|
list
|
..
|
Chapter
2: Claims of the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement:
Section
3: Mahdi:
In Spite of the
Weakness and Discrepancies of the Reports about Mahdi their
Collective Evidence cannot be Rejected:
There is a clear distinction
between the two sets of reports, one relating to the advent
of Messiah and the other to the appearance of Mahdi. The
reports about Messiah have been accepted by all the great
authorities of Hadith, whereas the reports relating to Mahdi
have been rejected not only by Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim,
but also by many eminent scholars of Hadith. There is no
doubt that all these reports have been greatly tampered with
for various reasons, so much so, that even those who believe
in the coming of Mahdi only accept the fundamental fact of
his advent. Because of the extreme differences and
discrepancies found in their details they refuse to approve
of these reports in toto. Nawab Siddiq Hasan
(an Ahl Hadith scholar of India) who was expecting an early
advent of Mahdi, even during his lifetime wrote: There is
no doubt in it that the bases of these reports
are very often defective [Nawab
Siddiq Hasan Khan, Hujaj al-Kiramah (Shah
Jahan Press, Bhopal), p. 365.].
At another place, in the same book, he has written that
all the details about the reports of Mahdi only show this
much that he would certainly appear, though his appearance
may occur in any form. The question here naturally arises:
when al-Bukhari and al-Muslim have not accepted these
reports and other scholars of Hadith have also regarded
their bases as defective, why should not these be considered
as absolutely weak or fabricated and be rejected entirely?
The attitude that if there is discrepancy in details, the
basic fact itself should be rejected does not only go
against all the principles of accepting Hadith but also of
history. On the other hand, the difference in the details
show that there is somewhere a fundamental reality behind
all this. If in reports relating to Mahdi different parties
for their own ulterior motives have mixed up false reports,
this is quite feasible, although this again proves that
behind these reports there is something substantial which
both the parties had wanted to seize upon to serve their own
ends. The original is, therefore, grossly distorted. When
historical reports (and even a non-believer in ahadith
gives at least this much status to them) differ in
details, the common factor among them is at least accepted
as true. In reports concerning Mahdi, the appearance of
Mahdi himself is such a common factor; therefore this at any
rate cannot be put aside. The reason why Bukhari and Muslim
did not accept them is the weak and defective way of their
reporting. But when weak and defective reports have at least
gained historical status, then according to the rules of
history we are forced to consider and accept their common
and collective testimony as true. Besides that we cannot
reject the possibility of different persons being referred
to in these reports and that some signs may be fulfilled in
one person and others in another, as the word mahdi
is also used in a very broad sense. It means one who is
guided and the heir to all truths and in whom the attribute
"Guide" for God is fully represented, and thus this word can
be applied to every guided person as for instance the first
four righteous successors of the Holy Prophet had also been
called Mahdis. In his Tarikh, Imam Suyuti
has reported a saying of Wahb ibn Munabih: "If there has
been any Mahdi in this ummah it is `Umar ibn `Abd
al-`Aziz [Al-Shaikh
Jalal ud-Din Sayuti: Tarikh al-Khulafa (Sarkari
Press, Lahore, 1870 C.E.), ch. ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd
al-‘Aziz, p. 234.]."
In view of this wide significance if different signs are
fulfilled in different persons they can all be called
Mahdis.
Common
Factors in the Reports about Mahdi:
Abu Dawud and
Tirmidhi mention a report by Ibn Mas'ud that The
world will not come to an end unless a person from the
people of my house becomes the ruler of Arabia whose name
will be identical to mine
[Sunan
Abu Dawud: Kitab al-Malhim (Mujtabai Press, Delhi, 1318
A.H.) Vol. 2, Dhkir al-Mahdi, p.
239.]. A report
from Umm Salmah reads thus: Mahdi is from me,
having a bright forehead, high nose and will fill
this earth with equity and justice as it was filled with
oppression and violence [Ibid.,
p. 240]. In Abu
Dawud it has been again mentioned that Hazrat
`All looked towards his son Hasan and said: A person
will be born from his seed whose name will be the name of
your Prophet and he will resemble him in disposition but not
in outward form [Sunan
Abu Dawud, p. 241].
In Musnad of Ahmad it is again reported from `Ali
that the Holy Prophet said: Mahdi is from the people of
my house [lmam
Abu `Abd Allah Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal,
vol. 1, p. 84.].
