Mirza similar to Jesus?

           Dear reader, please do not let your mind wander to the types of shampoos, as we are still discussing the ideas and beliefs of the Ahmadiyya community, both Qadiani and Lahori. Here we will discuss the basic claim made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (1839-1908).

 

Mirza claimed that he was the promised Mahdi and the awaited Messiah at the same time. Later, he claimed that God made him Mary, daughter of Imran, peace be upon her, for two years. The truth is that the boy of Qadian did not claim that he was only three in one. Later, he claimed that he was the prophet of God Adam, Abraham, Moses, and all the prophets and messengers, peace be upon them. He also claimed in 1905 that he was the second descent of the holy Krishna for the Hindus. The death of Jesus, peace be upon him The boy tried to prove by all means that he was indeed the Mahdi and the Messiah at the same time. He began his evidence by proving the death of Jesus, peace be upon him. I am not here to discuss his evidence as some have done. I am with the Islamic view that Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon him, died after God saved him from the plot of the plotters.

 

 The young man did not bring anything new, as he relied on the words of previous Muslim scholars such as Malik ibn Anas, Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, al-Bukhari, and others. The young man held on to this idea to pave the way for his claim that someone similar to Jesus, peace be upon him, is the one who will descend at the end of time. And that he - the young man of Qadian - is that person! In our saying that God Almighty took the soul of Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon him, we rely on His Almighty saying: ((When God said, “O Jesus, indeed I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify you from those who disbelieve and make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is your return, and I will judge between you concerning that over which you used to differ. ”)) - Surah Al Imran 56)).

 

 The verb "tawafa" only occurs in the Quran with two meanings: death and sleep. As for this verse, there is no evidence to indicate the meaning of sleep, so we can only assert that what is meant by death here is death. The death of Jesus, peace be upon him, does not negate the fact that God will resurrect him before the Day of Judgment to kill the Antichrist and break the cross. The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, stated that God will resurrect Jesus from the dead at the end of time. In Sahih Muslim, there is a hadith of the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, in which he says (.....Likewise, when God will resurrect the Messiah, the son of Mary, and he will descend by the white minaret, east of Damascus...). Not to mention the other authentic hadiths that mention the actions of Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon him, such as breaking the cross, killing a pig, and other things that prove that God will resurrect him to do those actions. Do the hadiths prove the existence of two Messiahs? The Ghulam of Qadian says that since Jesus, peace be upon him, has died, he will not be resurrected before the Day of Judgment, but rather someone similar to him will be resurrected, who is the Ghulam himself. The Ghulam’s followers – the Qadianis and Lahoris – cite authentic hadiths to support the Ghulam’s claim, which they claim describe Jesus, son of Mary, differently from the awaited Messiah. The two hadiths that contradict each other in their opinion are: (1) In Sahih al-Bukhari there is a hadith about the Night Journey, where the Messenger of God, Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, saw Jesus, son of Mary, and described him as having red hair and curly hair. The hadith was narrated by Ibn Umar, may God be pleased with them both, who said: “The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: ‘I saw Jesus, Moses, and Abraham. As for Jesus, he was red, curly haired, and broad-chested. As for Moses, he was a large, straight-chested man, as if he were one of the Zutt men.’” (2) In Sahih Al-Bukhari there is also a hadith in which the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, describes the Messiah, peace be upon him, when he saw him in a dream as Adam with straight hair. The hadith was also narrated by Ibn Umar, may God be pleased with them both, who said: “ The Messenger of God said: While I was sleeping, I saw myself circling the Kaaba, and there was a man with straight hair, between two men, with water dripping from his head. I said: Who is this? They said: The son of Mary. I went to turn around, and there was a red, large, curly-haired man.” He is blind in his right eye, as if his eye were a floating grape. I said, “Who is this?” They said, “This is the Antichrist.” The person closest to him in resemblance is Ibn Qatan, and Ibn Qatan is a man from Banu al-Mustaliq from Khuza’ah .

 

           The Qadianis and Lahoris say that the first hadith describes the Messiah of the Children of Israel, peace be upon him. As for the second hadith, it describes the awaited Messiah who will descend at the end of time, as the hadith also mentions the one-eyed Antichrist.

 

 I said : The contradiction claimed by the followers of Ghulam Qadian does not exist because the first hadith does not mention that Jesus (peace be upon him) had curly hair. Curly hair in the language has many meanings if it is not related to hair. For example, a person with a strong and sturdy body is called “a curly man”. Curly hair may also be a description of the skin. As for the skin color, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that the skin color of Jesus (peace be upon him) was like the best skin color seen in men. Skin color is a color between white and brown. The best skin color in the view of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is that which is closer to white and red. This is what was narrated by Bukhari, Muslim and Ahmad bin Hanbal. The Qadianis and Lahoris ignored all the other authentic hadiths that confirm that Jesus (peace be upon him) whom the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw on the night of the Isra had straight hair and did not contain the description “curly”.

 

 Al-Bukhari narrated: “Muhammad bin Bashar told us, Ghundar told us, Shu’bah told us, on the authority of Qatada, and Khalifa told me, Yazid bin Zari’ told us, Saeed told us, on the authority of Qatada, on the authority of Abu Al-Aaliyah, the cousin of your Prophet, meaning Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them both, told us, on the authority of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, who said: On the night of my Night Journey, I saw Moses, a tall, dark-skinned man with curly hair, as if he were one of the men of Shanu’ah. I saw Jesus, a stocky man, with a medium build, reddish and white, with a smooth head. I saw Malik, the keeper of Hell, and the Antichrist in signs that God showed me, so do not be in doubt about meeting him. Anas and Abu Bakrah said, on the authority of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, that the angels will guard the city from the Antichrist.”

