadith, the Classification of the Hadith.

In brief, I hope to explain four main concepts:

  1. How narrations are classified;
  2. The Levels of Authenticity;
  3. How to approach the books of Hadith; and
  4. Why is this relevant to the discussion on traditional Islam vs Ahmadiyya.

To repeat, this is a very basic introduction to this subject. After reading this, I guarantee you will have more questions than answers. But, I hope to establish an appreciation for what it means when Muslims object that the Ahmadiyya arguments rest upon known weak, distorted or fabricated hadith.

How Hadith are Classified

The classification of hadith is a thorough and rigorous process. There are dozens of factors involved in the methodology.


When you read from a hadith book, before every narration you will see “It is reported on the authority of so-and-so that so-and-so heard from so-and-so who saw the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم …”. This initial part of a hadith is called the sanad (سند), the chain of narration. A sanad is the documented list of people who transmitted the hadith, from person to person.

A major part of authentication is to validate each individual narrator in the chain of transmission. It would be asked of each person in the chain:

  • Who was he?
  • Was he known to be a liar? Even just once?
  • Did he openly commit sins?
  • Was he known for following innovations in faith (bid’ah or following a sect)?
  • Was he known to make mistakes in detailed matters?
  • Was his memory good? Was he ever known to be forgetful?
  • Was he known as careless or alert?
  • Did his mental faculties deteriorate at any point in his life? If so, when?
  • What was his line of work?
  • Was he well-known or a person of obscurity?
  • Where did he reside?
  • What was his relationship with the government?

All of these questions and more were meant to verify the integrity of a person. You might be thinking, would this not require a complete biography of each person mentioned in the Sanad? Yes! There are volumes of books that are nothing but biographies of Muslims of the past, documenting this detailed information. This area of Islamic studies is titled ‘Ilm al-Rijal (علم الرجال), or the Biographies of Muslims who transmitted the hadith. As part of this process, people who narrated hadith were themselves classified into categories, ranging between most trustworthy with an impeccable memory to frequent liar or possessing a weak memory.

Further, on the chain of transmission, it would be asked if there are gaps between narrators where people are omitted. For example, was there a 5 year period before the birth and death of two adjacent reporters? Did two adjacent narrators ever meet? If so, when and where? For what purpose? For how long? Can this be proven?

Then to the matan (متن), or text of the narration: A narration might be compared with similar known narrations to see if there are any discrepancies around the same incident. Does the narration contradict established principles in Islam (ie, deny the existence of angels)? Was the narration said in the right time, for example, not speaking about the Battle of Badr during the Makkan era. A hadith authenticator might look for “hidden defects” or irregularities, an insight with hadith that can only be gained after memorizing literally millions of hadith.

There are dozens of other small checks, a complete list of details would be beyond the scope of this article. Suffice to say, the methodology of authenticating hadith is very very thorough.

And after exhausting their physical means, hadith critics put their trust in Allah. It is said that Imam al-Bukhari رضى الله عنه never added a hadith to his famous Sahih al-Bukhari without making fresh wudhu’, sending salah upon the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم (durood shareef), performing two rakahs of nafl prayer, and making du’a istikhaara. He once saw the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم in a dream urging him to continue writing. Other hadith critics reached a point where they would see a light coming out of a person’s mouth who recited a correct hadith the way we see a person’s breathe on a cold day.

Levels of Classification

This aforementioned methodology classified hadith into four brought categories:

  1. Saheeh (صحيح), Authentic – This means that a narration is reliable and authentic, that we know without any doubt that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم made this statement or action. This is the absolute highest level of authentication.
  2. Hasan (حسن), Sound – This level means that we know without any reasonable doubt that a hadith is valid. There may be small issues with individuals in the chain of narration. However, a hasan hadith is not questionable or suspicious, in fact it might even be without dispute. Hasan only means that it is just a step below passing the rigorous tests of Saheeh.
  3. Dha’eef (ضعيف), Weak – This level means that the authenticity of a narration is subject to question. Entire meanings may have changed, reporters of the hadith are unknown or contain questionable individuals, etc. Dha’eef hadith are only used as inspirational statements or as a backup to support a point, but never to prove a point in belief or practice on their own. Many rejected them outright.
  4. Mawdu’ (موضوع), Fabricated – This is the lowest level of classification. In simple terms, it is a fake hadith, merely invented by someone. Examples include strange and offensive statements such as “consult women, and do the opposite”.

These are the four primary classifications, with many sub-divisions. For example, a dha’eef hadith can be further subdivided into categories, such as very weak (الضعيف جدًا), baseless (الواهي) and contradictory to other authentic hadith (منكر). A hasan hadith can be raised to saheeh because a matching saheeh narration exists, confirming the hasan one. This is called al-Hasan li-Ghayrihi (الحسن لغيره).

The absolute highest level of Saheeh is called Mutawatir (متواتر), which means that so many concurring sources narrated the same incident that it is inconceivable that it is false. This is akin to the reports of 9/11. It was reported to us by so many people that it is inconceivable that all sources conspired together to merely concoct the terrible events of that day.

