|| aaiil.org || || aaiil.org || || aaiil.org || || aaiil.org || || aaiil.org || || aaiil.org ||
Kindly click on 'File' on the browser's menu bar, and select 'Print...' to get a print-out of this page.
This page was printed from the 'Official Website of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam Lahore (Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam)'
located at http://aaiil.org or http://www.aaiil.org
Click on the above links to go to our homepage, if you reached this page through a search engine.
This is a 'printer-friendly' page, to see the original version of this page kindly click here.
Qadiani Beliefs Refuted Section > Articles > The Truth of Hazrat Mirza Sahib's Prophecy Concerning the Appearance of the Musleh Mauood
The Truth of Hazrat Mirza
Sahib's Prophecy Concerning the Appearance of the Musleh
Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood (i.e., Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib of Qadian) published a proclamation on 20th February 1886 which also included the following statement:
"So there is good news for you that an honourable and pure son shall be granted to you. You will get a pious boy. That boy comes as your guest. His name is Anmwaeel and also Bashir. He has been granted holy spirit and he is free from impurities and he is the light of Allah. Blessed is he who descends from the heaven. He is accompanied with blessing which will come along with his arrival. He will be a man of dignity, greatness and fortune. .. He will be very intelligent and wise and gentle at heart, will be filled with knowledge of physical and metaphysical sciences and he will be the one who will be fourth after three. (Note: The original in Urdu is "Woh teen ko char karnay wala ho ga." It can be interpreted in other ways.) (The significance of this is not clear.) "
In the Ahmadiyya Jamaat this part of the proclamation came to be popularly known as the prophecy of Musleh-i-Mauood. On 12th January 1889, Hazrat Sahib issued a proclamation which included the following in a footnote:
"As entered in the proclamation of 10th July 1888 and the proclamation of 1st December 1888, the Eminent and Exalted God had, out of His blessings and generosity, given the promise that after the death of the first Bashir, a second Bashir will be given whose name will also be Mahmood. And addressing this humble one He had said: "He will be of firm resolve and will be your likeness in beauty and generosity. He is All-Powerful, creates in whichever way He likes." So today the 12th of January 1889, and corresponding to the 9th of Jamadiul Awwal 1306 Hijra, on Saturday, in the house of this humble one, with the blessings of the Exalted One, a son has been born, whose name, presently, just by way of good omen, has been adopted as Bashir and also Mahmood. Proclamation will again be made after receiving complete clarification. But up till now it has not dawned on me whether this very boy is Musleh-i-Mauood and one destined to live (long) or he is some other one."
It should be borne in mind, that after this Hazrat Sahib never issued any proclamation giving the above-mentioned complete clarification.
Later on, Hazrat Sahib issued some important clarifications, but members of the Rabwah Jamaat failed to understand these and thus stumbled grievously. We shall first take up these clarifications to enable the readers to stand on firm foundations.
Let us first consider the meaning of "will be fourth after three" which was not clear at the time of the prophecy. The following passage appears on page 15 of the Appendix to Anjaam-i-Aatham (Hazrat Mirza Sahibs book):
"Then there is another revelation which was published in February 1886 and it is this that God will bring fourth after three. At that time the three boys who are present now, did not exist. And the meaning of this revelation was that there will be three boys, and then there will be another who will be the fourth after three. So a major portion of this has been fulfilled, that is to say that Allah bestowed upon me from this marriage, three sons who all three are present. Only one is being awaited who will be the fourth after three."
This has made plain the sense of "will be fourth after three" and also established that none of the three sons Mahmood Ahmad, Bashir Ahmad or Sharif Ahmad was Musleh-i-Mauood. On the contrary, the one who would be the fourth after three was still awaited. It is important to note that the attribute of being fourth after three is the attribute which determines the recognition of Musleh-i-Mauood, all the other qualifications refer, in simple words, to his future triumphs.
The second important clarification is that the prophecy of 20th February 1886 comprises, in fact, not one but two predictions. The first one ends with the words "Blessed is he who descends from the heaven" and this referred to Bashir the First and was fulfilled at his birth. The second starts with "He is accompanied with blessing which will come along with his arrival" and this pertains to Musleh-i-Mauood. This is so because, on the death of Bashir the First, Hazrat Sahib stated in his proclamation of 1st December 1888:
" . On the contrary, our proclamation of 20th February 1886, contained a prediction about some of my sons that they will die in childhood. Accordingly, in the statement in the proclamation of 20th February 1886, that an honourable, pure son comes as your guest, the word guest was, in fact, the name given to that son and indicated his tender age and early death because a guest is one who departs after staying a few days. .. Nor should there be misunderstanding that the prediction which has been mentioned is about Musleh-i-Mauood, because it has been clearly established through revelation that all these writings refer to the son who died. The prophecy which pertains to Musleh-i-Mauood starts with the words: "He is accompanied with blessing which will come along with his arrival. ."