 

 Muslim narrated: “Abd ibn Hamid told us, Yunus ibn Muhammad told us, Shaiban ibn Abd al-Rahman told us, on the authority of Qatada, on the authority of Abu al-Aaliyah, the cousin of your Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, Ibn Abbas told us, he said: The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said : On the Night of Ascension, I passed by Moses, son of Imran, peace be upon him, a tall, curly-haired man as if he were from the men of Shanu’ah. I saw Jesus, son of Mary, with a square build, reddish and white, with a smooth head. I saw Malik, the keeper of Hell, and the Antichrist, in signs that God showed him, so do not be in doubt about meeting him.” Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated: “Yunus told us, Shaiban told us, Qatada told us, on the authority of Abu al-Aaliyah, the cousin of your Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, Ibn Abbas told us, he said: The Prophet of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said : On the Night of Ascension, I saw Moses, son of Imran, a tall, curly-haired man as if he were from the men of Shanu’ah. I saw Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them both, with a square build, reddish and white, with a smooth head.”

 

           So, during the Isra’ journey, the Prophet (PBUH) described Jesus (PBUH) as having straight hair and skin that was close to white and red. In the view of the Prophet (PBUH), this is the best skin tone for men. Skin tone is a color between white and brown. This is the description he (PBUH) gave of Jesus (PBUH) in the vision he saw. Al-Bukhari also narrated: “Ibrahim bin Al-Mundhir narrated to us, Abu Damrah narrated to us, Musa narrated to us, on the authority of Nafi’, who said: ‘Abdullah said: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, mentioned the Antichrist among the people one day, and he said: ‘God is not one-eyed. Indeed, the Antichrist is one-eyed in his right eye, as if his eye were a floating grape. And I saw myself in a dream at the Kaaba last night, and there was a dark-skinned man, the most handsome of men’s dark skin, with a tuft of hair sticking out between his shoulders, with water dripping from his head, and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men, and he was circumambulating the House. So I said: ‘Who is this? ’ They said: ‘This is the Messiah, son of Mary. ’ Then I saw a man behind him, curly-haired, one-eyed in his right eye, the most similar to Ibn Qatan I have ever seen, placing his hands on the shoulders of a man, circumambulating the House.” The same attributes were mentioned in describing Jesus, peace be upon him, in the hadith of the Prophet’s vision, may God bless him and grant him peace, of Jesus, peace be upon him, and of the Antichrist, as Malik narrated in his Muwatta’ the following hadith: ((On the authority of Nafi’, on the authority of Abdullah bin Umar, that the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “I saw myself tonight at the Kaaba and I saw a man, dark as the most beautiful of men’s dark complexions you have ever seen, with a lock of hair as beautiful as the locks you have ever seen, and he had tied it up and it was dripping with water, leaning on two men or on the shoulders of two men, circumambulating the Kaaba. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ It was said, ‘This is the Messiah, son of Mary.’ Then I saw a curly-haired, one-eyed man whose right eye was like a floating grape. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ It was said, ‘This is the Antichrist.’)) “Amr bin Shimr,” the inspiration of the young man in In 1894 AD, a lunar eclipse occurred on the night of the 13th of Ramadan, and in the same year, a solar eclipse occurred on the 28th of Ramadan. Astronomers were waiting for this eclipse and the solar eclipse for scientific purposes. As for the boy of Qadian, he was waiting for these two astronomical events to announce that they were two signs from Allah confirming his claim in 1882 AD that he was the Mahdi. The boy based his claim on the following weak hadith narrated in Sunan al-Daraqutni from some Shiites: ((Abu Saeed al-Istakhri told us, Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Nawfal told us, Ubaid bin Yaish told us, Yunus bin Bakir told us, on the authority of Amr bin Shammar, on the authority of Jabir, on the authority of Muhammad bin Ali, who said: Our Mahdi has two signs that have not occurred since the creation of the heavens and the earth. The moon will eclipse on the first night of Ramadan, and the sun will eclipse in the middle of it, and they have not occurred since the creation of Allah the heavens and the earth - Sunan al-Daraqutni)).

 

After the boy learned that these two astronomical events were about to occur, he took advantage of the general public’s ignorance of astronomy and announced that he was the awaited Mahdi in 1882 AD, later saying that these two signs had been fulfilled in 1894 AD, confirming his claim to be the Mahdi. He said that the first night of Ramadan was the first night in which an eclipse could occur – which, in his opinion, was the 13th night.

 

           The intended meaning of the middle of Ramadan is the day that falls in the middle of the days in which an eclipse can occur - which in his opinion is the 28th of Ramadan. But as you have noticed, dear reader, the aforementioned narration has nothing to do with the interpretation of the boy of Qadian. The narration mentions the first night of Ramadan and not the first night of the eclipse. The narration also mentions the day that falls in the middle of Ramadan and never mentions the middle of the days of the eclipse. Of course, you have also noticed that the aforementioned narration is not a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). It is a narration transmitted by some Shiites on the authority of Muhammad al-Baqir, who was born 47 years after the death of the Messenger (peace be upon him). As for the Shiite narrators of this narration, they are weak, especially the narrator Amr ibn Shammar, who was accused of fabrication by both Sunni and Shiite scholars alike.

