Thoughts on the Ahmadi — Sunni Dialogue on Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Assalamu Alaikum. This was a very refreshing debate to the other Sunni stream on br. Adnan Rashid’s channel. I had criticised fellow Sunni brothers there for poor chairmanship and relentless interruptions to the Ahmadi brothers. I had criticised br. Adnan for scattergun interruptions last time, so I should praise him here where he showed decorum and mashallah, very tempered down. This made the dialogue more productive. Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis will find this beneficial and I look forward to future engagements inshallah. Responding to a few points:
1. Br. Yemeni: He should have responded to the Ahmadi brother’s salams with ‘Wa Alaikum As-Salam’, instead of ‘Wa Alaikum.’ Allah will not throw you into Hellfire for a completed salam.
2. The main thrust of the Ahmadi argument is that Mirza Ahmad was a true prophet because he is being attacked by non-Ahmadis in the same way non-believers attacked Muhammad (S) and also attacked Jesus (AS). This is not a test of prophethood. If it were, then Musailama would have been a true prophet, and so would have the Bahaullah and Rashad Khalifa. But Ahmadis consider them to be liars. The Ahmadi brs. have faith in Mirza Ahmad which is why they believe in him. But why do they have faith in him and not the Bahaullah or Sufi sheikhs who claim to have direct lines to Allah or to Rashad Khalifa who claimed the apparent mathematical miracle of 19 in the Quran through computation? What about the Gurus in Sikhism? They claimed to be a part of God…so they must be followed, right? Wrong.
3. A Sunni questioner stated a hadith that there would be a reformer in the ummah every 100 years after Muhammad (S). He rightly asked why these reformers did not correct the prevalent belief that Jesus (AS) was saved from death and risen to Heaven alive. If Jesus (AS) died then all of the reformers (140 of them) would have corrected this erroneous belief by stating that Jesus (AS) died and that the Promised Messiah is a separate person to Jesus (AS) and nothing to do with him, i.e. a new prophet within the Prophethood of Muhammad (S) and a reflection of him. No reformer stated this. One of the Ahmadi brs. answered that the reformers did not have the remit to correct the erroneous beliefs as this task fell to the Promised Messiah (1300 years later). This makes no sense whatsoever. A reformer before Mirza Ahmed would have corrected wrong beliefs…the ummah would not have to wait 1300 years for the correct belief to appear.
4. The Ahmadi brs. said that Mirza Ahmed was a reflection of Muhammad (S) and also another Jesus. A reformer could have a high spiritual status and a reflection of Muhammad (S) (a few Sufi sheikhs and pirs certainly claim this today) but can never be a prophet. Muhammad (S) was the last and final prophet. He left two things for the Ummah which when followed would never go astray until Judgement Day. They are the Quran and Sunnah…the two weighty things, not Mirza Ahmed. Ahmadi brs. claimed that Mirza Ahmad is the same spiritually as Muhammad (S). How? One of the Ahmadi brs. said that Mirza Ahmed gave interpretations that no other person could, which is one of the evidences of his prophethood. But this is reverse logic. Ahmadis have faith in Mirza Ahmed as a prophet, so anything he says would be taken as true and correct even though his beliefs are at odds with the rest of the Sunni scholars and reformers of the past and the Companions (R).
5. The Ahmadi perception of Jesus (AS) and Mirza Ahmed is very convoluted and confusing. One of the Ahmadi brs. said that because Jesus (AS) died then Mirza Ahmed is a different Jesus. Why? Why would Mirza Ahmed be connected to Jesus (AS) in any way if Jesus (AS) died? The reason is because of Jesus’s second coming. The hadiths mention Jesus’s return, which is the mainstream Muslim belief. The Introduction section to Mirza Ahmed’s ‘Tadkhira’ (which is a collection of revelations and dreams) states Jesus’s (AS) second coming. And that Mirza Ahmed is the second coming of Jesus (AS). This makes no sense. The second coming is stated in the hadiths because he came the first time 2000 years ago. So, the second coming refers to the same individual. If they are different individuals then there is no second coming. That is why the Ahmadi br. said that Mirza Ahmed is a different Jesus, because the first one died. So why connect Mirza Ahmed to Jesus (AS) then? Because of Jesus’s (AS) second coming. Why would there be a second coming? Because according to the general Muslim belief, Jesus (AS) did not die but rose to Heaven and will return. To harmonise this contradiction, Ahmadis need to believe that the second coming of Jesus (AS) is Mirza Ahmad, who is a different Jesus. For Mirza Ahmed to be this second coming Messiah, Jesus (AS) needs to be dead in order for Mirza Ahmad to be represented as the promised Messiah albeit a different Jesus. The Ahmadi thought process in this case is classic cognitive dissonance. The contradictions and flawed thinking are glaring.