The third important clarification is that according to the Rabwah Jamaat the birth of Musleh-i-Mauood was bound to take place within nine years, but this is absolutely wrong. The nine year limit is not mentioned at all in the proclamation of February 1886, that is, in the prophecy of Musleh-i-Mauood. This period was fixed in the proclamation of 22nd March 1886. On the objection that this time was too long, it was stated in a proclamation on 8th April 1886:
"Be it clear that some gentlemen like Munshi Inderman Sahib of Muradabad have raised this objection on the proclamation of 22nd March 1886 that the nine year limit which has been laid down for the appearance of the Promised Son leaves a lot of room, for some son may be born during this long period. . Besides this, after the publication of the above-mentioned proclamation, I now turned towards Allah for clarification of this affair. So, today on 8th April 1886, it was made plain to this humble one from Allah, whose glory is eminent, that a son will be born very soon, not exceeding the period of a pregnancy. This shows that probably a son is about to be born or will definitely be born from a nearby pregnancy. But it has not been revealed whether the one that will be born now is that very son or that he would be born some other time in the nine year period. .."
Afterwards, on the birth of Bashir the First, he wrote in the proclamation of 7th August 1887:
"O Viewers! I give you good news that the son whose birth I had predicted in the proclamation of 8th April 1886, and after receiving communication from the Exalted God, had declared unequivocally that in case he was not born of the present pregnancy, he will definitely be born of the next pregnancy which will be soon after. That auspicious son was born today, 16th Zeeqaad 1304 Hijra, corresponding to 7th August 1887, after midnight at about 1:30 a.m. So Allah be praised for this."
Later, on the death of the same son he wrote in the Green Poster (Subz Ishtayhaar) dated 1st December 1888:
"The Exalted God has also disclosed to me, that the prophecy of 20th February 1886, in fact, comprised prediction of the birth of two noble sons. And up to the writing "Blessed is he who descends from the heaven" the prediction is about the first Bashir who was the cause of divine mercy in the spiritual sense. The writing that follows this is about the second Bashir."
The first Bashir was born within nine years and the prophecy was fulfilled. Hazrat Sahib never mentioned the nine year limit after this.
Predictions About the Other Four Sons:
After the clarification that the first part of the prophecy of 20th February 1886 was fulfilled on the birth of the first Bashir, the predictions that Hazrat Sahib made on pages 42 and 43 of his book Tiryaq-ul-Quloob, about the birth of the other four sons are given below:
First Son: "The prediction about the birth of my elder son Mahmood was published in the proclamation of 10th July 1888, and also in the poster of 1st December 1888, which was printed on green paper (Subz Ishtayhaar; Click to read). So when the publicity of this prediction reached the state of perfection through proclamations and no section of the Muslims, Christians and Hindus remained unaware of it, then with the blessing and mercy of the Exalted Allah, Mahmood was born on Saturday the 12th January 1889, corresponding to 9th Jamadi-ul-Awwal 1306 Hijra ."
Second Son: "And my second son whose name is Bashir Ahmad, the prediction about his birth has been made on page 266 of Aaina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam. ."
Third Son: "And my third son whose name is Sharif Ahmad, the prediction about his birth is given in the footnote on page 39 of my pamphlet Anwar-ul-Islam. This pamphlet was published in September 1894. .."
Fourth Son: "And my fourth son whose name is Mubarak Ahmad, the prediction regarding him was made in the proclamation of 20th February 1886. ..."
This evidently refers to the prophecy of Musleh-i-Mauood, the second of the two prophesies contained in the proclamation of 20th February 1886, because as already explained above, in the words of Hazrat Sahib himself, the first prophecy was fulfilled in the birth of the first Bashir. It is evident that if Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood ever applied the prophecy of Musleh-i-Mauood to any of his sons, it was applied to Mubarak Ahmad, who died in childhood. It should be clearly understood that this conjecture was based purely on Hazrat Sahibs own thinking and was not based on revelation from the Exalted Allah. If this conjecture was not fulfilled, it should cause no surprise.