 

 Here is some of what some Sunni scholars said about the Shiite narrators of this hadith : Amr ibn Shammar and Jabir al-Ja’fi:

 

 * Al-Sulaymani said: Amr bin Shammar used to fabricate for the Rafidis.

 

* Al-Jawzajani said: Amr bin Shammar is a liar and a heretic.

 

 * Al-Hakim said: Amr bin Shammar had many fabrications on the authority of Jabir Al-Ja’fi, and no one else narrated those obscene fabrications on the authority of Jabir.

 

* Ibn Hibban said: Amr bin Shammar is a Rafidi who curses the Companions and narrates fabricated hadiths from trustworthy people.

 

Abu Hatim said: Amr bin Shammar is a very weak hadith narrator and should not be used as a source of information. They abandoned him.

 

* And more than one person has also refuted it, including Al-Bukhari, Al-Nasa’i, and Ibn Sa’d.

 

* As for Al-Daraqutni, the narrator of the same hadith, he said when he transmitted the following hadith in his Sunan ((No prayer is accepted except with purification and with prayers upon me)): Amr ibn Shamir and Jabir Al-Ju’fi are weak.

 

 Jabir al-Ju'fi is also an abandoned hadith transmitter. Shu'bah, Waki' and al-Thawri authenticated him, but Ibn Ma'in, Abu Hanifa, Laith ibn Abi Salim, al-Jawzjani, Ibn Uyaynah, Ibn Kharash, Sa'id ibn Jubayr and others declared him a liar, and many declared him weak. Al-Dhahabi said: "Jabir al-Ju'fi was authenticated by Shu'bah, but he was an anomaly and the hadith masters abandoned him."

 

 Ibn Hajar said: “Jabir al-Ja’fi is a weak Rafidi.”

 

 The opinion of the Shiites themselves: Although the hadith is mentioned by Imam al-Darqutni, it is a purely Shiite hadith, as we explained above. The two narrators, Amr ibn Shammar and Jabir al-Ja’fi, are Shiites. The hadith itself is mentioned in some Shiite books. However, Shiite scholars have also weakened this hadith because its narrator, Amr ibn Shammar, is accused of fabrication by the Shiites themselves.

 

 These are some of the statements of the Imami Shiite scholars about him : - Al-Hilli said in his Khulasat: Amr ibn Shammar narrated from Abu Abdullah and Jabir, and he is very weak. He added hadiths to the books of Jabir ibn Yazid al-Ja'fi, some of which are attributed to him, so the matter is ambiguous, so I do not rely on anything he narrates. - Al-Najashi said: Amr ibn Shammar, Abu Abdullah al-Ja'fi, is an Arab. He narrated from Abu Abdullah, very weak. He added hadiths to the books of Jabir al-Ja'fi, some of which are attributed to him. As for the other Shiite narrator, Jabir ibn Yazid al-Ja'fi al-Kufi, some Shiite scholars have authenticated him, but others have weakened him due to his confusion. These are the statements of some Shiite scholars about him: - In Khulasat al-Allamah: Jabir ibn Yazid, al-Kashi narrated praise and some blame about him, and the two chains of narration are weak. We mentioned them in the great book. - Ibn Al-Ghadairi said: Jaber bin Yazid Al-Ja'fi Al-Kufi is trustworthy in himself, but most of those who narrated from him are weak. Among those who narrated from him the most from the weak are Amr bin Shammar Al-Ja'fi, Mufadhal bin Salih, Al-Sakuni, and Mankhal bin Jamil Al-Asadi. I see that what these narrated from him should be abandoned and the rest should be stopped except for what was mentioned as evidence. - Al-Najashi said: Jaber bin Yazid Al-Ja'fi met Abu Ja'far and Abu Abdullah and died during his time in the year 128 AH. He himself was confused, and our Sheikh Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Al-Nu'man used to recite to us many poems in his meaning that indicate confusion. This is not the place to mention them, and what I think is stronger is to stop at what these people narrate. The other narrations from Al-Baqir belie Amr bin Shammar, but the verse of the eclipse and the solar eclipse were mentioned in other Shiite books from Muhammad bin Ali Al-Baqir in a manner completely different from that narration of Amr bin Shammar. In the book “Al-I’az” we find the following trace from Muhammad bin Ali Al-Baqir: ((On the authority of Tha’laba Al-Azdi, he said: Abu Ja’far Al-Baqir said: Two signs will occur before the rise of the Qa’im (Mahdi): a solar eclipse in the middle of Ramadan and a lunar eclipse at the end of it. He said: So I said: O son of the Messenger of God, the sun will eclipse at the end of the month and the moon in the middle. Abu Ja’far said: I know what you said: They are two signs that have not occurred since Adam descended.)) This narration is also mentioned in the following books: Al-Irshad by Al-Mufid, Vol. 2, p. 374, Ghaybat Al-Nu’mani, p. 181, I’lam Al-Wara, p. 429, Ghaybat Al-Tusi, p. 270, Bisharat Al-Islam, p. 96, Yawm Al-Khalas, p. 516, Tarikh Ma Ba’d Al-Zuhur, p. 118.

 

 The same meaning is also repeated in this other narration from al-Baqir himself: ((On the authority of Wardan, the brother of al-Kumait, on the authority of Abu Ja`far al-Baqir, that he said: Before this matter, the moon will be eclipsed on the fifth day - and the sun on the fifteenth day, and that will be in the month of Ramadan, and at that time the calculations of the astrologers will be dropped)).