6. The Mahdi and the second coming of the Messiah are different people. Mirza Ahmed fused them into one. The Mahdi has specific characteristics, Jesus (AS) in his second coming has different characteristics. They cannot be the same person in the form of Mirza Ahmed. As far as I understand, Ahmadis and Sunnis do share the same hadith literature. And it should be clear that the Mahdi and the second coming of Jesus are different people according to this body of hadiths. The Mahdi will perform prayers behind Jesus (AS). Ahmadi brs. do rightly challenge Sunnis that if they believe that Muhammad (S) is the final prophet, but still accommodate Jesus’s (AS) second coming as a prophet, why then not accept Mirza Ahmed as a prophet? Jesus’s (AS) return does not contradict the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad (S). No new prophet will come after Muhammad (S). Jesus (AS) is not a new prophet. He came before Muhammad (S) as a prophet. He will not have a prophetic mission during his second coming. Mirza Ahmed is a new prophet after the finality of Muhammad’s prophethood with new revelation (although there are no new laws).
7. I once had a short dialogue with an Ahmadi about 30 years ago. His argument for the death of Jesus (AS) is that it is unreasonable to assume that Jesus (AS) is alive and Muhammad (S) is dead and buried in the ground. Thus this makes Jesus (AS) superior to Muhammad (S), which is incorrect. One of the Ahmadi brothers in the stream made a similar point. However, superiority is not based on whether someone is alive or dead. In the Bible, prophet Elijah (AS) rose to Heaven and was expected to return. That is why the Jews asked Jesus whether he was Elijah or not as they were expecting a second coming. Elijah being alive and other prophets being dead has no bearing on whether they are superior or not. All prophets die, and Jesus (AS) will die during his second coming.
8. One of the Ahmadi brs. read out a text or email from an Ahmadi sister. She said that Mirza Ahmed is a prophet, so he should be followed and no one else as they are not prophets. But the Ahmadi community do follow a non-prophet today. Their caliph or successor to Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, who is Mirza Masroor Ahmad today.
9. The only disagreement I have with the Sunni brothers’ criticism of Mirza Ahmad’s support of the British Empire is that the Empire can be seen in a both positive and negative light. The negatives are clear and relate to slavery, Bengal famine etc. The positives are the English language, Parliamentary system of governance, trade, immigration into the UK from the Commonwealth as a result of Empire etc. And there will be a spectrum of opinion in between. Prophethood is not dependent on the support or criticism of an empire. Any empire can have its problems, be they the British empire, Roman, Byzantine and even our previous Muslim empires. Hence, Mirza Ahmad’s political stance has no bearing on his personality. In the same way many Muslim countries today ally themselves with the USA, it doesn’t mean these Muslim governments are kafirs. Likewise when the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco recognised Israel’s right to exist (Saudi Arabia soon inshallah), it doesn’t mean the leaders of these countries are kafirs or MOSSAD stooges.
10. What Sunnis would see as an evolution of claims of Mirza Ahmad, i.e. Reformer, then Mahdi, then Messiah, then Prophet; the Ahmadis see this as sequential revelations from Allah. They have to believe as such because of the evolving claims of these titles that are meant to be held by different individuals; which has been fused into the person of Mirza Ahmad. Bottom line is that the Ahmadi brothers will take at face value everything that Mirza Ahmad said without challenge, and any problems in his claims can be explained by revelations from Allah. Then this begs the question I asked above. If Ahmadis have complete faith in Mirza Ahmad as a prophet because he received revelation from Allah, then why not accept the claims of other luminaries who have made similar claims? I.e. Sufis, Rashad Khalifa, the Sikh Gurus, Joseph Smith (the Mormon prophet) etc., who all claim unique connections with God? Why is Mirza Ahmad different to these other claimants?