In spite of these clear statements made in Tiryaq-ul-Quloob, Mr. Sultan Sial, editor of the article "Refutation of Lahori Doctrines" reproduces the following from page 34 of the same book:
"About eighteen years ago, I informed some persons, Hindu and Muslims, that God had vouchsafed to me the revelation: "We give thee good tidings of a handsome son. .." Everyone wondered at this revelation for my wife had passed the age of childbearing since twenty years. . About three years thereafter, I married into a noble family of Delhi and God bestowed upon me that son and three others."
He goes on to argue:
"Note the words: "God bestowed upon me that son." Hence, the Promised Son was amongst the four that had already been born at the time of making this statement."
This is sheer nonsense. The prediction was only about a handsome son. This son was born and Hazrat Sahib wrote "God bestowed upon me that son. .." Obviously "that son" refers to the "handsome son" mentioned in the prediction and not "The Promised Son" (Musleh-i-Mauood) who was not mentioned at all in that prediction. In fact, in the same book, a few pages later, Hazrat Sahib, quoting the prediction concerning the birth of the second son, Bashir Ahmad, writes "and Light is near. Perhaps Light refers to the Promised Son" (page 42). The word "perhaps" makes it quite clear that the Promised Son had not yet appeared.
Some More Arguments:
Those people who think that the identity of Musleh-i-Mauood had been established in Siraj-um-Muneer (published 1897) and in Tiryaq-ul-Quloob (published 1903), should consider that if such an identity had been established, then it was essential that all such directives should have been clarified in Al-Wasiyyat which was published in 1905. Why did Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood state in footnote on page 6 of Al-Wasiyyat?:
"God has informed me: "I shall raise a person for your Jamaat from your own progeny and shall distinguish him with nearness to Me and revelation and right shall progress through him and many people will accept the truth. So wait for those days. And remember that everyone is recognised in his own time."
Evidently Musleh-i-Mauood had not yet appeared in 1905 and was to be recognised later in his own time.
In Hujjat Ullah, which was published after Siraj-um-Muneer, the following words appear on page 10:
"Indeed, if I have written in this prophecy some revelation which would establish that, that revelation had fixed him as the promised son, then why is that revelation not put forth? So when you are unable to present the revelation, then is this curse on you or on someone else? . And supposedly, even if I had meant just this, then my word is not the same as the word of God. I am a man. It is possible that I may say something after exercising my judgement and it may not be correct. Again I ask: "Which is that revelation of God that I had clarified that the boy will be born of the very first pregnancy or that the one born of the second one will in fact be the same Promised Son, and that revelation was not fulfilled? If you have with you any such revelation of mine, then curse is on you if you do not publish that revelation."
See how Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood has demanded revelation to establish identity. He has sent curse on one who does not publish it. This is exactly how it happens. Whenever someone appointed by Allah appears, he receives revelation from the Exalted Allah that he has been appointed. He then informs the world about this revelation. Nobody becomes an appointed one with the votes of his disciples. Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood repeatedly challenged his opponents that he had been appointed by the Exalted Allah as the Mujaddid of the fourteenth century Hijra and if anyone else was also a claimant, he should come forward. No one did, since he would have been obliged to produce a revelation. If revelation from Allah was not a condition, every religious group would vote in someone of their leaders as a Mujaddid.
During the last days, on 27th October 1907, Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood made a statement in his own hand in Urdu and handed it over to the Sadar Anjuman. Photocopy of the statement in Urdu has been published several times. We reproduce below its translation in English (and the original scanned facsimiles below):
"My opinion is that any matter about which the Anjuman comes to a decision that it should be thus, such decision having been taken by a majority of votes, the same should be considered as the right decision, and the same should be the final decision. Nevertheless, I would add this much that, in certain religious matters which are related to the special object of my advent, I should be merely informed and I am fully confident that this Anjuman will not do anything against my wishes. This is written only by way of precaution, for it may be that the matter is one which is ordained by God in a special manner. This rule is to be observed only during my lifetime; after that, the decision of this Anjuman in all matters shall be final "
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
27nd October 1907
Handwritten Instruction by the
Founder In Printed
Handwritten Instruction by the Founder
In Printed Urdu
If Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad had been already identified as the Musleh-i-Mauood, it was meaningless to name the Anjuman as the successor. He should have been appointed successor.
People who say that Hazrat Maulana Noor-ud-Din also considered Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad to be the Musleh-i-Mauood should ponder why in such a case he himself continued to remain the Khalifa? Why did he not abdicate in Mian Sahibs favour? At least at the time of death he should have made the will "This is Musleh-i-Mauood, accept him as your leader." And why did he use against Mian Sahib harsh words whose photocopy has been published.