 

 This narration is found in the following books: Ghaybat al-Nu'mani, p. 182; Bisharat al-Islam, p. 97; Tarikh al-Ghaybah al-Kubra, p. 479; Yawm al-Khalas, p. 517. The Position of the Boy But the boy of Qadian did not care about all these contradictions and lies about Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir, as he decided to choose from the narrations what agreed with his desires. The boy of Qadian did not pay attention to the fact that many of the fabricated narrations of the blood-shedding Mahdi came with a chain of transmission equivalent to the chain of transmission in which the words of Muhammad ibn Ali were narrated above. The narration, as we said, is narrated by Amr ibn Shammar, who is accused of fabricating narrations for the Shiites.

 

Among the amazing traces narrated by Amr ibn Shammar on the authority of Jabir al-Ja’fi on the authority of Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir (and it is the same chain of transmission of the trace “Our Mahdi has two signs”) is the following: Amr ibn Shammar narrated on the authority of Jabir who said: ((A man entered upon Abu Ja’far al-Baqir and said to him: May Allah grant you well-being, take from me these five hundred dirhams, for they are the zakat of my wealth. Abu Ja’far said to him: Take them and give them to your neighbors among the people of Islam and to the poor among your Muslim brothers. When the Qa’im of the Household rises, he will divide equally and be just among the subjects. Whoever obeys him has obeyed Allah, and whoever disobeys him has disobeyed Allah. He was only called the Mahdi because he will be guided to a hidden matter and will extract the Torah and all the books of Allah, the Almighty, from a cave in Antioch.)) And Amr ibn Shammar narrated on the authority of Jabir al-Ja’fi ((on the authority of Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir a long hadith in which he mentioned that Ali ibn Abi Talib said to the companions when the death of Umar ibn al-Khattab was approaching: I ask you by Allah, is there among you anyone whom the Messenger of Allah has fed? Allah’s Messenger (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: “This is from the pomegranates of Paradise, and none should eat from it except a prophet or a prophet’s successor” other than me? They said: “No.” He said: “Is there anyone among you to whom the Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him and his family) said: “You are the divider of Hellfire; you will bring out from it the pure and leave in it every disbeliever” other than me?” They said: “No.” He said: “So they winked at each other about it and consulted each other and said: “We know his virtue and we know that he is the most deserving of it, but he is a man who does not favor anyone over anyone else. If you give him control over it, he will make you and all people equal in it by law. But give it to Uthman, for he desires what you desire.” So they gave it to him. And on the authority of Amr ibn Shammar, on the authority of Jabir al-Ja’fi, on the authority of Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir, who said: O Jabir, when the Day of Resurrection comes, Allah the Almighty will gather the first and the last to decide the matter. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him and his family) will be called, and the Commander of the Faithful will be called, and the Messenger of Allah (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him and his family) will be clothed in a green garment that will illuminate what is between the east and the west, and Ali will be clothed like it ... A pink robe that shines for them between the east and the west, and a similar one is draped over me, then they ascend to it, then we are called and the people’s accounts are given to us, so by God we will admit the people of Paradise to Paradise and the people of Hell to Hell. Then the prophets are called and they stand in two rows at the throne of God Almighty until we finish the people’s accounts. Then when the people of Paradise have entered Paradise and the people of Hell have entered Hell, the Lord of Glory will send Ali and he will settle them in their homes in Paradise and marry them. By God, Ali is the one who marries the people of Paradise in Paradise, and that is not for anyone other than him. It is an honor from God Almighty and a favor that God has favored him with and bestowed upon him. By God, he will admit the people of Hell to Hell and he is the one who will close the doors on the people of Paradise when they enter it, because the doors of Paradise are to him and the doors of Hell are to him. And on the authority of Amr ibn Shammar, on the authority of Jabir ibn Yazid, on the authority of Abu Abdullah, peace be upon him, who said: “Ali will have a chance on earth with his son al-Husayn, may God’s prayers be upon them both, accepting his banner until he takes revenge for him from the Umayyads and Muawiyah and the family of Muawiyah and those who witnessed his war. Then God will send to them his supporters on that day from the people of Kufa, thirty thousand and from the rest of the people, seventy thousand.” He will meet them in two rows like the first time until he kills them and none of them will remain to inform. Then God Almighty will resurrect them and cause them to enter His most severe punishment with Pharaoh and Pharaoh’s family. The Ahmadis – the Qadianis and the Lahoris – describe the above-mentioned events as nonsense.

 

 I said : If some of the hadiths narrated about the Mahdi the slanderer are with a chain of transmission equivalent to the hadith ((Our Mahdi has two signs..)), then how can this hadith be an argument for the boy? And the Ahmadis deny hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim whose chain of transmission is like pearls compared to the chain of transmission of the fabricator Amr ibn Shammar if it contradicts their minds; then it would have been more appropriate for them to deny the fabricated hadith ((Our Mahdi has two signs)) because in addition to the weakness of its chain of transmission, its text contradicts reason and science. So how can the lunar eclipse be at the beginning of the lunar month? And is the sign a puzzle for Muslims to solve despite its not being proven from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)? And how can we believe the denial of the hadith because these two signs have appeared since Allah created the heavens and the earth.

 

 Didn’t these two verses appear – according to the young man’s interpretation – dozens of times in the past? Wasn’t the confirmation of Ramadan for many Muslims based on the mere sighting of the crescent moon? Should Muslims change their school of jurisprudence to escape the punishment of Allah for denying a prophet? Some Qadianis accused Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) of transmitting the words of the Children of Israel and attributing them to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). So what right do they have for us to accept that they attribute words to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) when a liar transmitted them from a liar from a man who was born 47 years after the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)!! Especially since the transmitted words contradict reason and science and do not contain anything that agrees with their interpretation of them. I do not know what is the meaning of (Our Mahdi has two signs)? When did we expect the signs of the Mahdi? The Mahdi is nothing but a just Imam whose existence in this nation was announced by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He was preceded in the past by Rightly-Guided Caliphs who spread the truth and established justice. Al-Dhahabi says in his biography of Muhammad bin Ali al-Baqir himself: “Abu Ja`far was an imam who strived hard, recited the Book of Allah, and was of great stature. However, he did not reach the level of Ibn Kathir and the like in the Qur’an, nor did he reach the level of Abu al-Zinad and Rabi`ah in jurisprudence, nor did he reach the level of Qatadah and Ibn Shihab in memorization and knowledge of the Sunnah.” I said: So al-Baqir, may Allah have mercy on him, was not more knowledgeable about the Sunnah than the imams of the Tabi`in in this field. So why do the Qadianis not take the narrations attributed to other imams of the narrators of hadith? How so, when this statement has not been proven from al-Baqir, rather it has been proven that he fabricated it against him and that he is a wicked liar. The myth of the first days of the eclipse and the middle days of the eclipse As for the statement: “The nights of the eclipse in the lunar month are the 13th, 14th, and 15th. And the days of the eclipse are the 27th, 28th, and 29th,” it has been scientifically proven to be false. Because the place where it is applied must be specified. I do not know why the Qadianis insist on repeating this statement in an era when it has been proven conclusively that it is false. As for East and Central Asia (where Qadian and Lahore are located), a lunar eclipse can occur on the 12th day of the lunar month.

     Whoever rejects this fact and insists on the principle of astronomical sighting of the crescent must necessarily reject the possibility of a solar eclipse occurring on the 27th day of the lunar month. As for the double standard when talking about eclipses and solar eclipses, it is unacceptable because it is a blatant camouflage. For a solar eclipse to occur there on the 27th day of the lunar month, the beginning of the month must be delayed by more than two days from the actual birth of the crescent. This is only possible when relying on naked sighting to prove the beginning of the lunar month. But astronomically, no.

 

When the Qadianis said that the lunar eclipse in Qadian in 1894 occurred on the 13th of Ramadan, they relied on naked sighting to prove the beginning of Ramadan. However, if they had relied on astronomical sighting, the day of the eclipse would have been the 14th of Ramadan. Therefore, they must accept the principle of sighting the crescent with the naked eye when talking about the first day of the eclipse in the lunar month. Thus, the 12th is the first possible day for the eclipse in that part of the world. As for the possibility of confirming in the future the occurrence of a lunar eclipse on the 12th of the lunar month, I cite the calculations provided by the Professor of Astronomy, Dr. David McNaughton. The calculations indicate that a lunar eclipse will occur on 21st February 2008, which is the 12th day of the lunar month for the residents of the area located at 42 degrees south and 50 degrees east. In that area, it will not be possible to see the crescent on 8th February 2008 at dusk, especially since the month is February in winter. Thus, the beginning of the lunar month there will be at least February 9, 2008, and God knows best.

 

 Thus, the lunar eclipse there falls on the 12th of the lunar month. It is worth mentioning that Dr. David McNaughton is a British astronomer - who also holds South African citizenship - who used to work at Dubai International Airport as an astronomical and meteorological consultant. He has many published researches in Britain, where the throne of both the fifth Qadiani Caliph and the Queen of England, head of the Anglican Church, reigned. Here I am putting in your hands one of the simplified illustrations to prove that for the solar eclipse to occur on the 27th of the lunar month, the beginning of the month must be delayed by about two and a half days from the actual birth of the crescent:

 The same solar and lunar eclipses occurred at the same times of Ramadan (i.e. the night of the 13th and the day of the 28th) during the life of the Bab - the Mahdi and Prophet of Babism and Baha'ism - and were repeated the following year as well. So why don't the Qadianis follow him?!!! Knowing that the Bab claimed to be the Mahdi and Prophet many years before the boy. A double eclipse in Ramadan occurs on average every 23 years approximately. Hundreds of claimants to the Mahdi appeared before the boy.

 

Where is the sign that has not appeared since the creation of the heavens and the earth?!!! When the boy of Qadian was confronted with the fact that solar and double eclipses had occurred thousands of times before, the boy said that it did not matter if this sign had occurred many times in the past. In his opinion, the sign would not be complete unless there was someone claiming to be the Mahdi .

 

This young man did not know that dozens of charlatans before him had claimed to be the Mahdi, and that a double eclipse had happened during Ramadan during their lifetime, on the 13th and 28th of the month . I will give here some examples of that:

 

 (1) Salih bin Tarif al-Barghawati: He claimed to be the Mahdi and a prophet in the year 125 AH. There were many solar and double solar eclipses in his life.

 

(2) Mirza Ali Muhammad (nicknamed Bab): He claimed to be the Mahdi before claiming prophethood in the year 1260 AH. There were many solar and double solar eclipses in his life.

 

(3) Abu Mansour Issa: He claimed to be the Mahdi and a prophet in the year 341 AH. An eclipse and a double eclipse occurred during his lifetime.