Approach to the Books of Hadith

The arrogance of modern academia has led many to approach books of hadith as we would read a newspaper, as something we can pick up and independently study, analyze and make personal conclusions on without the aid of a guide. Nothing could be further from the truth. Books of hadith were written by scholars for scholars. It was never intended that the layman would directly read them. There are subtleties in their language that only a scholar would pick up, such as the difference between ‘On the authority of so-and-so’ vs ‘I heard from so-and-so‘. Sometimes, scholars thought the classifications of a hadith was so obvious they did not feel the need to write it down. Many times clearly fabricated hadith were left in the compilations only for the sake of completion. Historically, none of these convoluting factors were problems because students learned prophetic narrations in a class with a teacher who is a master in each hadith he is conveying.

But with the advent of wide-scale print media and the internet, now the average person can get a copy of Sahih al-Bukhari, complete with the Muhsin Khan English translation. While this is a positive development, it is a double-edged sword that opens the door for misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

Consider if someone compiled anecdotal events from your life. Imagine how easy an incident could be misconstrued. This is exactly what happens with many of the hadith. They are misinterpreted or misunderstood. To truly understand a hadith, you do not pick up a book of hadith and just read, you must know:

  • When it was said;
  • Why it was said;
  • Where was it said;
  • To whom it was said;
  • What were the surrounding circumstances;
  • Are there any other related hadith to the incident;
  • Are there any cultural norms or customs that affect its meaning but are not obvious from the text; etc

Books of Hadith generally do not contain this information in a simple manor. Some questions are answered in books of Sharh (شرح), explanation. But ultimately, the best way to gain this knowledge is to study with a scholar of hadith who himself learned from a scholar of hadith, who learned from a scholar of hadith all the way back to the actual compilation of the book or the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم himself. This is a safeguard that your understanding of the hadith is not merely someone’s personal interpretation, but what the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم actually intended, through a direct chain of correct understandings.

The Relevance to Ahmadiyya?

So, what is the point of all of this? Why am I even taking the time to talk about Mustalah al-Hadith.

In short, because if you analyze the Ahmadiyya arguments, you will find that the vast majority of them use weak, problematic or outright fabricated hadith. For example, it is an established fact that Al-Maseeh عليه السلام and Imam Mahdi عليه السلام are two different people: Al-Maseeh is and only is ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام, and Imam Mahdi is named Muhammad, his father is named ‘Abdullah, he is from the noble family of the prophet from the tribe of al-Qahtan. In some narrations, the two interact and exchange dialogue, clearly indicating two different people. However, Mirza Ghulam claimed to be both at the same time. In order to justify this position, he cited the narration “لا مهدى إلا عسى” (There is no Mahdi except ‘Esa). What they do not disclose to the laymen Ahmadi is that this narration was known for centuries that this was a fake hadith- a complete fabrication. Yet they continue to cite it for proof.

Likewise, the Ahmadiyya religious leaders will cite known fake hadith to prove that ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام died. Br. Waqar’s articles demonstrate this thematic problem in their arguments.

Mirza Ghulam said he rejects any hadith that contradicts the Qur’an. While this principle is true, it is no accident that Ahmadiyya appeals to this principle more than others. It is not that there are just so many fake hadith floating around that were incorrectly deemed authentic. It is that their Ahmadi-specific interpretation of the Qur’an is so erroneous that they radically conflict with authentic and valid prophetic traditions. Both the Qur’an and hadith are correct, but their interpretation of the former and subsequent rejection of the latter is erroneous.

When I was doing my undergraduate studies, someone left the book “Invitation to Ahmadiyyat” in the Muslims’ prayer room. I read the book, and strongly considered accepting Ahmadiyya. But because I had foundational knowledge on this topic, I double-checked the sources that the author used. I found problem after problem, citing questionable hadith, half-truths, and other issues. I ultimately decided to remain Muslim. But I am concerned that the average Ahmadi does not possess this knowledge. So, I hope this article was a sufficient primer into the topic.

If you want to do additional research, I suggest a few sources:

May Allah reveal to the common Ahmadi the erroneous nature of the Ahmadiyya arguments. May Allah continue to guide Ahmadis away from the false religion of Mirza Ghulam and to the true path of our noble Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, and may he reward us for our da’wah efforts.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و سلم تسلما

Questions about Pigott for Ataul Mujib Rashid

Ahmadiyya as a whole has been speechless on John Hugh Smyth-Pigott for the last 18 months or so. Whatever they have said has been from our sources, including the three-page document that the Qadianis published in Ahmadiyya Gazette Canada.

Last week on Rah-e-Huda, their senior-most Maulvi, Ataul Mujib Rashid, ducked a question from a German caller asking about Pigott, saying something about ‘historical context’ and about devoting a full programme to this issue. Is it that complicated? However, we welcome the Ahmadiyya opening up to their followers.

