Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din
on how to present claims of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Advises use of wisdom and gentleness in explaining
Some of our friends put forward something
in such a way that the ignorant become inflamed and a dispute takes
It is my practice that whatever is the
subject of a verse of the Quran, I explain that topic. Now if there
is no mention in it of Mirza, how could I drag it in without reason?
From Badr, 22 April 1909, page 5
Translators Note: Given below is the translation
of a talk by Maulana Nur-ud-Din. The words in square brackets have
been added in the translation for clarity.
A letter was presented to Hazrat Ameer-ul-Mumineen [Hazrat
Maulana Nur-ud-Din] containing a discussion about the superiority
of Hazrat Abu Bakr and the Promised Messiah [as to which of them
was superior]. After reading it he said:
Once I saw Hazrat Ali in a dream and I said to him: The disputes
about who was superior has caused enormous damage to Islam, so what
is the truth of the matter? He replied: Every person
has a connection with God in his heart. His superiority is according
to that. But that connection is such a hidden secret that none but
Allah knows it. So it is futile to have a discussion on this
Hazrat [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] sahib was appointed by God. He had
to speak according to the Divine command. The word nabi
or rasul was very easy according to the meaning in Arabic.
But the people of our country take it in such a complicated way
that they fell into difficulties. Even when you send a man who cleans
toilets on some work, at that time he is called rasul of
the sender. What, then, is the benefit of this dispute? Look, a
splint is a thing and God is a thing. Does it mean that a splint
and God are equal? Does it mean that the verse Every thing
will perish [the Quran, 28:88] applies to Him? Certainly not.
Likewise, by being called nabi or rasul, no one
becomes equal to the Holy Prophet Muhammad. My belief about the
Holy Prophet Muhammad is what I sometimes say spontaneously in my
talks on the Quran (dars) that it is simply impossible
for a man like him to be born. Both Jesus and Moses were rasul
but they bear no comparison with the Holy Prophet Muhammad.
The fact is that there is a style of explaining a point. Some of
our friends put forward something in such a way that the ignorant
become inflamed and a dispute takes place. I have said many times
to non-Ahmadis during conversation, that Mirza was also sent by
the Lord. Mirza used to receive news of the unseen from his Lord
and disclose it to people. They all accepted this and showed no
anger, while this is the same as the meaning of the words rasul
and nabi. So there is an appropriate way of explaining
things: Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and goodly
exhortation [the Quran, 16:125]. Many people are needlessly
placed in a trial. They should be treated with mercy, but they are
not treated like that.
The point regarding superiority can be resolved very quickly, but
this is the debate [i.e., whether Hazrat Abu Bakr or Hazrat Ali
is superior] which even led to bloodshed between Sunnis and Shiahs.
Till the 12th century, Sunnis and Shiahs did not have separate mosques.
But eventually this debate brought about disunity and these two
parties became deadly foes, one of another.
A shiah was incensed by reading the following verse of poetry by
Hazrat [Mirza] sahib:
Kerbala is my field every moment. There are a hundred Husains
in my shirt.
I said to him, it means that while the suffering at Kerbala endured
by Imam Husain lasted from morning to afternoon one day, Mirza sahib
is saying: I am such a victim that I am in the field of Kerbala
every moment; in case of Imam Husain the matter was settled in a
few hours, but in my case hundreds of days have passed and they
slaughter me every day, as if there are a hundred Husains sheltering
in my shirt. The Shiah immediately said: What you say is true.
You need to show wisdom in speech. I went to Sialkot.
It is my practice that whatever is the subject of a verse of the
Quran, I explain that topic. Now if there is no mention in it of
Mirza [Ghulam Ahmad sahib], how could I drag it in without reason?
Some people [Ahmadis] were offended that I gave such a long address
but didn’t even mention Mirza, as if I was trying to please
the whole world. It is not only them. I have seen the same in sufis,
followers of Fiqh, and the Ahl-i Hadith, that unless you mention
what they like hearing about, they become unhappy and aggrieved.
In Kashmir, people walk out of a khutba if the name of
Sayyid Abdul Qadir Jilani is not mentioned, and think that the khateeb
is a faithless man. …
In the Quran such people are mentioned: And when Allah alone
is mentioned, the hearts of those who believe not in the Hereafter
shrink [the Quran, 39:45]. They do not have faith in the Hereafter,
so they are enraged at the mention of the oneness of Allah. To sum
up, I regard all such discussions as wasteful. Therefore you must
pray very much that God shows you a way of explaining things to
your opponents gently.
(See image of Urdu text further down.)
Maulana Nur-ud-Din not mentioning name of Hazrat Mirza sahib
This point, referred to in the last two paragraphs
of the above excerpt, is also found in another issue of Badr,
dated 26 May 1908. That issue carries a report by a correspondent
on the behaviour of the opponents of the Ahmadiyya Movement during
the stay of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in Lahore. It reports on the
abusive speeches they made, within the hearing of Ahmadis, at an
open ground close to the house where Hazrat Mirza sahib was staying,
at which location they gathered every evening for this purpose.
In contrast to these abusive speeches, writes the correspondent:
At the end, while lamenting the demise of the decency,
seriousness and knowledge of these ulama, I wish to mention
that Maulana Maulvi Nur-ud-Din gives religious talks (dars).
But can any non-Ahmadi prove that the Maulvi sahib has ever mentioned
these opponents in order to abuse them, even indirectly, let alone
explicitly? In fact, I can say that he has never mentioned
the Promised Messiah in particular. (Badr,
26 May 1908, p. 6, col. 3)
At this point the editor of Badr has added a footnote
which begins as follows:
The love and devotion of the honoured Maulvi Nur-ud-Din
sahib for the Promised Messiah is known from the fact that, despite
being such a physician who could have earned at least a thousand
Rupees a month in some large city without difficulty and without
advertising himself, and despite being owner of lands, property
and houses, he lives in a village for the sake of the Hazrat Mahdi.
(Badr, 26 May 1908, p. 6, col. 3 to p. 7, col. 1)
Then, after relating some more about the Maulanas utmost
devotion to, and sacrifices for, the Promised Messiah, the editor
His love is so strong that no disciple can show the same
towards his master. Nonetheless, despite such love, his lecture
consists of explaining the greatness of God, showing the ways
of attaining righteousness, and proofs of the truth of Islam.
If in that context a mention of Hazrat Mirza sahib should arise,
then so be it. Otherwise, he is so thoroughly absorbed in explaining
the greatness and glory of Allah the Most High that he hardly
makes any specific mention of his Imam, let alone that he
should mention the opponents and thereby waste his own time and
that of his audience. Of course, his conduct is itself a powerful
evidence of the truth of the Promised Messiah, which is better
than a thousand words. (Badr, 26 May 1908, p. 7,
col. 1 and 2)
Thus, it was openly known, and Maulana Nur-ud-Din himself referred
to it as well, that he did not much mention Hazrat Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad in his talks, lectures and khutbas. This shows how
strongly he adhered to the purest belief in the oneness of God and
the teaching to please Him only. It dispels the idea that disciples
should be sychophantic and flattering towards their leader.
Scanned image of the three
columns of the talk from Badr, 22 April 1909, p. 5: