Note: The Alislam Team assumes full responsibility for any errors or inaccuracies in this translation of the Friday Sermon.
(Sermon Delivered: 28 March 1924)
Topics: Surah al-Fatiha, moral courage, magnanimity, Bahai infiltration, Quran's supremacy
Sermon delivered by Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmad(ra), Khalifatul Masih II Date: 28 March 1924 Published in: Al-Fazl, 4 April 1924
After reciting the tashahud, ta'awwudh, and Surah al-Fatiha, Huzur(ra) said:
Surah al-Fatiha, among the many matters to which it draws our attention, also draws us toward a kind of ghayrat — a moral jealousy — that blazes like fire in a person's heart. I am astonished that Muslims recite Surah al-Fatiha every day yet remain unaware of its deeper meanings. Consider: we stand before Allah forty or fifty times daily and supplicate, ghayril maghdūbi 'alayhim wa lad-dāllīn ["not of those who have incurred Thy wrath, nor of those who have gone astray" — 1:7]. That is, we ask that we not be associated with, nor be in fellowship with, nor have ties with those who rejected Allah's appointed ones, His messengers and prophets, who caused them all manner of suffering and afflictions and thereby brought Allah's wrath upon themselves. And we ask that we also not be among those who, while not overtly harming Allah's messengers and appointed ones, went to excess in venerating them — preferring their love over the love of God, elevating them above the station God had assigned them, forming with creatures the bond that should be formed with God alone.
This is such a comprehensive supplication that all the evils and sins of the world are contained within it, for wrongdoing is of only two kinds: either one breaks the commands of Allah's appointed ones and opposes them, or one abandons the true and real relationship with God and instead forms a false attachment with some human being — whether that person be an appointed messenger, a mujaddid (reformer), a prophet, an ordinary person, or even an unbeliever — and loves that person to excess. What evil remains outside these two categories? Every kind of moral wrongdoing falls under the first clause: theft, robbery, corruption, and opposition to the prophets are all encompassed by ghayril maghdūbi 'alayhim. And every form of shirk — idol-worship, grave-worship, all manner of excess — falls under wa lad-dāllīn. There is no evil that this supplication does not cover.
In effect, we declare before Allah every day that we regard all manner of moral corruption with disapproval and that we do not wish to form any association with those who have overstepped the bounds in their love of creatures to the point of neglecting the love of God and exalting humans to the level of divinity. Both groups are removed from our company. We seek the sirāt al-mustaqīm — the straight path, neither the one where Allah's commands are broken, nor the one where under the guise of love for God, humans are elevated to a station God never assigned to them. We seek the middle path: to believe in the prophets, accept their commands, follow their teachings, and assign them the very station God has assigned to them.
When a Muslim repeatedly and emphatically declares before God, "Protect me from becoming among the maghdūb 'alayhim and the dāllīn," he is in effect saying: "I am a person of ghayrat — I shall neither choose any kind of evil for myself, nor will I keep company with those who do." This is the mark of ghayrat — to be so averse to evil that one does not even wish to be associated with those who commit it, and to repeatedly seek refuge. Everyone recites this supplication, but how many actually reflect on its meaning, act upon it, and genuinely feel in their hearts the ghayrat to remain distant from those who are distant from God? Very few — in fact, extremely few. Indeed, many people call those who act upon it "narrow-hearted" and regard them as lacking spirit.
Remember: there is no magnanimity outside of Islam. What does magnanimity actually mean? Is a physician narrow-hearted because he does not himself swallow the bitter medicine he gives to the sick? Or because he forbids patients from eating salty meats, sweets, and rice as their disposition requires, while eating such things himself? Should he be called narrow-hearted when he also personally endures hardships to treat them? Narrow-heartedness is not giving a criminal the punishment he deserves. Rather, if we were to let a drowning person perish without saving him, that would be narrow-heartedness and lack of spirit. To say that we are narrow-hearted because we do not drown along with the one who is drowning — whoever expects that of us wishes to make us foolish and ignorant. Magnanimity means rescuing the drowning person.