Brevity has been kept in view in this article. For a detailed survey, a study of Maulana Muhammad Alis pamphlet titled Al Musleh-i-Mauood would, Insha Allah, prove very useful.
Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad, Elected by the Rabwah Jamaat as Musleh-i-Mauood:
We do not desire to hurt anybodys feelings. Just to present the truth, we request members of the Rabwah Jamaat to keep before them the words of praise concerning the Musleh-i-Mauood that have been written in Hazrat Masih-i-Mauoods prophecies and then look at the incidents in the life of Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad. Then let them cast their vote as they like. A few incidents are narrated below:
1. Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad on page 35 of his book Aaina-i-Sadaqat admits that his beliefs are:
"That I have spread the idea about Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood that he is, in fact, a prophet. . Thirdly that all Muslims who have not entered the baiyat of Hazrat Masih-i-Mauood, although they have not heard even his name, are kafirs and outside the pale of Islam."
Again during the Annual Jalsa of December 1913, Mian Sahib called his party of Ansaarullah. Other people also attended this meeting. In this meeting he stated: "If someone places a sword on one side of my neck and asks me not to call non-Ahmadis as kafirs, even then I shall reply that they are kafirs and I shall certainly call them kafir." (Paigham-i-Sulh, 21st September 1947, page 5).
Now contrast this verbosity with his subsequent docility. Not to talk of the threat of a sword, he was not even pierced with a thorn but the stand taken in front of the Munir Inquiry Committee was entirely opposed to the beliefs stated above. The following statement is given on page 199 of "The Report of the Court of Inquiry to Inquire into the Punjab Disturbances of 1953":
"On the question whether the Ahmadis (Note by the Webmaster: the Qadiani Ahmadis implied here; the Lahori Ahmadis have never, God Forbid, proclaimed non-Ahmadis to be outside the pale of Islam) consider the other Muslmans to be kafirs in the sense of their being outside the pale of Islam, the position taken before us is that such persons are not kafirs and that the word kafir, when used in the literature of the Ahmadis in respect of such persons, is used in the sense of minor heresy and that it was never intended to convey that such persons were outside the pale of Islam. We have seen the previous pronouncements of Ahmadis on this subject, which are numerous, and to us they do not seem to be capable of any other interpretation than this that people who did not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad were outside the pale of Islam."
Will the Musleh-i-Mauood be a man of such FIRM RESOLVE?
2. The following writing appears on pages 216-217 of the Third Khalifa of the Rabwah Jamaat, Hafiz Mirza Nasir Ahmad Sahibs, Daura-i-Maghrib 1400 Hijra ki Roo-i-dad, in reply to a correspondents question:
"In such a case no one has the right to tell a person who calls himself a Muslim that you are not a Muslim. If one has to act according to the Quran, then he has to be accepted as a Muslim. Those people who do not consider us Muslims are violating the Quran. But we accept their right to call themselves Muslims and according to us they are part of the Muslim Ummah."
At this the correspondent said: "They do not accept you as Muslims. Will you call them Muslims in spite of this?"
His Eminence replied: "Yes, we consider them Muslims in spite of this. If they are violating the Quran by not calling us Muslims, it does not follow that we should also violate the Quran. Let anyone do as he likes, but we cannot violate the Quran."
Now, members of the Rabwah Jamaat can decide for themselves whether Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad holds the correct beliefs or Mirza Nasir Ahmad. They are both their "Rightful Imams". Inna lillahi wa inna elaihi rajeoon.
Could a person holding such perverse beliefs be the Musleh-i-Mauood?
3. The paper Al-Fazl (Note: The Official Organ of the Rabwah Jamaat), Qadian of 12th September 1947 carried the following news on page 3:
"On the night between 10th and 11th September, the news was broadcast from Radio Pakistan that the respected Imam of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, Qadian, after consulting representatives of his Jamaat has decided that all Ahmadis of East Punjab, particularly those of the Qadian Jamaat, should stay where ever they are. They should not leave their stations under any circumstances. Women and children should be evacuated to Western Punjab. They can be brought back as soon as conditions improve."
Immediately after issuing these instructions to his followers, Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad fled from Qadian and took refuge in Lahore. Is this the "FIRM RESOLVE" expected from the Musleh-i-Mauood?
We now close this article. It is hoped that truth has dawned on members of the Rabwah Jamaat. More material can be presented if required.
This page was printed from the 'Official Website of the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam Lahore (Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam)'
located at http://aaiil.org or http://www.aaiil.org