In another report we find: Even if a day is left from the
age of this world, God will certainly raise a person from
among us who will fill the whole world with justice as it
was filled with oppression [Ibid.,
p. 99]. In another
report by Ibn Mas'ud it has been mentioned that: There
will be no Qiyamah unless there is a person from
among the people of my house who is raised as a ruler, whose
name will be my name [Ibid.,
p. 376]. There are
many reports by Abu Said Khudri. In one of them we
find: Mahdi will be from my ummah ... will
fill the earth with fairness and justice
[Ibid., vol.
3, p. 26], and in
another : I give you the glad tidings of Mahdi who
will be raised in my ummah at a time of digression
and distress of people. He will fill the earth with equity
and justice as it was filled with oppression and violence
[Ibid., p.
37]. Yet in another
it has been stated: He said that we feared that
new things would crop up after the Holy Prophet, then we
asked him and he said: Mahdi will be raised in my ummah,
five, seven or nine (years)
[Ibid., p.
21]. Similarly Ibn `Asakir
has reported in his Tarikh : A person from the family of
Hasan will appear from the Eastern countries. Even if
mountains stood in his way he will demolish them and make
his way through [Hujaj
al-Kiramah, p. 355.].
And in Tibrani and Abu Na'im the following
report occurs: I swear by my Lord Who appointed me with
truth, that Mahdi of this ummah will be of
these two, i.e., of Hasan and Husain
[Ibid., p.
356]. And it is
reported from Dar Qutni that: Mahdi will be from the
family of my uncle `Abbas [Ibid.,
p. 355]. Yet there
is another report which reads : O 'Abbas! God started
this matter with me and will end it with a young man of your
progeny who will fill this earth with justice as it was
filled with violence [Kanz
al-`Ummal (Da'irat al-Mu'arif al-Nizamiyyah Press
Hyderabad, 1314 A.H.) vol. 7, p. 188; Hujaj al-Kiramah,
p. 356.]. And
there is a report in Ibn Majah: There is no Mahdi except
`Isa [Abu
'Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Yazid ibn Majah Qazwini,
Sunan Ibn Majah, ch. Al-sharat
al-Sa`ah, p. 302.].
Now the common factors in these
reports are reduced to this, that a Mahdi would appear in
this ummah in the later ages having a strong
resemblance with the Holy Prophet filling the earth with
equity and justice. But these reports differ as to which
family he would belong. He might be "from me" (i.e.,
the Prophet) or from the people of his house, or from
the seed of Hasan and Husain or of ibn 'Abbas and it has
also been mentioned that he might be only a person from the
nation of Muhammad. The reports of his being from the seed
of Hasan, Husain or `Abbas, definitely contradict one
another. Therefore, this part of the reports has to be given
up, but the reports which contain expressions such as "from
me", "from the people of my house", "from my
ummah" can easily be reconciled, for they may
imply his spiritual resemblance to the Holy Prophet, as the
Prophet is reported to have said about Salman of Persia:
Salman is from the people of my house
[Zurqani,
vol. 2, p. 126.].
Similar expressions have been used as well for other
persons. Thus a member of this ummah having strong
resemblance to the Holy Prophet can be regarded as from him
or from the people of his house. The common factor in these
reports, therefore, is that Mahdi will be a person belonging
to the nation of Muhammad. This view is supported by the
report in Ibn Majah where only `Isa has been called
Mahdi.
Another important point which is clear
from these reports is about the Divine appointment
(bi'that/bay-sut) of Mahdi. Now the word
appointment for human beings (in Islamic terminology)
is used either for prophets or for mujaddids. But as
prophethood has come to an end with the Holy Prophet,
therefore Mahdi can be raised in this nation only as a
mujaddid. As to the reports in which his
equity and justice have been mentioned, it must be borne in
mind that one type of law and order is the responsibility of
the government of the day and the other type of justice is
connected with the appointed ones (mamureen) of God
whether they are in possession of temporal power or not.
What type of justice has been referred to in these reports
will be discussed later. Oppression and violence which have
been particularly mentioned here are the same which have
been spread by the followers of the Religion of the Cross.
On the one hand, they have raised a humble servant of God to
the pedestal of Divinity as the Quran says: The heaven
may almost be rent thereat, and the earth cleave asunder,
and the mountains fall down into pieces, that they
ascribe a son to the Beneficent!
