Note: The Alislam Team assumes full responsibility for any errors or inaccuracies in this translation of the Friday Sermon.
Sermon delivered by Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad(ra) 7 March 1924 (Published in Al-Fazl, 14 March 1924)
Topics: Tabligh preparation, proofs of prophethood, logical argumentation
After recitation of tashahhud, ta'awwudh, and Surah Al-Fatihah, Huzur(ra) said:
In some of my recent sermons I have drawn the attention of the members of my community to the fact that this is an era of tabligh. Therefore, all our members should devote their full attention to the propagation of that Islam which we have received through the Promised Messiah(as). We should not rest until this truth has spread to every corner of the world. However, a question arises: in what manner should tabligh be conducted? It is clear that without weapons — that is, without arguments and proofs — a person cannot convince another. I therefore urge people to memorise and thoroughly understand the proofs of the truth of this community, because without doing so one cannot make others understand.
All the truths that exist in the world emit a light, and through that light truth filters and reaches people's hearts. People may not be consciously aware of it, yet the truth does reach them. In such a state, a person may come to understand through one or two arguments, but he cannot make others understand. If a person who has himself understood the truth lacks sufficient arguments to make others understand, and he nonetheless makes the effort, his effort will go to waste.
There are two means by which truth can be spread. The first is that one should have a relationship with God — that one's prayers are accepted, and that a divine influence has been granted to him. The second is that the truths he has received should be capable of being presented in such a manner that people cannot deny them. There are many people who are themselves convinced, but do not possess sufficient knowledge to make others understand. Such people themselves stumble, and also cause others to stumble — or at the very least, they are not a means of guidance, and their efforts do not touch people's hearts.
Among the powerful arguments we present in favour of the Promised Messiah(as), I wish to present one here. This argument contains so many component parts that many people are not even aware of them, let alone understand them — and this is why their words have no effect on others.
It should be kept in mind that all arguments, when combined together, establish a claim. Just as there are levels in education — first grade, second grade, third grade and so on — so too are there levels in argumentation. One argument establishes one part; a second argument, combined with the first, establishes the parts above it. If a student of the first grade thinks he has become fully accomplished and reached the ultimate level, he is a fool. Similarly, if someone presents one portion of an argument and thinks his opponent will thereby be silenced, that is his lack of understanding — because in argumentation, one portion of an argument establishes only one point.
For example, the existence of God is a very grand claim, and the heavens and the earth bear witness to it. But even from so great an argument, only this much can be established: that there ought to be a God. Whether God actually exists or not is not proven by this alone. The Promised Messiah(as) has discussed this at length and stated that from the heavens and the earth only this much is established — that there ought to be a God. But the definitive proof of God's existence is not this; rather, it is that God Himself manifests before us and says, "I am." The heavens and the earth do not produce that. From them, one can only gather that a God ought to exist and that there is a need for God. Until God manifests Himself to us, the certainty that God exists is not attained. The heavens and the earth direct one's attention toward God, and when God descends upon a person's heart and declares, "I am," then certainty is achieved.
There is a third matter here as well: that what a person claims to be God's word — is it not his own fabrication or error? Has he not been deceived? Sometimes it merely seems as though someone has called out, but in fact nothing has happened — only the ears are ringing. This has happened to me several times, and it may have happened to many others: one seems to hear a voice from behind, yet upon turning around, there is no one calling. Therefore, one must also ascertain whether the voice one heard was a real voice, or whether one's ears were merely ringing. The criterion for determining this is that what comes from God is accompanied by signs. For example, if I hear the call "Mahmood" and upon turning around I find no one there, I will conclude that it was not a real voice — it was merely a ringing in my ears. But if I hear "Mahmood" and upon turning I see someone actually running toward me, then I will say it was no error of my ears — that person truly called me.
Therefore, when a voice comes to someone and divine help also follows in accordance with that voice, it will not be the result of some weakness of the mind. Now reflect on how many arguments have combined to establish the existence of God. If one were to be content with only one part of the argument and leave the rest aside, the purpose is not established. I offered the example of the argument for God's existence. Now I will present one argument for the truth of the Promised Messiah(as) — or indeed for the truth of any prophet — and I will show how truth is established step by step, moving from one level to the next, until the matter becomes clear.
For example, it was stated in hadith, and it is also apparent from the Holy Quran, that the Promised Messiah ought to have come in this age — but that does not by itself prove the truthfulness of Hazrat Mirza Sahib(as). Or, for example, the moon and sun were eclipsed, and this is a sign of the coming of the Promised Messiah — but from that alone it is not established that Hazrat Mirza Sahib(as) is the Promised Messiah or the Mahdi. There are other arguments that, when combined, can establish this. But if someone thinks that the solar and lunar eclipse alone proves the truthfulness of the Promised Messiah(as), and tries to convince someone of this with that argument alone, he will stumble. I will therefore present one fundamental argument for the truth, and explain how truth is established from it.
That argument is the verse:
"فَقَدْ لَبِثْتُ فِيكُمْ عُمُرًا مِّن قَبْلِهِ ۚ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ" Yunus 10:17
This is the argument given in the Holy Quran for the truthfulness of the Holy Prophet(sa). We wish to examine how far it assists in establishing the truth. Generally, people think that from this verse all the claims of a claimant are fully established — but that is not the case. Rather, from this argument only one part of the claim is established. People ordinarily draw only this inference from it: that the Holy Prophet(sa) never told a lie, that no accusation was ever laid against him, and therefore it is established that he is truthful in his claim. But this does not actually establish his truthfulness, because that method of reasoning is not sound. Rather, this verse contains several conditions which together form one part of the proof of a prophet's claim. What are those conditions, and what do they establish?
First: The verse says faqad labithtu feekum 'umurā — "I have lived among you a lifetime." One condition here is that he must have spent a major portion of his life among those people to whom he comes. People cannot assess someone until they have had dealings with him over a period of time, until they have seen that his circumstances have not kept changing, that he has always held fast to the truth, that he has never strayed from it. Until this is known, trust cannot be placed in him. We must therefore know the prior life of the claimant, from which we can ascertain that in all important matters he remained consistently upon one position. If there were minor differences in secondary matters, that is another thing — but in matters of principle he must have remained at one point. It should not be the case that today he is a Hindu, tomorrow a Christian, and the day after an adherent of yet another religion. If someone were such, we could not accept him as an avatar or a prophet. He may be a maulvi or a scholar, since a maulvi or scholar may stumble on an argument and come to understand; if a maulvi changes fifty religions, it is not surprising and there is no rational objection to following him — because a maulvi or scholar speaks from his own knowledge and thought, and may err. But the source of a prophet's knowledge and speech is God; therefore, in matters of principle there should be — and indeed there is — no inconsistency in him, and so he does not stumble. To see this, one must know the prior life of the claimant.
Second: This verse makes clear that truthfulness or falsehood cannot be debated on the basis of a few days' circumstances, because one can maintain a deception for two or three years — a person can devise a scheme of deception over such a period. But a long prior period cannot be used as the foundation for deception. And when a person's entire life has passed before one's eyes, one can know how he was in childhood, how he was in youth, how he was in middle age. If this is not the case, the matter can remain doubtful. In short, it is necessary that his entire life should have been before people.
Third: His life must not be obscure; it must be such that people have taken notice of it — for in general it is from such wide notice that greatness becomes apparent. His life must be such that the disbelievers themselves cry out: "kunta feena marjuwwā" — Hud 11:63 — "We had placed great hopes in you." In short, his life must be of the highest distinction and excellence; people must have had dealings with him; and people must have observed his righteousness and elevated character in all circumstances. Then, when he says, "I have lived among you — you have seen my childhood, my youth, my middle age" — such a person truly commands attention.
Fourth: The verse then says "min qablihi" — "before it." This contains another condition: that his righteousness and pious life must have been present before his claim. When he makes his claim, it inevitably becomes possible for him to maintain an outward composure in accordance with his claim.
These are the four signs that must be found in a claimant, and they are stated in this verse: (1) that he should have spent his life among his own people; (2) that he should have spent a long life; (3) that the portion of his life before the claim should have been spent in such a distinguished manner that people's attention was drawn to him, and people regarded his life as a life of great promise and benefit; (4) that this life should have been before the claim.
