Misstatement about Saying Prayers behind Non-Ahmadi Imams
Truth About the Split
The sixth item which calls for attention in Maulawi Muhammad Ali’s account of the dissensions, is his statement that towards the close of 1913, I once again made the announcement that the deniers of the Promised Messiah (as) were kuffar, that this announcement reached the ears of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) and that his fatwa allowing Ahmadis to pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams was also criticised by me. Though during my pilgrimage to Mecca in 1912, I had myself said my prayers behind non-Ahmadi Imams, and so had all Ahmadis who went on pilgrimage during the time of Khalifatul Masih I (ra) ; that as Khalifatul Masih I (ra) was ill at the time, he ordered Maulawi Muhammad Ali to enlighten the Community on this question and even dictated to him some notes on it.
The whole of this account, including the allusion to a fatwa issued by Khalifatul Masih I (ra) , permitting Ahmadis to pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams is false, as false as any of the others. The facts are that Khwaja Kamaluddin, from a natural timidity of temperament and a desire to win the goodwill of 'non-Ahmadis had ever been trying to secure an order permitting Ahmadis to pray behind non-Ahmadis. When he went to England, he wrote repeatedly to Khalifatul Masih I (ra) urgently requesting for the grant of such permission, even urging that unless such permission was given, there would be trouble. People in England would be prejudiced against Islam, and all his missionary activities would be jeopardised. As Khwaja Sahib was already looking for an excuse, Khalifatul Masih I (ra) , when he read his letter, said, "Let him pray behind them." This, so-called permission was forthwith cabled to Khwaja Sahib by his friends, and was utilized by the former, in praying behind that prominent opponent of the Ahmadiyya Movement Zafar Ali Khan, editor of the Zamińdar, to the permanent undoing of his own faith. The permission, however, could in no way be treated as a fatwa, because neither the Khalifatul Masih (ra) , nor any other person has any authority to issue a fatwa contrary to the express fatwa of the Promised Messiah (as). It is the latter who is our proper Teacher and Guide. Nobody except him has the authority to issue a fatwa on his own account. Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I (ra) himself was but a disciple of the Promised Messiah (as), and had like others, sworn allegiance to the Master. He was, therefore, bound to obey the injunctions of the Promised Messiah (as) as much as any of his other followers. As a matter of fact, Khalifatul Masih I (ra) himself never claimed any superior authority.
He once wrote, "I swear by God that I believe with my heart in all the claims of the Promised Messiah (as) and hold firmly to them, and it is my faith that the acceptance of them is a necessary condition of salvation. Nuruddin." Again he once said: "Listen! your disputes fall under three classes. The first class relates to such matters and principles regarding which a decision has been left by the Promised Messiah (as). Those who go against any such decision cease to be Ahmadis. Then, there are matters regarding which the Promised Messiah (as) has remained silent. With regard to these, it is not for you to speak until you have first received permission thereof from me. Therefore, while the Khalifa is silent or till the Khalifa of the Khalifa does not appear in the world, you have no business to pronounce opinions on these matters."—(From a speech at Lahore: Al-Hakam June 21 and 28, 1912.) If one were to read the above words of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) side by side with the fatwa of the Promised Messiah (as) quoted below, one might see whether it was possible even to imagine Hadrat Khalifatul Masih I (ra) issuing a fatwa permitting Ahmadis to pray behind non-Ahmadis.
The Promised Messiah writes: "Remember that God has informed me that it is forbidden to you and forbidden altogether that you should pray behind any Mukaffir (who attributes Kufr to another), Mukazzib (a denier) or Mutaraddid (a doubter). Your Imam should be one who is one of yourselves." (Appendix, Tuhfa’- e-Golarhwiyyah, page 18).
What Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) wrote to Khwaja Kamaluddin pertained to Khwaja Sahib himself and was a comment on his individual condition. It was not a fatwa, as may easily be understood from the following incident. Somebody wrote to Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) for permission to pray behind a non-Ahmadi Imam, and Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra)
accorded the permission. Upon this, the elder brother of the applicant also wrote to Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) soliciting a similar permission. In reply, Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) directed that he should first make himself like his younger brother, and then a similar permission would be granted to him. The younger brother did not care even to say his daily prayers. If the permission sought were likely to induce him to be regular in his prayers, there would be no harm done. It is evident from the reply and even from the fact that the elder brother thought it necessary to write such a letter, that the permission granted by Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) was not of the nature of a fatwa, but a concession allowed to meet the special circumstances of a particular individual. Similarly, it was in view of the weakness of Khwaja Sahib and under the apprehension that withholding of permission might prove too severe a trial for Khwaja Sahib’s faith, that Khalifatul Masih I (ra) , accorded to Khwaja Sahib permission to pray behind non- Ahmadis. We would never be justified in treating the permission as a general fatwa. It was only a particular direction applied to a particular individual. As for the statement that I criticised the fatwa, it is absolutely without any kind of evidence to support it. For, when there was no fatwa, it is idle to speak of anybody criticising or denying the fatwa. When we believed that the authority of the Promised Messiah (as) is final, there was little need for me to find fault with anything contrary to the Promised Messiah’s (as) fatwa. Even assuming that Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) had actually issued a contrary fatwa, still, according to us, such a fatwa could not have formed part of our faith.