[The Quran:
19:90-91] and, on
the other, they have inflicted sufferings on their fellow
beings by their peculiar philosophy that it is only the
white people who have the right to rule over other nations;
the latter being created for the service of the
white.
Whether
Mahdi will Spread Islam by the Sword:
Strangely enough, a common
misconception prevalent among Muslims about Mahdi - that he
would spread Islam at the point of the sword - has not been
mentioned at all in these reports. Not only the Muslims, but
the non-Muslims as well, have come to associate the very
name of Mahdi with bloodshed and fighting. The book
Iqtarab al-Sa'ah, supposed to be written by the son
of Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan, contains the following
words about Mahdi: He will call people towards God
with the sword. The one who refuses will be killed
[Nawab
Sayyid Nur al-Hasan Khan, Iqtarab al-Sa'ah (Mufid
`Am Press, Agra, India, 1301 A.H.), p.
94.].
When we look into the ahadith
we find only the words yamlik al-'Arab i.e., he
will be the ruler of Arabia, and for the spread of equity
and justice the earth has also been mentioned in
these reports. The words yamlik al-`Arab which
confine his territory to Arabia are either an interpolation
of a reporter or meant for another person whose kingdom will
be limited to Arabia [Apparently
these words seem to apply to 'Abd Allah ibn Zubair who did
not enter into bai'at of Yazid. When Yazid died in 64
A.H. 'Abd Allah ibn Zubair was elected as the khalifah.
The people of Hijaz, Yemen and Iraq also submitted to
his rule. Mu'awiyah ibn Yazid's rule was limited to Egypt
and Syria, but after his death the people of these countries
also took bai'at of Zubair, but soon after they
revolted and separated themselves from him. Thus Zubair's
kingdom remained confined to Arabia. In 73 A.H. during the
reign of 'Abd al-Malik, Zubair was attacked by Hajjaj and
was martyred by him. Thus his reign was spread over a period
of nine years. Reports concerning Mahdi mention seven or
nine years of his rule. These words, therefore, may refer to
'Abd Allah ibn Zubair. If it is kept in view that these
ahadith have been greatly tampered with, the part
mentioning the period of Mahdi’s kingdom for seven or
nine years can be applied to him as
well.]. Reference to his
kingdom on one side and the abundance of wealth on the
another may have led people to believe that Mahdi would
propagate Islam with force. This view is supported by a
statement in Iqtarab al-Sa'ah which says that: Wars
will be waged at his hand, treasures will be dugout, city
after city will be conquered from East to West
[Nawab
Sayyid Nur al-Hasan Khan, Iqtarab al-Sa'ah,
p. 64.].
It seems that on account of such conjectures the wrong
conception of a warrior Mahdi gradually got its way among
Muslims. Some reports might have also been fabricated in
this connection. But Sihah Sittah (six
authentic collections of hadith): and
Musnad of Ahmad which refer to the benevolence of
Mahdi do not mention any report to show that Mahdi will wage
wars or conquer the whole world or convert unbelievers to
Islam at the point of the sword. How was it possible when
the coming of such a Mahdi was decidedly against the clear
verdict of the Qur'an that: There is no compulsion
in religion [The
Quran, 2:256]. How
could indeed such a Mahdi come who would act against
this injunction and wield the sword to convert the people to
Islam?
This Wrong
Conception was Removed by the Mahdi himself:
May God bless Hazrat
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian who has completely rooted
out the false conception of Mahdi's spreading Islam with the
sword, which has opened the eyes of Muslims and has made
them realise that the story which was forged by their
enemies to stem the progress of Islam was unwittingly
accepted by Muslims themselves. Had there been no other
argument for his being a Mahdi, this alone was sufficient to
prove that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claim of being the guided
one (mahdi) of God was correct. The greatest obstacle
today in the progress of Islam is the world-wide
misconception that Islam was propagated at the point of the
sword. The enemies of Islam made full use of this weapon to
scare the people away even from the name of Islam. As for
Muslims themselves, instead of removing this blot from the
beautiful face of Islam, they lent a helping hand to its
opponents by their wrong belief in a warrior Mahdi. No doubt
there had been other Muslim scholars also who had rejected
the reports, about the advent of Mahdi, or doubted their
authenticity such as Ibn Khaldun
[Muqaddamah]
and the Mu'tazalites, but it had no general effect on
Muslims. There was also a reason for this attitude, because
the complete rejection of these reports meant the rejection
of a fundamental reality as well, i.e., the coming of
Mahdi himself, which was basically true and was a prophecy
of the Prophet Muhammad [Hujaj
al-Kiramah, p. 386.].