 

(4) Abu Ghafir Muhammad bin Muadh: He claimed to be the Mahdi in the year 268 AH. A solar and a double solar eclipse occurred during his lifetime. It has been scientifically proven that the first possible day for a lunar eclipse is the night of the 12th and not the night of the 13th as Ghulam Qadian and his followers claimed. Thus, their riot was nullified. As for Mirza Ghulam, he believes that solar and lunar eclipses only appear when corruption is widespread!! As for their combination, it is a threat from God of punishment!! The Ghulam says in his book “Najm al-Huda” p. 232:

 

 In his book “Najm al-Huda” also, p. 253, Mirza challenges his opponents to bring evidence of the occurrence of solar and double solar eclipses in Ramadan before. He says there:

 

 

There is no Mahdi but Christ!

 

Some may wonder why the boy claimed that he was both the Mahdi and the Messiah, and not just the Mahdi or the Messiah.

 

 The answer is that the boy tried to claim the spiritual value of every person who is sacred to any sect. We see this clearly in his later claim that he represents the descent of the Hindu Krishna. As for the claim of Mahdism, this was very popular in the nineteenth century when people were busy with similar claims by the Sudanese Mahdi, the Bab, and others.

 

 There were heated discussions about the interpretation of the signs of the Mahdi and the Messiah. Most likely, the expectation of a solar and lunar eclipse in Ramadan was the spark that ignited the boy’s ambitions to claim the Mahdiship.

 

 As for the claim that he is the Messiah, he found a fabricated hadith that says, “There is no Mahdi except the Messiah,” so he decided to impersonate both characters. The hadith is narrated in Sunan Ibn Majah on the authority of Anas bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “The matter will only increase in severity, the world will only decline, and people will only become stingy. The Hour will only come upon the worst of people, and the Mahdi will only be Jesus, son of Mary.”

 

 My comment on this argument is as follows :

 

 1- This hadith contains Muhammad ibn Khalid al-Jundi, about whom al-Hakim said he was unknown, and the preserver of Morocco Ibn Abd al-Barr said he was abandoned, and it was reported from Ibn Ma’in that he was documented, but it was not proven. The hadith was denied by al-Nasa’i, al-Hakim, al-Bayhaqi, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Qurtubi, al-Sagani, and Abu al-Fath al-Azdi, who said: It is only preserved from al-Hasan as a mursal, and it was narrated by Jarir ibn Hazim from him.

 

Al-Dhahabi said: Al-Azdi said (Muhammad bin Khalid is a fabricator of hadith). Al-San’ani said about this hadith that it is fabricated, as in the fabricated hadiths of Al-Shawkani.

 

The report is false, and it is not correct to attribute it to the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and the signs of weakness are apparent on it. Is it permissible to take beliefs from a fabricated or even weak hadith? The Qadianis reject authentic hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim because they say that they are of uncertain authenticity and do not support belief. So how do they accept hadiths that are not authentic in the matter of belief? Or do they consider all the rules insignificant for the sake of the young man of Qadian?! I have followed up on what the Qadianis claimed about Ibn Ma'in's authentication of Muhammad ibn Khalid al-Jundi and I found that the story of authentication was transmitted from an unknown person. The details of the story of Ibn Ma'in's authentication of him are extremely ridiculous. Abu al-Hasan Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Ibri al-Hafiz narrated this authentication of Ibn Ma'in in Manaqib al-Shafi'i, saying: Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Hamadani told me in Baghdad, saying: Muhammad ibn Mukhallad, who is al-Attar, told us, and he said: Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Mu'all al-Adawi told us. He said: Yunus bin Abdul A'la told me: A man with grey hairs came to me in the year thirteen, meaning two hundred, wearing a cloak and a belt, asking me about this hadith. He said to me: Who is Muhammad bin Khalid al-Jundi? I said: I don't know. He said to me: This is the muezzin of the army and he is trustworthy. I said to him: Are you Yahya bin Ma'in? He said: Yes... etc. However, this story cannot be used as evidence for two reasons: - Its chain of transmission includes Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Mu'all - Abu Bakr al-Suri, who was mentioned by al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad and he said: He narrated from al-Hasan bin Arafa, Yunus bin Abdul A'la and others. Abu Amr bin al-Samak, Abu Bakr al-Shafi'i and Ubayd Allah bin Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Mukhrami narrated from him. He did not mention any criticism or approval of him, and someone like this is unknown, so it is not possible to use him as evidence.

 

 - It appears from examining the text of this story that Yunus bin Abdul A’la did not know Ibn Ma’in before this story and only knew him through the information of his interlocutor. Therefore, he asked him: Are you Yahya bin Ma’in? He said: Yes. Thus, we cannot say that the one who spoke to him was Yahya bin Ma’in. We do not know why Ibn Ma’in asked a man he did not know about Khalid al-Jundi, since Ibn Ma’in was the only one who knew the condition of Khalid al-Jundi. Therefore, the text of the story is extremely strange and illogical.

 

 2- The phrase ((And the Mahdi is none but Jesus, son of Mary)) is not acceptable in the context of the hadith, because the sentences that are connected to each other are all verbs other than the latter. If what was meant was what some understood, that the Mahdi is the Messiah, he would have said, “And the Mahdi is none but Jesus, son of Mary.” But he said, “And the Mahdi,” and it became clear that something was missing from the news. Its original form may be, “And none will follow the appearance of the Mahdi except Jesus, son of Mary,” and God knows best. As he said, “He will not increase except…” (He will not rise except…), so it became clear that the verb was missing. The hadith is weak in its chain of transmission, which makes it unnecessary for us to delve into its text. Matters of the unseen and other matters of the Shari’ah are not proven by weak hadith. So God commands us to worship with certainty, not conjecture. And conjecture is of no avail against the truth.