Maulawi Muhammad Ali has charged me with having offered prayers—while on pilgrimage to Mecca—behind a non-Ahmadi Imam, and this, in accordance with a fatwa of Khalifatul Masih I (ra) . This is a misstatement which, in spite of his knowledge of the true facts, Maulawi Muhammad Ali continues to repeat. The facts are as follows.
In the year 1912, I went on pilgrimage to Mecca in company with Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab, visiting Egypt on our way. My maternal grandfather, Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib, also went on pilgrimage the same year. He went to Mecca direct from Qadian. We met at Jaddah, and from there journeyed together to Mecca. On the very first day at Mecca, while we were circumambulating the Kaaba, time came for the evening prayers. I wished to withdraw, but our way was barred and the service had already commenced. Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib told me that Hadrat Khalifatul
Masih (ra) had ordered that, while at Mecca, we might pray behind non-Ahmadi Imams. Upon this, I joined the service. Later on, when we were still in the precincts of the Kaaba, came the time for the night prayers, and we joined as before. When we returned to our residence, I said turning to Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab,
"The prayers we offered were only to comply with the command of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra), let us now offer our prayers for the sake of Allah. Such prayers cannot rightly be offered behind non- Ahmadi Imams." We, then repeated both the services. The next day, I believe, we joined another service behind a non-Ahmadi Imam. But I began to feel that although we subsequently repeated the service, a certain weight was oppressing my mind, and I felt that if I continued like that, I should certainly fall ill. At last on the second day, I was compelled to speak on the subject to Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab. I said. "My regard for my grandfather prevents me from putting the question to him, but will you kindly inquire of him whether Hadrat Khalifatul Masih’s orders in this matter were given to him directly or was it that he learnt of them from a common report." Upon inquiry, it transpired that there were no direct orders but that my grandfather had heard that some such orders had been given to some person. I thanked God for the news and from that time, in spite of objections from various quarters, we always offered our prayers in our own congregation. We were in Mecca for about 20 days. At all times we offered our prayers either in our own house or in the Kaaba in a congregation of our own. And it was a special favour of God that although, as a general rule, none save the few recognised sects were allowed to form a congregation within the quadrangle of the Kaaba, no one objected to our congregation; and it often happened that many latecomers joined us in our prayers and swelled our congregation to a considerable size. My grandfather felt apprehension lest his part in the matter might in future, prove a source of trouble. He, therefore, said that he would bring the question to the notice of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) on his return to Qadian.
When at last we returned, our friends one after another invited us to functions arranged to welcome us. Among others, Miyań Hamid Ali an old servant of the Promised Messiah (as) , who had attended upon him for 40 years invited us to tea. The guests included Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra), Mir Nasir Nawab Sahib, Sayyid Abdul Muhyi Arab and myself. One gentleman, Hakim Muhammad Umar, put the question to Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra). The latter replied that he had never given any fatwa of that kind, that his permission was given only to such people as were weak and timorous. Such people, if they found themselves begird, by non-Ahmadis, might perform their prayers behind non-Ahmadis, and repeat their prayers when they returned to their places. Thanks to God that my action thus accorded both with the fatwa of the Promised Messiah (as) and with the views of the Khalifa of the day."
But here the question may be asked, why did I choose to carry out the supposed command of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih (ra) , and perform Namaz behind non- Ahmadi Imams when there existed already a contrary fatwa of the Promised Messiah (as)? The answer is that from the practice of the Companions of the Holy Prophet (sa) of Islam it is evident that they considered it obligatory in such matters to carry out the commands of the Khalifa of the day, even when they did not agree with him regarding their propriety. Accordingly, we find in Bukhari and in other books of tradition and history that once, when Hadrat Usman (ra) was the Khalifa, he departed from the practice of the Holy Prophet (sa) , and during a certain Hajj—while in a state of journey—performed four Rak‘at of Namaz at Safa, instead of two. This caused considerable excitement among some of the Holy Companions, but nevertheless they all followed him in performing the full four Rak‘at, Hadrat Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf (ra) resolved that in his own congregation he would perform only two Rak‘at of Namaz. But he chanced to meet Abdullah bin Mas‘ud (ra) who inquired of him whether the Khalifa had issued any new command. Abdur Rahman (ra) said, 'No,' and added that, as for himself, he had performed only two Rak‘at of Namaz, Abdullah bin Mas‘ud (ra) said that it was true that all evidence went to prove that the Holy Prophet (sa) had performed only two Rak‘at of Namaz, but then when he (Abdullah bin Mas‘ud (ra) ) had heard that the Khalifa of the day had performed four Rak‘at, he too had performed the same number of Rak‘at. (At the time of the pilgrimage, on account of the large number of pilgrims, the prayers at Mina 'are offered in several separate congregations.) Abdullah (ra) also advised Abdur Rahman (ra) to do likewise and told him that it was improper to act in a manner contrary to the practice of the Khalifa.