It was necessary, therefore, that unless the truth had
manifested itself and the Promised Mahdi had come, the total
rejection of this prophecy should not have any effect on the
general body of Muslims. When the real claimant appeared he
sifted out the truth from falsehood and showed in what way
the true part of the prophecy was fulfilled. The rest he
showed was added either by the carelessness of the reporters
or by wilful interpolation. There have been, of course,
several other claimants to Mahdihood also but
every one of them was interested in his own person and claim
and cared nothing about making Islam free from false
objections. Everyone picked up certain words and expressions
from the reports and tried to apply them to himself but paid
no attention to the removal of this false belief that Islam
was propagated by the sword. There had been some pious
persons from among these claimants as well and they might
have identified their own temporal victory with the victory
of Islam but the extermination of this outlandish conception
of a warrior Mahdi who would wield the sword for the spread
of Islam was destined at the hands of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad,
and thus a great obstacle was removed which stood in the way
of the progress of Islam. His claim of being a Mahdi showed
to the world that the secret and glory of Islam was
correlated with such a claim.
Not one, but let hundreds of such
claimants appear for the glory and success of Islam, and
Muslims should welcome them with open arms. To obstruct
their cause, under suspicions and misunderstandings, is to
obstruct the cause of Islam and the Muslim nation. Hazrat
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was no doubt a claimant to Mahdihood but
he made his claim a source of the onward march of Islam. The
prophecy relating to Mahdi has been fulfilled today with
such clarity that the fundamental fact behind it has been
gradually accepted by all Muslims. The conception that Islam
was, or will be, thrust upon non-Muslims with the sword is
loosing its hold on their minds. Islam has never stood in
need of violence for its progress, and never shall a time
come when such a course will be applied for its propagation.
Even non-Muslims have also started releasing that the
advancement of Islam was simply due to its spiritual force
and not to the use of any sword. And it is indeed a fact
that the real success of Islam was brought about not by a
powerful emperor but its conquests were mainly due to its
dynamic spiritual force. The following passage by an
American scholar confirms this view:
"The other great religions
won their way slowly, by painful struggle, and finally
triumphed with the aid of powerful monarchs converted to
the new faith. Christianity had its Constantine, Buddhism
its Asoka, each lending to his chosen cult the mighty
force of secular authority. Not so in Islam. Arising in a
desert land sparsely inhabited by a nomad race,
previously undistinguished in human annals, Islam sallied
forth on its great adventure with the slenderest human
backing and against the heaviest material odds
[Lothorp
Stoddard, The New World of Islam, p.
1.]."
In short, the real Mahdi of Islam is
he who has clarified the real meaning of Mahdihood and has
shown to the world that the Mahdi of Islam is a spiritual
Mahdi and that Islam's success depends on its intrinsic
spiritual values and not on outward force.
Messiah and
Mahdi are one:
There was yet another great
misunderstanding about Mahdi which the Founder of the
Ahmadiyyah Movement [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of
Qadian] removed. Messiah and Mahdi were considered to be
two separate persons, although it was indicated in a report
of Ibn Majah: There is no Mahdi except
Isa (Laa Mahdi Ila Eesaa)
[Sunan Ibn
Majah (Matbah Nizamiyyah, Delhi.) 1905 C.E., ch.
AI-sharat al-Sa'ah, p.
302.]. There is a
positiveness about these words that there is no other Mahdi.
This can only be interpreted that the Promised Mahdi is
another name of the Promised Messiah. If the name Mahdi in
some other reports has been given to some one else, it is to
be accepted in a general way, as for instance, the first
four Khalifahs have also been called Mahdis. `Umar ibn `Abd
al-`Aziz, too, has been given this name. Now this report of
Ibn Majah could not be untrue as it was
against the general conception among Muslims about Mahdi,
and such a thought could not have occurred to the reporters.
