A Dangerous Interpolation by Mr. Faruqi
For Mubarak Ahmad, the fourth son, Mr. Faruqi accepts the passage in Zamima Anjam-i-A'thum
as an identification based on Ilham
and then he proceeds to introduce a serious, a grave interpolation into a passage from Tiryaqul Qulub, to the effect that after the words `making three into four', he adds `i.e. Muslih Mau'ud', dishonestly on his own behalf, to create a wrong impression that, under this identification based on Ilham, the Promised Messiah had been led to hold Mubarak Ahmad, son born number four, to be the Muslih Mau'ud. Now this is very far from the true basic facts of the situation. The Promised Messiah, nowhere in his writings, neither in Zamima
Anjam-i-A'tham, nor in Tiryaqul
Qulub, has identified Mirza Mubarak Ahmad, the son born fourth to be the Muslih Mau'ud. We definitely claim that Mr. Faruqi can never show us, from Tiryaqul
Qulub, that the Promised Messiah ever took up a definite position that Mubarak Ahmad was the promised son, destined to be the Muslih Mau'ud.
This is how Mr. Faruqi builds up a web of a unjustified statements and conclusions, to leave an impression on the mind of the reader that in the eyes of the Promised Messiah, Mubarak Ahmad, the fourth son, under a firm identification done by Ilham, was to become the Muslih Mau'ud. The basic fact, which conclusively proves that here he is taking up an entirely false position, is that Mubarak Ahmad was born outside nine years, the clear time limit in the case. In fact TiryaquI
carried the following passage, wherein the Promised Messiah takes up a clear and candid position in regard to the matter:
had said four sons would be born of which the number one had been held in the Ilham
to become a stalwart of God, with qualities of a Messiah. So, by the grace of Allah, four sons have been born." (page 14)
Evidently, the Promised Messiah says very clearly that one of the four sons was going to be the Expected Muslih. There is here no trace of any basis for the view that he identified Mubarak Ahmad as the son destined to become the great Muslih Mau'ud.
There is another reason why the Promised Messiah could not have felt sure that Mubarak Ahmad was destined to be the Muslih Mau'ud, because, even before his birth he was aware there was a possibility, in the light of the Ilhams
concerning him that he might die in childhood. Under Sign number 21, in Tiryaqul
where the birth of this son was foretold, the Promised Messiah wrote:
"Allah has informed me He would give me another son. This is the same fourth son, born now, who has been named Mubarak Ahmad. It was this same boy intimation of his birth had been given two years before. Then, again, the intimation was given at a time when there still were two months to go before his birth; and then came the following Ilham, when he was to be born:
`Inni asqoto minallahi wa usibohu
'. i.e., `From the hand of God, I fall on the earth and it is to him I will go.' From this, on the basis of my own judgement I drew the meaning that he would be a pious boy. His face always turned to Allah. His movement always directed towards Him or that he would die soon. God alone knows out of these two possibilities which is the one to concide with His will and purpose." (Tiryaqul
Qulub, Edition 1, page 30, Large Size)
This interpolation on the part of Mr. Faruqi is highly regrettable. In fact this interpolation was made, in the first instance, by Mr. Faruqi's father, Doctor Basharat Ahmad, the father-in-law of Maulvi Mohammad Ali, in his book entitled Mojaddid-i-A'zam, in the course of his discussion on the Promised Messiah's prophecy with respect to the Muslih Mau'ud. It is possible Mr. Faruqi walked in the footsteps of his father, relying completely on the integrity of his own father in quoting from the works of the Promised Messiah, Mr. Faruqi may not have taken the trouble to check the reference himself. Otherwise, if Mubarak Ahmad had really been taken by the Promised Messiah, to be the Muslih Mau'ud, on the basis of his own Ilhams, it will have to be conceded that the prophecy of the Promised Messiah, in this behalf, has been falsified - not that the ijtihad
of the Promised Messiah in regard to this matter has turned out to be wrong.
There are evident contradictions in Mr. Faruqi's "Truth Triumphs". On page 31, he states that the Promised Messiah's ijtihad
turned out to be wrong. Then, further on, in open contradiction of what he has written on page 31, according to his conception of the ilhami
identification, he takes Mubarak Ahmad, the fourth son, to be the Muslih Mau'ud, full in the teeth on the fact that Mubarak Ahmad died in early childhood, proving for all time to come that he was not the Muslih Mau'ud.
Even before February 20, 1886, there had been an Ilham
in 1883, that Mubarak Ahmad would be the fourth son. The Promised Messiah wrote on page 196 of Nozulul
"In 1883, I received an Ilham
`Turner of three into four, Mubarak'."
So Mubarak Ahmad was indeed the fourth son. In this sense he was, indeed, the boy who made three into four. But he was not the Muslih Mau'ud, neither in the light of the identification done by an Ilham, nor was he held by the Promised Messiah to be the son destined to become the Muslih Mau'ud, on the basis of his own ijtihad. Mubarak Ahmad's death in childhood proved beyond doubt of any kind, that in one respect he was the son who made three into four; and that the Muslih Mau'ud
would be the maker of three into four, in some other sense.
Mr. Faruqi writes, however:
"Then again at page 40 of the same book, Tiryaqul Qulub, in the 25th Sign, Hazrat Mirza Sahib considers the birth of Mubarak Ahmad as a fulfilment of this promise. But the death of Mubarak Ahmad in September 1907, disillusioned Hazrat Mirza Sahib, for he wrote in his Notice Tabsira
dated 15th November, 1907. `When Mubarak Ahmad died, then Allah sent another Ilham
to me: We give you good news of another gracious son who will take the place of Mubarak Ahmad (both physically and spiritually).'" (Truth Triumphs, page 31)
Further, on page 32 of `Truth Triumphs' Mr. Faruqi gives the following note:
"Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad made an error of interpretation in the understanding of these Ilham
Had the Promised Messiah said Mubarak Ahmad was to become the Muslih Mau'ud, Mr. Faruqi would have been right, after the death of this son, in saying that the Promised Messiah had made an ijtihadi
error, and he would have been free to hold that the Ilham
: `Inna nobasshiroka bighulamin halimin
yanzilo manzilal mubrake
' `I give you the glad tiding of a kind and gentle son, to take the place of Mubarak' - indicated that the son destined to become the Muslih Mau'ud
was to be a fifth son, yet to be born. But the Promised Messiah never said Mubarak Ahmad was the Muslih Mau'ud, neither on the basis of any identification made in some Ilham, nor on the basis of his own understanding and ijtihad. Therefore the Ilham
just quoted above cannot be said to have any bearing on the question of the identity of the Muslih Mau'ud. Thus we come to the final position of this prophecy, that the Muslih Mau'ud
now was to be one of the three sons left after Mubarak Ahmad had passed away.