These are the four conditions that under this verse must be present in a claimant. Without them, his claim is not worth a penny. One or two or three or four years cannot serve as a proof, for in such a span people can be deceived. But a scheme cannot be laid in early childhood. Therefore there must be evidence of his childhood state, then his youth must have been observed, and he must have been before people in middle age. Such a person, if he says, "Raise an objection against my entire life," may well be justified — but not someone who spent a few years somewhere in an obscure life and then claims, "Point out some fault in this portion of my life." A certain apostate went from here to Lahore and said, "O people of Qadian, point out some objection against my life," presenting this very verse. But if anyone can present this argument merely because the faults of his few years are not known to others, then the pandoras and sansis of the Qadian area could equally stand up and say, "Point out some fault in our lives." We who are not acquainted with their circumstances — what could we say against them? The real point is that under this verse it is necessary that the claimant should have lived before his claim in such a distinguished manner that people of every community cry out: "kunta feena marjuwwā" Hud 11:63 — "We had placed great hopes in you." If this condition is not met, every person will set himself up as a claimant. Furthermore, it is also evident from this verse that the life must be before the claim — because after making a claim, a person can also maintain an outward composure by deliberate effort.
So this argument has four conditions, and all four must be present. If they are not kept in view, the argument cannot be formed at all.
Now consider: the prior life of Hazrat Mirza Sahib(as) was so distinguished that he held special esteem in the eyes of wise and discerning people. Regarding matters of property and disputes, people would say, "Whatever you decide, we will accept" — because even his opponents knew that he would not deviate from the right.
If this condition were not met, "laqad labithtu feekum 'umurā" would have no meaning at all, and ninety percent of people might qualify — those against whom no one has any objection simply due to their obscurity. But they cannot be the true instances of this verse, because there are hundreds of people who live such obscure lives that people's eyes do not even fall upon them. No one would have objected to them anyway.
Under this criterion, the prophethood of the Holy Prophet(sa) is established. We accept Hazrat Ibrahim(as), Hazrat Musa(as) and others as truthful, even though their lives are not directly before us — because the Holy Prophet(sa) has testified to their truthfulness, and the truthfulness of the Holy Prophet(sa) is itself established, for both friends and foes bear witness that his life before his claim was most splendid and pure. Therefore we accept the previous prophets as true as well. So this verse is a proof of the truthfulness of the Holy Prophet(sa) and a testimony in favour of the Promised Messiah(as). It is not applicable to every person who lived in obscurity. No one can therefore say, "Prove some crime against me, or else accept me as a prophet." By that reasoning, eighty percent of people would become prophets. This argument applies to one whose life and circumstances are before people, and of whom people were convinced before his claim that lying and treachery were impossible for him, and were certain that whatever he said was true. He must be such, by virtue of his qualities, that people are ready to accept even what appears on the surface to be against reason. Such a person is born once in centuries.
But up to this point only one thing has been established: that such a person does not lie. However, it remains possible that he has gone mad — just as a madman thinks himself a king. If such a person says he is a prophet and claims to receive revelation, he is not lying — his mental state is simply not sound, and that is why he says so. In such a case, further arguments will be needed — arguments that will establish his claim through what comes after the claim.
In sum, people, for not understanding this argument, present it incorrectly — just as Muhammad Nasib said, "O people of Qadian, point out some objection against me," whereas it is well known that "khubb-e nafs na gard-o ba-salha ma'lum" — the inner filth of a person is not discovered in years by those around him. Where did people reflect on him and regard him as a person of complete spirituality? Spending a few days somewhere cannot make someone the true embodiment of this verse. For that, the purity of an entire life must be demonstrated. After that, consideration will be given to whether what he says is driven by some personal belief — as the Brahmo Samaj calls whatever arises in the heart "revelation" — or whether he is mad. All of these are things that must be examined. A person will be called a liar only if none of these conditions are found in him. If these matters are not kept in view, one cannot convince others of the truth, and one stumbles oneself — and that is one's own fault. The instrument for removing a kidney stone cannot remove a cataract from the eye. A blacksmith who needs a drill cannot do his work with a hammer. Whatever an argument establishes — use it to establish only that much, and strengthen the next part with another argument. Only then can there be benefit.
Reflect on the manner and method in which I have presented this argument, and see how from each point, what is established and how far it goes. In short, the Promised Messiah(as) has made his claim, and tabligh of it is necessary — but without knowing the arguments required for it, success in tabligh cannot be achieved. Let the members learn to present arguments, and learn to present them correctly, so that their words have an effect and people accept the truth. May Allah grant us the capacity to understand the truth and to know its arguments, and grant us the capacity to use them. Amin.
(Al-Fazl, 14 March 1924)
Related Resources