On the other hand, this hadith supports the reports
by Bukhari and Muslim as they also mention the coming of
only one person in later ages and that is Jesus. The coming
of any other person is not at all mentioned in these two
authentic collections (Sahihain). Thus the report of
Ibn Majah has made it clear that if in some reports
the appearance of Mahdi is suggested besides the coming of
Jesus Christ, this also refers to Jesus. Now here we should
stop and think that if we do not try to solve the
difficulties involved in the reports about Mahdi in the
light of this hadith we shall have to admit that
besides al-Bukhari and al-Muslim other works
of Sihah Sittah (six authentic collections of
reports) have incorporated a lot of fabricated matter in
their collections. And if these reports were not fabricated,
why did Bukhari and Muslim reject a prophecy of such
magnitude and did not even care to mention it in their
works? The report of Ibn Majah: There is no Mahdi except
`Isa solves both these difficulties. Al-Bukhari
and al-Muslim have only reported the second name
of this reformer and other books of Sihah have
mentioned both the names of `Isa and. Mahdi.
This is not the only hadith
which shows that Messiah and Mahdi are one, but if we
carefully study other reports, they also point towards the
same conclusion. Evidently, there cannot be two Amirs
(leaders) or Khalifahs at one and the same time. Hazrat
Abu Bakr immediately after the death of the Holy Prophet
gave a reply to the Ansar (helpers) who said: One leader
from us and one from you [Al-Bukhari,
Kitab Fadail Ashab Al-Nabi, H. No.
1638a.] that this
was not possible and there could not be two leaders at the
same time. If this report is true, how could there be two
leaders, i.e., the Promised Messiah and Mahdi,
simultaneously? If it is said that one will be an assistant
to another we do not find it mentioned in the reports. Both
Messiah and Mahdi have been called imams. In
al-Bukhari: and al-Muslim: imamu-kum minkum
and amma-kum minkum occur for the Promised
Messiah who has also been called Arbiter and judge. Hakam
and imam are identical. In Musnad of Ahmad
he has been clearly referred to as "Arbiter, judge and
imam." [Imam
Abu `Abd Allah Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal,
vol. 2, p. 394 and p. 272.]
About Mahdi it is a wide-spread belief, that he will be
an imam and some think that he will be a king also.
In this case Messiah must be his wazir (aider,
assistant). But, on the other hand, this is also
acknowledged that the Messiah will be superior to Mahdi as
Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan quotes in his book a saying
by imam Shaukani: There is no doubt that Jesus is
superior to Mahdi [Nawab
Sayyid Nur al-Hasan Khan, Hujaj al-Kiramah, (Shah
Jahan Press, Bhopal), p. 385].
At any rate there can be only one imam at a time and
when Jesus and Mahdi are both called imam then it
necessarily follows that Jesus and Mahdi are also
one.
The third argument in favour of this
view is that the Promised Messiah has also been called Mahdi
in the reports. Accordingly, there is a hadith from
Abu Huraira to the effect that: Whoever lives from among
you shall meet Jesus, son of Mary who is imam, Mahdi,
arbiter and judge [Musnad
Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol. 2, p.
411.]. Besides all
this if we look deep into the matter we observe many other
similarities to show that these are only two different names
of one person. The time of their advent is the same, they
shall have the same office, the same work and the same
complexion, then how could they be two separate persons?
That the time of their appearance is the same is
acknowledged by all. About their office I have discussed
above that both of them have been called Imam, Amir,
Khalifah and Mahdi. Their work and duty is also the same.
The making of Islam dominant over other religions is the
work of the Messiah and the same has been assigned to Mahdi
as well. So much so that the breaking of the Cross and
killing the swine, thought to be the special duties of the
Messiah, have also been attributed to Mahdi as has been
mentioned in Hujaj al-Kiramah:
"The religion of Islam in his
time will be established as it had been in the age of
grace of the Prophet Muhammad. He will be a ruler over
all the world and shall break the Cross and kill the
swine. All these signs have been briefly discussed by Ibn
Hajar in connection with the coming of Mahdi
[Nawab
Siddiq Hasan Khan, Hujaj al-Kiramah, p.
363.]."
Spreading of peace and justice has
also been assigned to both. It is frequently reported about
Mahdi that he will fill the earth with justice and the
Messiah has also been called arbiter and judge. Their
complexion is also the same. The coming Messiah is of
wheatish colour, quotation has been given before
[Kanz
al-'Ummal, vol. 6, p. 126.].