And so, Islam — where it teaches ghayrat in the supplication ghayril maghdūbi 'alayhim wa lad-dāllīn — has also taught magnanimity. It says: ihdinā al-sirāt al-mustaqīm — "O Allah, guide us all to the straight path." The very people from whose association one seeks refuge are now the subject of a prayer: "O Allah, make all of us righteous and good." See how great the magnanimity — those for whom one felt such aversion that one prayed fifty times daily to be kept away from them — one now prays: "O Allah, may they not perish; may they not be destroyed; may they have no association with me — but may they have an association with me, because I am on the straight and protected path. Do not bring me to where they stand, but bring them to where I stand."
A doctor draws the sick toward himself — he does not make himself sick. The doctor's sympathy does not mean that if the patient has influenza or plague, the doctor should inject himself with the plague or influenza germs and become ill along with the patient. Whoever calls a doctor's refusal to do so narrow-heartedness would himself be mad and deranged. The doctor who is truly sympathetic and magnanimous is the one who strives to cure the sick.
True magnanimity is that which Islam has taught. The Holy Prophet(sa), in a supplication recited upon entering a town, taught: "O Allah, I beseech You that I may have love for the righteous servants of this town and not for the wicked — but may all of them, righteous and wicked alike, have love for me, so that by forming a connection with me they may all become righteous. May my influence be upon them; may their influence not be upon me."¹
In this supplication the Holy Prophet(sa) set out the complete and perfect method by which a person attains every form of guidance. A believer ought to have the ghayrat that he should not have connections with the wicked.
Ghayrat is part of a noble person's character. Ghayrat is a virtue of the highest order. But it is a pity that many people consider magnanimity and ghayrat to be incompatible, imagining that ghayrat cannot coexist with magnanimity. This is incorrect. Ghayrat means detesting evil and remaining apart from it, while magnanimity means drawing the wicked toward oneself and making them good. Both can coexist at the same time; they are not opposites. Ghayrat, in its proper place and occasion, is itself a virtue. Yet many people object to it.
The reason I am delivering this sermon on this subject is that certain individuals tried to sow discord in the Jama'at. I punished them, expelled them from the community, and forbade members from maintaining ties with them. But it is unfortunate that even in Qadian there have been reports of twenty-five individuals who heard the lecture and the directive to cut ties, and yet maintained those ties. Just today a letter arrived from a person whom I had previously considered wise, informing me that Mahfuz-ul-Haq came and extended his hand for a handshake and that he could not refuse it, and adding that the rest of the community continues to interact with him. This is exactly the proverb: "She who loves more than a mother will be called a busybody aunt." The claim of anyone that he loves and cares for another human being more than God does is entirely incorrect, and I am completely unwilling to accept it. I have seen with my own eyes the treatment people give one another — how real brothers treat their brothers, how fathers treat sons and sons treat fathers. I have seen the conduct of non-Ahmadis among themselves, of Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs among themselves, and then the relations of Ahmadis among themselves. I can say honestly that the sincerity and love I find in my heart for people — by virtue of the station God has placed me in — the compassion and mercy I feel, is something neither a father has for a son nor a son for a father. And then when I measure the love I feel against the love of the prophets, as a firefly's glow against the sun, I find their love and sincerity surpassing all bounds. Yet whoever claims to be a better well-wisher and more compassionate than they are is a liar. That is exactly the proverb: "She who loves more than a mother will be called a busybody aunt." Greater love than theirs is impossible, even between father and son.
Magnanimity and ghayrat can coexist at the same time; they are not opposites. It is recorded that the Promised Messiah(as) once visited Lahore and was standing somewhere when Pandit Lekh Ram came by. Hindus show respect to great people even when they oppose them. Lekh Ram came before him and offered a greeting. The Promised Messiah(as) turned his face to the other side. Lekh Ram came again from the other side for a response and offered his greeting again. The Promised Messiah(as) again did not respond and turned away. Others thought the Promised Messiah(as) was unaware, and they were pleased that a great man among the Aryas had come to greet him. A companion drew his attention, saying, "Huzur, Pandit Lekh Ram Sahib is greeting you." The Promised Messiah(as) addressed him, saying: "He insults my Master and comes to offer me greetings." There are moments that call for ghayrat. It was not that the Promised Messiah(as) wanted Lekh Ram to be destroyed; he has written that whenever Lekh Ram came before him, he would pray: "O Allah, grant him guidance."