 

 3- Ghulam Qadian and his followers transmit this hadith from Ibn Majah as follows: ((There is no Mahdi except Jesus, son of Mary.)) This is a clear mistake because Ibn Majah’s wording of the hadith is ((And there is no Mahdi except Jesus.)) As for the wording (There is no Mahdi except Jesus), it was narrated by Al-Hakim and others. Al-Hakim narrated it only to show its denial, as he himself stated. The phrase (There is no Mahdi except Jesus) is clearly wrong because everyone whom Allah guides is a Mahdi. And there is no reference in the phrase to the Commander of the Faithful who is called Al-Mahdi. I will quote here the chain of transmission of the hadith (There is no Mahdi except Jesus) without the definite article (al): - It was narrated by Al-Hakim, who said: Isa bin Zaid bin Isa bin Abdullah bin Muslim bin Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Aqeel bin Abi Talib narrated to us, Yunus bin Abdul-A’la Al-Sarfi narrated to us, Muhammad bin Idris Al-Shafi’i, may Allah be pleased with him, narrated to us Muhammad bin Khalid Al-Jundi, on the authority of Abaan bin Salih, on the authority of Al-Hasan, on the authority of Anas. Ibn Malik, may God be pleased with him, said: The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: The matter will only increase in severity, the religion will only decline, the people will only become more stingy, and the Hour will not come except upon the worst of people, and there is no Mahdi except Jesus, son of Mary. - And Ibn Nu'aym included it in Al-Hilya, saying: Judge Abu Ahmad Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Ibrahim told us, Sulayman ibn Ishaq ibn Nuh Al-Talhi told us. And Abu Muhammad ibn Hayyan told us, Abu Al-Huraish Al-Kalabi told us, Yunus ibn Abd Al-A'la told us, Muhammad ibn Idris Al-Shafi'i told us, on the authority of Muhammad ibn Khalid Al-Jundi, on the authority of Abaan ibn Salih, on the authority of Al-Hasan, on the authority of Anas ibn Malik that the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: The matter will only increase in severity, the world will only decline, the people will only become more stingy, and the Hour will not come except upon the worst of people, and there is no Mahdi except Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them both. - And Al-Quda'i included it in Musnad Al-Shihab. - It was narrated by Al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad. - It was narrated by Al-Mizzi through two chains of transmission on the authority of Yunus ibn Abd Al-A’la. - It was narrated by Ibn Abd Al-Barr in Jami’ Bayan Al-Ilm wa Fadluhu. - It was narrated by Ibn Al-Jawzi through Al-Khatib in Al-’Ilal Al-Mutanahiyyah. - It was narrated by Abu Amr Al-Dani in Al-Sunan Al-Waridah fi Al-Fitan. - It was narrated by Al-Salfi in Al-Tayouriyat. - It was narrated by Ibn Mandah in his Fawa’id. - It was narrated by Yusuf Al-Mayanji. - It was mentioned by Al-Dhahabi in the biography of Yunus ibn Abd Al-A’la in Tadhkirat Al-Huffaz with his chain of transmission on the authority of Yunus. And so was Al-Subki in Tabaqat Al-Shafi’iyyah.

 

 So many have narrated the hadith with the wording ( There is no Mahdi except Jesus ). This wording does not refer at all to the Imam Mahdi. The sentence is clearly wrong as I mentioned earlier because all righteous believers are Mahdi. The Qadianis also base their claims on the hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal on the authority of Abu Hurairah on the authority of the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: ((Soon whoever among you lives will meet Jesus, son of Mary, as a guided Imam and a just judge. He will break the cross, kill the pig, abolish the jizya, and war will lay down its burdens)).

 

The Qadianis say that the hadith describes Jesus (peace be upon him) as an Imam Mahdi and thus he is the promised Mahdi. I said: If Jesus (peace be upon him) is the Mahdi because the Prophet (peace be upon him) said about him (an Imam Mahdi), then why is Muawiyah ibn Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with him) not the Mahdi as well? Or is Jarir (may Allah be pleased with him) the Mahdi? Al-Bukhari and others narrated the following hadith: ((Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Numayr told me, Ibn Idris told us, Ismail told us, Qais told us, Jarir (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace be upon him) never turned away from me since I converted to Islam, and whenever he saw me he smiled at me. I complained to him that I could not stay on the horse, so he struck my chest with his hand and said: O Allah, make him steadfast and make him a guide and guided.)) Ahmad ibn Hanbal also narrated: ((Ali ibn Bahr told us, Al-Walid ibn Muslim told us, Saeed ibn Abdul Aziz told us, Rabia ibn Yazid told us, Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Umayrah Al-Azdi told us that the Prophet (peace be upon him) mentioned Muawiyah and said: O Allah, make him a guide and guided and guide others through him.))

Mirza and the transmigration of souls

 

Although the Qadianis try in vain to say that souls transmigrate and insist that the fact that Mirza is the Messiah does not mean that the soul of Christ descended upon him, their attempts are futile in view of the many clear texts that Mirza cited to support the theory of the transmigration of souls. I will cite here only some examples, as Mirza stated in his book “Mirat Kamalat al-Islam” p. 438:

 

He also says in his book “Mirror of the Perfections of Islam” p. 553:

 

And Mirza says on page 99 of his book “The Nazarene Christ in India”:

 

((Buddha believed in reincarnation, but his reincarnation did not contradict the teachings of the Bible, as reincarnation, for him, was divided into three categories:

 

First: A person’s determination to do more deeds requires another body after death.