Mahdi is of the same complexion as is found in report by
Na'im ibn Hammad that: He will be of wheatish complexion
from among the people (of the land)
[Kanz
al-'Ummal, vol. 7, p. 262.].
A Prophecy
becomes a Great Miracle after its Fulfilment:
The prophecy about the advent
of Mahdi is from among those prophecies which are related to
this age. The Mujaddid of this century has shed such
light on them that all the darkness which surrounded them
has been dispelled and they have become a manifest sign for
the truth of the Prophet. These prophecies were buried under
so many obscurities that there were many who denied their
authenticity and even those who believed in them were also
bewildered (at the great contradictory mass of such reports)
and were at times inclined almost towards its rejection.
Accordingly it was said: We admit that Mahdi will not
appear. What harm is there if he does not?
[Hadith
al-Ghashiyyah, p. 343.]
Or: Leave Mahdi aside. The descent of
Jesus is at least unanimously agreed by Christians and
Muslims alike. Let him descend
[Ibid.].
And in another book it has been mentioned that:
We admit that Mahdi may not come. This does not
contradict any important belief of the people of Islam. But
the son of Mary will indeed appear according to all
of them. May God bring him soon, for his coming as well will
serve the same purpose for which we expect the advent of
Mahdi [Nawab
Nur al-Hasan Khan, Iqtarab al-Sa`ah, p.
147.]. That person
has indeed rendered a great service to Muslims who has
removed all the cobwebs from these prophecies and has thus
placed before us a clear evidence of the truthfulness of the
Holy Prophet. It is easy to say what difference does it make
to Islam whether Mahdi comes or not, but the first advantage
of Mahdi's advent has been that it has brought to light a
new testimony in favour of Islam, or in other words, a
miracle of Islam has manifested itself in this age. The
miracles of all the prophets have come to an end with their
death, but the miracles of the Prophet Muhammad have
continued to manifest themselves ever since and will remain
so till the Last Day. As a matter of fact, the faith which
the fulfilment of a prophecy creates in one's heart is not
even created at the occurrence of a great miracle, because a
miracle may contain some elements of doubt in it, but the
fulfilment of a prophecy is in fact a ‘talking
witness’ which stands before friends and foes alike.
Moreover, at the occurrence of a miracle there are only a
few persons present who witness its truth, but a prophecy
after its fulfilment does not stand in need of another
evidence. It becomes an evidence itself. Has that person not
done any service to Islam who has explained the hidden
truths behind these prophecies and has thus helped to
strengthen our faith in Islam? Hazrat Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad's interpretations concerning the prophecies about
Mahdi do not seem to be the result of his intellectual
investigations, but were the work of Divine light given to
him which helped him to discover the truth underlying these
reports. This discovery consisted of two great facts.
Firstly, it was wrong to associate the name of Mahdi
with the sword and to believe, as the opponents did, that
Islam was spread at the point of the sword - the authentic
reports being devoid of any such mention - and, secondly,
that Jesus and Mahdi were not two separate persons but
two names of the same reformer.
The
Significance of the Two Names:
As has been discussed above,
there was a profound reality hidden behind these two names,
therefore the mujaddid of this age was assigned two
great tasks which entitled him to receive the names of
Messiah and Mahdi. On the one hand, Islam had a big
encounter with Christianity, - for, according to the Quran
and Hadith, Christianity was going to attain great power in
the world, - and, on the other, the present age was
particularly suited for the propagation of Islam among
Christians. Islam had won the hearts of millions of people
of other religions before, but Christianity had not offered
its due quota to Islam. It was, however, destined that the
sun of Islam should rise over Eastern countries first.
Therefore, it was mostly in the East that the light of Islam
spread in the beginning, but then according to the law of
nature this sun was going to shine over the Western
countries as well. In a report of the Prophet this had been
described as the rising of the sun in the West. Again, it is
to the same effect that the Holy Prophet has referred to:
I have been given two treasures; one red (Eastern nations)
and another white (Western nations)
[Sunan Abu
Daud, Kitab al-Fitan, Vol. 2, p.