Observe how both things are united. In terms of ghayrat, he did not even return his greeting. But in terms of magnanimity he prayed for him, because prophets have a love for people greater than a father's love — yet they await people to form a connection with Allah.
The severing of ties was not on account of religious differences. We have ties with thousands of Christians, Hindus, non-Ahmadis, and Sikhs. So religious difference alone does not cause ties to be severed. Rather, ties are severed when someone crosses the boundaries of decency. We may have ties with an atheist who denies God's existence, but sometimes we will not have ties with one who calls himself an Ahmadi. The Holy Prophet(sa) used to speak with Abu Sufyan and the other leaders of Mecca, but with three specific Companions he would not speak.² So ghayrat and magnanimity are two distinct things.
These individuals, while being among us and calling themselves Ahmadis, deceived us. Their conduct was, by the standard of decency and integrity, impermissible — they had pledged brotherhood. If they wished to become Bahais they should have said so openly. To be Bahais while calling themselves Ahmadis is a hypocritical stratagem. Our complaint against them is not that they became Bahais but that they took our bay'at and deceived us. If doubts had arisen in them, they could have informed me. Instead, without informing me, they secretly began propagation and told those people, "Do not tell anyone." They continued in the very work established solely for the propagation and spread of Ahmadiyyat, but took their salaries while writing articles against Ahmadiyyat. These acts are below the standard of morality and the shari'at.
Morality has different levels among different nations. But this act was even below the moral standard of the lowest castes whom people sometimes call "untouchables." I am not telling you to go and ask Muslims, Christians, Jews, or Hindus. Go and ask the chuhray, the chamars, and the sahansi what they would say if someone acted in this way — even they would declare it to be filthy and morally degraded. So the severing of ties with them was on account of ghayrat. How could a believer tolerate someone being among us, professing faith in Muhammad Rasulullah (saw), and then saying that the shari'at of the Holy Prophet(sa) is abrogated and that Baha'u'llah is superior to him?
The Promised Messiah(as) is dear to us. For his sake we have engaged in combat with the whole world. But he is not dearer to us than the Holy Prophet(sa). Daily I meet and encounter people who do not accept the excellences of the Promised Messiah(as) and reject his claims. But that — by God — does not weigh as heavily on my soul as this: that in the presence of the Holy Prophet's (saw) teachings someone should say that such-and-such person's teachings are superior and that so-and-so excels the Holy Prophet(sa) in knowledge and moral excellence. There is no doubt that were it not for the Promised Messiah(as), we too would not have that recognition of the Holy Prophet(sa) which has set fire to love for him in our hearts and from which non-Ahmadis are deprived. But there is also no doubt that while one can gauge the beauty of an original from its reflection, the reflection cannot surpass the original. A reflection is a reflection; the original is the original.
By Allah, we believe in the greatness of the Holy Prophet(sa) as described by the Promised Messiah(as) not because the Promised Messiah(as) said it, but because we ourselves entered that garden and thoroughly explored it. The words of Mirza Sahib(as) had the effect of a key; the words of prophets are openers and conductors to the heart's innermost chamber. The keys to the meanings of the Holy Quran were given to us, and with those keys we have drawn forth such knowledge, and within the Quran we behold such sciences as are not to be found in all the existing religious books of the world — whether those religions be new or old.