 

Second: What the Tibetans believe exists in their religious leaders, the “lamas,” which is that part of the spirit of Buddha or another Buddhist leader resides in their “lamas.” That is, his power, nature, and spiritual properties are transferred to the current “lama,” and his spirit affects him.

 

Third: Man continues to go through various types of birth in his life in this world until he becomes a real human being according to his own characteristics, where his first existence ceases to exist and he acquires a second existence according to the actions of his first existence...etc.))

 

 

Oh Mary, may you and your husband live in heaven!!

 

 There is no typo in the title as you think. It is part of a revelation that the boy claimed to have received from his God. It is mentioned in the book “Al-Tadhkira” on page 727, which contains the holy revelation to the boy of Qadian. In this revelation, his God calls him by the name Mary. The boy tried to prove by all means of deception and distortion that he represents the second descent of Jesus, peace be upon him. He claimed that he resembles Jesus, peace be upon him, in his essence. Therefore, in his opinion, it is correct to call him by the name of Jesus, son of Mary himself. When he was asked about this similarity, he said that Jesus, peace be upon him, was born without a father. And that the boy of Qadian did not have a sheikh of the sect to follow. Since the sheikh of the sect is like a spiritual father, then the boy of Qadian was also born without a father!! When people did not believe these absurdities, the boy adopted a greater absurdity to complete the scandal of his lie among the people. In his book, Ruhani Khazaen, the young man said the following: ((God made me Mary for two years... then He breathed into me the spirit of Jesus as He breathed into Mary. And in a metaphorical image, I became pregnant. After several months, not more than ten, after this inspiration, I changed from being Mary to Jesus. And thus I became the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary - Ruhani Khazaen Book, Vol. 19, p. 50)). And in another place in the book, Ruhani Khazaen, the young man says: ((I am the one meant by the Almighty’s saying, “And Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her of Our spirit” because I am the only one who claimed that I am Mary and that the spirit of Jesus was breathed into me - Ruhani Khazaen Book, Vol. 22, p. 350)). In the book of Tadhkira you also find the following revelation to the boy of Qadian: ((Then the pangs of childbirth came upon him at the trunk of a palm tree. He said, "Oh, would that I had died before this and was in oblivion and forgotten!"). I find no words to comment on this funny story except to congratulate the geniuses of Qadian for their promised pregnant boy. I dedicate to them these verses that the funny story of their boy inspired me to. I have named the poem "The Miraculous Poem" after the name of the poem that the boy composed in which he challenged humanity:

 

 

The miraculous poem!!

 

Christ came [1[ *

 

Christ has come

 

Thus cried a voice from the East..

 

Like an eloquent rooster

 

** I said: Are you saying that right?

 

Is he the Christ?

 

Or is it that one who...

 

He is one-eyed... with an ugly face?[2]

 

* He said: No, my brother.

 

That which means myth[3]

 

And our Messiah has come..

 

To eliminate that myth

 

And to establish the most important pillars of faith

 

.. I mean "cleanliness" ..

 

And he says to those who carry weapons

 

Take it easy..

 

This is ridiculous[4]

 

I fight the great power that..

 

You taught us the secrets of slimness?!!

 

** I told him: This is strange..!!

 

From a recent time...

 

I read in the hadiths..

 

That Christ is known..

 

If... "the cross is broken"

 

* He said: No..

 

That is a correction and insertion

 

The origin is: "drinking milk."

 

** I said: Leave these misfortunes alone

 

Won't he kill the pig one day?

 

* He said: No..

 

Pigs are the offspring of prostitutes[5]

 

Those who denied him..

 

Prostitutes' husbands[6]

 

** I said: Isn't Christ a sign?

 

* He said: Of course..

 

Rather, a thousand verses

 

And one day he was drugged [7]

 

Then the belly gets bigger

 

And if she is pregnant..

 

Then his upper half disappeared.

 

We shouted: What happened to him?!!

 

We had barely finished yet...

 

His head came out of his neck

 

He gave birth to himself..

 

And life came back to him

 

** I said to him: Oh my!

 

Why didn't you say that?

 

I would have known him from the beginning

 

That boy

 

 

And our final supplication is that all praise is due to God, Lord of the Worlds.

 

Fouad Al-Attar

 

----

 

[1] ((The Messiah Has Come)) is the title of an article introducing the Ahmadiyya community published on the official website of the Ahmadiyya Qadiani community.

 

[2] The one-eyed man here refers to the Antichrist. By the way, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani has a droopy right eye, as is clear in the picture on the first page of this article.

 

[3] The Ahmadis (Qadiyanis and Lahoris) say that the Antichrist is the Christian West today. They do not have a person called the Antichrist.

 

[4] One of the most important calls made by Ghulam Qadian was the sanctity of jihad against the British state, which was occupying India in his time.

 

[5] (The offspring of prostitutes) is one of the famous insults that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani used to describe his opponents.

 

 

[6] Among the famous insults of Ghulam Qadian was his description of his opponents’ wives as prostitutes and his opponents themselves as dirtier than pigs.

 

[7] Qamar al-Zaman, son of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiani, says in his book “Sirat al-Mahdi,” narration number 929: “Dr. Mir Muhammad Ismail, one of Mirza Ghulam’s companions, informed us that His Holiness the Promised Messiah, peace be upon him, Mirza Ghulam, had confirmed that opium had amazing and strange benefits. And that he had personally prepared a medicine from opium that he called “Divine Antidote,” which he used to give to his companions as well.”