Since the issue is so complicated (!), can we please request our readers to to pose some questions for Ataul Mujib. After the Qadianis do a show on Pigott as they have promised, we will follow it up with a video insha Allah to see if the answers were in good faith so that Ahmadis can make up their minds.

http://thecult.info/blog/2010/03/27/john-hugh-smyth-pigott/
http://wiki.qern.org/mirza-ghulam-ahmad/contemporaries/john-hugh-smyth-pigott

Ahmadi Girls Told to Boycott Muslims?

We received this message from a contributor to the forum today. We’d very much like to hear from the Ahmadiyya whether this is authentic or not. If it is authentic, and we have no reason to doubt its authenticity, then the level of fear-mongering contained in the email speaks volumes about the status of Ahmadiyya as a cult.

Dear Sadr Sahiba

Assalamo alaikum wa Rehmatullah wa Barakatohu

May Allahtallah grant you and your family a long life in good health and happiness. Amen. In the wake of recent opposition by non Ahmadi Muslims, in the UK, against our Jama’at, this is just a reminder for all of us to be aware of the circumstances and to take extreme caution, especially the youth who can be easily targeted by the opposition. Hence, Ahmadi girls, especially those in universities, should not join any Islamic unions or groups on campus, as such groups can also begin to spread hatred against our Jamaat. Young girls should be extremely cautious when making new friends at colleges and universities. They should also not be over confident and trusting with friends they have known for longer. As we all know, the internet can have positive points but we should also keep in our mind the dangers then can arise. A girl’s honour, respect and dignity, is very precious and difficult to get back once lost. Girls should be strongly discouraged from uploading their pictures on the Internet or giving them away otherwise, for example as part of a group picture. Girls should be discouraged from joining any social online network, as anyone can pose as an Ahmadi in order to try and befriend Ahmadi girls with the sole purpose of influencing them negatively against the Jama’at. Please continue to pray that Allah may protect all of us against harm, Ameen. Jazakallah. Wassalam,

p.p.

Shmaila Nagi

Sadr Lajna Imaillah UK

TheCult member accepts prophecies about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

In some ways, this is a very difficult post for me to write. Acknowledging that I have been wrong in the past and dealing with it is no easy matter. But, as Al-Hajj Malik al-Shabazz (Malcolm X) said, “I am for Truth no matter who says it”. So with a heavy heart and deep contemplation, I must admit the error of my ways and come clean in this public manor.

Yes, its true. A prolific writer against Ahmadiyya has accepted the truth in the prophecies about Mirza Sahib. I truly believe that he was prophecized by the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم in several hadith. I truly believe that our Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم foretold of others who would come after him.

Many of you may disagree with my sudden change in stance. Others may get upset, some even angry. How could someone who has done so much work in favor of traditional Islam suddenly change his position? To that, I say I am following the way of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم and the Muslims who came before. For indeed, if our beloved Muhammad al-Mustafa صلى الله عليه و سلم said something, we must follow it. We must not attempt to reinterpret it, reject it, or find alternative explanations in the light of our pre-conceived notions. I repeat! We must not attempt to reinterpret it, reject it, or find an alternative explanation.

Before you draw your scorn on me for my change, please listen to my reason. While my change in heart was partially spiritual, partially intellectual, the main reason was a single hadith which, once I read, implanted itself in me like a splinter in the back of my mind. I could not reconcile my previous positions in the light of this hadith. I had to follow the truth of this hadith to its logical conclusion. And while there are many other supporting proofs and evidences, this hadith alone was the pivotal reason why I truly believe that Mirza Sahib was prophecized by our master Muhammad al-Mustafa صلى الله عليه و سلم. I want both parties to read this hadith with an honest heart and an honest mind. For a third time, without our reinterpretations, rejections or alternate explanations:

وأخرج ابن مردويه عن ثوبان رضي الله عنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إنه سيكون في أمتي كذابون ثلاثون كلهم يزعم أنه نبي، وأنا خاتم النبيين لا نبي بعدي

Thawban, may Allah be pleased with him, said, “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and give him peace, said that there will be in my nation thirty arch-liars, each of them claims that he is a prophet, and I am the seal of the prophets, there is no prophet after me.

Mirza Ghulam was prophecized as one of the arch-liars who will come in this nation and will claim to be a prophet. But, as the hadith continues, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم is the Seal of the Prophets, there is no prophet after him.

To our Ahmadi readers, these are the words of our Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, explicitly denying the false prophets after him. Do not attempt to reinterpret it, reject it, or find an alternative explanation. Be with truth no matter where it stands. May Allah honor you as you rightfully deserve to be honored!

…What? Didn’t see that coming, did you? Smile. Its the Sunnah!

(Inspired by Shaykh Yasir Qadhi’s article)

Happy Birthday To Me

Six years ago today I reverted to Islam. Not a single day goes by when I am not grateful to my Creator for this gift.

It all started with a Fracture in Belief. Islam has since given me so much. And all it asked of me was to extricate myself from the clutches of a cult obsessed with negativity, death prophecies and money.

Alhamdulillah for this beautiful gift of the deen-ul-haqq.

I invite Ahmadis to join me. Come back to Islam. It is your birthright.