233.]. As encounter
with Christianity and the propagation of Islam in
Christendom were the two tasks of the mujaddid of
this age, therefore, the title Ibn Maryam or `Isa was given
to him. He mentions that fact in the following couplet:
As I have been given light for the Christian people, the
name of the son of Mary has been given to me for this
reason. Again, because he was commissioned to strengthen
the inner solidarity of Islam, save Muslims from going to
immoderate extremes, cure them of the habit of takfir
(denunciation of Muslims as heretics) and place before
them the sublime object of preaching of Islam, which was in
fact the object of the life of the Prophet Muhammad,
therefore the name Mahdi was also given to the mujaddid
of this age. The only reality behind all this is that
the perfect mujaddid of the fourteenth century was
like the full moon that was going to shine in the world. For
shedding the light of Islam in the Christian world he was
called Messiah or son of Mary, and for illuminating the
hearts of Muslims with the light of Islam he was called
Mahdi. That is why the Holy Prophet declared that: He has
been given my name [Ibid.,
Kitab al-Malahim, Vol. 2. p.
239.]. The point
that Mahdi is superior to Jesus, though Jesus was a prophet
of God, only means that, as a Mahdi, he will manifest the
truth of Muhammad and, as a Messiah, the truth of Jesus, the
former being superior to the latter; it is because of this
that Mahdi is superior to Jesus.
Other
Prophecies about Mahdi:
Prophecies about the advent of
Messiah and Mahdi have been discussed by me elsewhere. Here
I should only like to mention about the place of his advent.
There is no doubt in it that some reports also suggest
Makkah or Madinah as the place of his appearance and the
sanctity of these places might have turned the attention of
the reporters towards these towns. But there are reports
which not only indicate the place of his advent in the East
but even his companions are also reported to be from among
the Eastern people. The reporters' own imagination in normal
circumstances could not have gone to that extent.
Accordingly, following are the words of the reports of Abu
Na'im and Ibn `Asakir : From the offspring of Hasan ibn
'Ali, a person (i.e., Mahdi) will appear from the East. If
mountains are in his way he will demolish them and make his
way through [Hujaj
al-Kiramah, p. 355; Najm al-Thaqib, vol. I, p.
51.]. Here the
reference to his being the offspring of Hasan ibn `All has
been due to the wrong impression that Messiah and Mahdi were
considered to be two different persons. A report in Ibn
Majah says: Some people will come out from the East
and will support Mahdi, i.e., they will help him in his
domination [Sunan
Ibn Majah, ch. Khuruj al-Mahdi, p.
310.]. Nawab Siddiq
Hasan Khan also writes:
"Men of Divine gnosis will
enter into fealty with Mahdi by God's guidance and Divine
visions. Holy people will be with him to strengthen his
message and to support him ....These will be nine persons
in the footsteps of the Companions (of the Prophet); they
would prove their covenant true which they made with
Allah. They would all be non-Arabs ('ajami) and
none would be an Arab from among them
[Nawab
Siddiq Hasan Khan, Hujaj
al-Kiramah.]."
If the companions and supporters of
Mahdi are non-Arabs, it clearly shows that the place of his
advent is not Makkah, but some other country outside Arabia,
and it has been just stated that his companions would be
coming from the East. Undoubtedly, in view of this, the
place of Mahdi's advent should also be an Eastern country as
has been mentioned in one of the reports: Mahdi will
appear in a village the name of which will be Kadi'ah
[Jawahir
al-Asrar, p. 55. The original name of Qadian was
Islam Pur Qadi Majjhi which was gradually shortened to Qadi,
being generally pronounced as Kadi. If it is kept in view
that the form of foreign words in the Arabic language
undergoes a little change, for instance, London is altered
into Landarah, the change of Kadi into Kadi'ah is easy to
understand.]. This name is
so identical with Qadian (or Kadi, with which Qadian was
formerly known) that, if read with the reports of the
general signs of Mahdi, it becomes clear that such reports
are only applicable to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad of Qadian.
Some of the
Signs are only in the form of Metaphors in the Prophecy
about Mahdi:
There are some signs of course
about Mahdi's advent which do not apply in their literal
sense to the Founder of the Ahmadiyyah Movement. For
instance, that he will be a king for seven years or that he
will possess large treasures. This is, however, accepted on
all hands that prophecies are couched in metaphorical
language, because the future events are shown in the form of
visions and dreams which are subject to interpretation like
other prophecies. The Quran has also called ru'ya'
and kushuf as God's speaking from behind a
veil [The
Quran: 42:51],
therefore the apparent expressions should not mislead a
person. About the Promised Messiah, for instance, it has
been mentioned in a report that he would come with two
yellow mantles [Abu
'Isa Muhammad ibn 'Isa Tirmidhi, al-Jami‘
al-Tirmidhi, vol. 1, p. 38.].
A yellow mantle is interpreted with a disease and this in
fact pointed to two diseases with which the Promised Messiah
was going to suffer. It is surprising to note that about
Mahdi it has also been mentioned that: On him there will
be two shining mantles as if he is from among the men of
Israel [Abu
Na'im, Iqtarab al-sa`ah, p. 128; Hujaj
al-Kiramah, p. 360.].
About possessions of kunuz (treasures) as well
the same mistake is committed and kunuz is taken to
mean treasures of gold and silver. But when the Holy Prophet
says: I have been given two treasures, red and white
[Sunan
Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Fitan, vol. 2, p.
133.], no one takes
them to be treasures of gold and silver and it is only
interpreted as signifying two groups of people. Similarly a
saying of Hazrat `Ali has been recorded in
Hujaj al-Kiramah that: Blessings of God be upon
the renouncers (taliqan) that at that place are
treasures of God, but these are not of gold and silver but
consist of people who have recognised God as they should
have and they would be the helpers of Mahdi
[Nawab
Siddiq Hasan Khan, Hujaj al-Kiramah, p.
396.]. When in such
reports treasures of Mahdi have been considered as his
helpers, there should be no difficulty in interpreting
metaphorically the expression kunuz appearing in
other traditions. It has also been mentioned in a hadith
that: La hawla wa la quwwaw (there is no
power except His power) is a treasure from among the
treasures of paradise [Ibn
al-Athir, al-Nihayah fi Gharib 'l-Hadith wal-Athari,
vol. 4, p. 36.].
Now this is not a treasure of gold and silver but only,
as it is stated in al-Nihayah, the reward which has been
stored [Ibid.].
Again, it has been mentioned in some of the reports that
Mahdi will also dig out treasures from under the Ka'bah. Now
gold and silver are not buried under this holy place. On the
other hand, it is the riches of knowledge and wisdom which
were manifested by the Prophet Muhammad and have been
concealed from the eyes of the world with the lapse of time.
The real treasure is, in fact, the wisdom and Divine gnosis
which were lost in the Age of Corruption and only letter and
form-worship was left with the Muslims. Thus, whoever
restores the lost glory of wisdom, it is he who really digs
out treasures and distributes them among the people. The
istikhraj kunuz (i.e., the digging out of
treasures from earth) therefore, in the case of Mahdi does
not mean digging of gold and silver, but it is only a
metaphorical expression which implies the imparting of
knowledge and wisdom by Mahdi to his people, which is indeed
the task of all God-sent reformers. Their kingdom is also a
spiritual one, and, if God wills, He may favour them with
temporal power as well. But their actual kingdom is always
spiritual. Now, if a person insists on the literal meanings
of these reports, it would be impossible for him to accept
all the reports which are so contradictory in their details
that even those who generally believe in them also entertain
doubts as to their literal fulfilment. The contradictions in
them are so great that either the whole lot have to be
rejected under the principle when two things contradict,
they cut each other, or only their general and
collective testimony should be accepted. A part of them
should be interpreted metaphorically and a part, of course,
has to be left aside. When we follow this principle these
reports invariably apply to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
of Qadian, the Founder of the Ahmadiyyah Movement. That
Mahdi will not spread Islam with the sword and that he and
the Messiah are one, these two points have made it
definitely clear that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is
indeed the Promised Mahdi. It does not make any difference
if a ruler Mahdi may also appear at some future time, but,
just for the sake of mere possibility, it is not right to
reject the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad which have been
fulfilled.
Top
footer
|
'E-mail'
this page to a friend!
|
E-mail
Us!
This website is designed,
developed and maintained by the members of:
The Lahore
Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of
Islam
(Ahmadiyya
Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam, Lahore
-- A.A.I.I.L.)
and is being managed in the Netherlands.
The responsibility of the content
of this website lies with the respective
authors
You may print-out and spread this
literature for the propagation of Islam provided our website
[aaiil.org]
is acknowledged
|