11. Given that the door of prophethood is open (within the prophethood of Muhammad (S)) according to Ahmadi brothers, and we are living in the age where religious principles are declining and God’s laws are being turned upside down in an unprecedented manner, the time is ripe now for a new prophet. There are people claiming to be prophets or may claim prophethood soon. How would Ahmadis recognise the new prophet (who might be a reflection of Muhammad (S) or Jesus (AS) in modern times)?
12. The dialogue in this stream is welcome and is a welcome departure from combative and derogatory debates. Thank God that during this stream and the previous stream by Adnan Rashid that the immature and childlike challenge of mubahala was not issued from either side. Because both sides would have lost. More dialogue and debate in an atmosphere of brotherhood needs to take place between the knowledgeable brothers from both sides. In fact it would be good to watch a debate between the Ahmadi caliph (Masroor Ahmad) and Zakir Naik. I have had some discussions with Ahmadis, over the last 30 years, and the recent one was with an Ahmadi two months ago who did not know that Mirza Ahmad is thought to be a prophet by Qadianis. He considered Mirza Ahmad to be a reformer and a messiah. I told him that he must belong to the Lahori sect which does not consider Mirza Ahmad to be a prophet but only a reformer messiah. We will of course continue the discussion inshallah when I see him next. I did attend the Jalsa Salana in Tilford a few years ago and prayed with the Ahmadi brothers. And I have read some of Mirza Ahmad’s literature, including the Tadkhira and Baraheen Ahmadiyya. But the apparent revelations in Tadkhira do not correspond to revelation given to Muhammad (S). His works may be the works of a great reformer and scholar but not a prophet.
Let the brotherly discussions continue.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —-
Author Biography
Hasan Ali Imam was born in Bangladesh in 1972 and brought up in the UK. He has engaged in respectful debate and dialogue with those which disagree with him, which culminated in his candidacy for the British Parliament in 2005. He continues to be involved with the UK Conservative Party in his spare time whilst working for a multinational corporation. Hasan has also been involved with the UK Government’s PREVENT counter terrorism strategy as a trainer to public servants on how to prevent young people from venturing into extremism. He also draws on his own experience of attempted recruitment by extremist groups in the 1990s. Hasan has authored three books.
Firstly, ‘United States of Anger — Why Linda Sarsour’s Rage and Far Left Violence Cannot Move Mountains.’ This book is a response to Linda Sarsour (an American Palestinian Socialist activist), and her far left compatriots who supported the violence and rampage that took hold in the US after the tragic killing of George Floyd.
Secondly, ‘BAME — Breaking Through Barriers.’ This book deals with the race space in the UK. It responds to critics who state that ethnic minorities have not progressed due to institutional racism. He tackles the issue head on and invites critics to dialogue and debate. This book was praised by the British Government.
Thirdly, ‘Aisha and Fatima — Ladies of Heavan. A Sunni Response to Shiaism.’ This is specific to the main Islamic sects of Sunni and Shia. The book captures dialogues that Hasan (a Sunni) had with Shia Muslims over the last 20 years.
A fourth book project is under way for publication in 2023, entitled, ‘Why the Far Right are Far Wrong.’ Yes, you guessed it. It includes responses to the Far Right and dialogue with some of its members.
Hasan has also written an article on ‘Medium.com’ to challenge the anti-vaccine narrative from his own Conservative side, including Dr. Simone Gold in the US, and has invited dialogue and debate with anti-vaxxers. He has also engaged in dialogue with and Israeli Jew and an anti-Israeli Muslim on the State of Israel and the importance of Jews, Christians and Muslims to unite under the Abrahamic brotherhood.