When the teachings of Baha'u'llah are placed alongside the teachings of the Holy Quran, it is as if a witch were placed before a houri — and in fact even this comparison does not do justice to the Quran, because however ugly and beautiful, two human beings still share in humanity. But Bahai teaching has not even that much in common. In truth, no teaching — Bahai or otherwise — has as much standing before the Quran as a witch has before the most beautiful of women. And this is not something I say from hearsay. I say it on the basis of the knowledge given to me through the Promised Messiah(as): the knowledge and wisdom contained in every single verse of the Quran far surpasses all existing religious books, and in comparison to the Quran they do not even amount to a torn, rotten rag filled with filth and lying on a rubbish heap. And this is not a mere claim — I have proofs to accompany it. Take a single verse of the Quran and place all other books opposite it, and see how they hide away in a form more lowly than a bat. We have not merely read the words of the Quran; we have ourselves entered the fire of its love and it has entered into our very being. Our hearts have felt its warmth and derived delight from it. Our condition is not that of a person who sees the king enter a garden and stands outside waiting for the king to emerge so he can kiss his hand. Rather, we took the king's hand in our own and entered the garden with him, walked every path, and beheld every flower. We do not rely on Razi; we do not acknowledge Ibn Hayyan. Rather, through the company of the Promised Messiah(as) we have attained knowledge such that had these luminaries been of our age they would have considered it their honour to be our students.
Allah has bestowed upon us such knowledge that in its light we have seen that the Quran is a living book and Muhammad Rasulullah (saw) is a living Messenger. Yet these people, while calling themselves among us, said that the Promised Messiah(as) came to abrogate the Quran and spread Bahai teachings. What greater insult to us than this could there be?
A person who says that the Holy Prophet(sa) — God forbid — was a fabricator, and that the Promised Messiah(as) — God forbid — was likewise a fabricator, might say that the Quran is abrogated and that such-and-such person is superior to the Holy Prophet(sa). That is a different matter, for his eyes are blind to this light and these truths are hidden from him. But a person who professes Islam, acknowledges the Quran as guidance, and then says that Mirza Sahib(as) came to suspend the Quran and abrogate Islam — who could be more of a deceiver than he? Such a person considers us the most insane of humans and expects of us what is not even expected of the inmates of asylums. He wishes us to acknowledge that Mirza Sahib(as) — whose every hour and every moment was spent serving the Quran and manifesting the honour of the Holy Prophet(sa) — secretly believed in his heart that the Quran was abrogated and that Bahai teaching was superior to it. Such a person declares us blind, deaf, leprous, and mad, and wants us to accept an impossibility.
The man who, from birth to death, spent every minute proving the honour of the Quran; whose life's purpose was to give life to the Quran, and who gave it life and manifested its beauty to the world and opened its closed doors — about him I once heard a non-Ahmadi say, though it displeased me at the time: "Those who witnessed Mirza Sahib's life know that his ghayrat for Muhammad Rasulullah was greater than his ghayrat for Allah." This is incorrect — his ghayrat for Allah was not less than his ghayrat for the Holy Prophet(sa). But witnessing his ghayrat for the Holy Prophet(sa), that person drew a false inference; a veil was cast over his eyes and he could not perceive the ghayrat the Promised Messiah(as) had for Allah. To say of such a person that he came to suspend Muhammad Rasulullah's (saw) teachings and to erase his religion and that he was a forerunner for Baha'u'llah — no greater insult to the Promised Messiah(as), the Holy Prophet(sa), and ourselves is conceivable. The speaker evidently thinks we are so deficient in reason that we are worse than animals, that we would accept such a thing.
He is the man whose love and devotion was such that in his own verses he wrote:³
The moon is the beloved of others; our beloved is the Quran.
He said: though the moon fades, I care not; though the sun departs, I grieve not — for the light and radiance of the Quran suffices me. To say of this man that he came to suspend the Quran — what greater insult than this could there be?
The more I reflect on this matter, the more my ardour grows. This is a grave insult that has been inflicted upon the Promised Messiah(as), the Holy Prophet(sa), and upon us. If there is any occasion in the world that should stir ghayrat, it is this. What greater occasion for ghayrat could there be? Yet some people think they will say we treated them harshly. But I ask: can any human being suppress ghayrat? That is not magnanimity — that is utter shamelessness. Islam does not teach shamelessness. Which religion is there in which ghayrat has been condemned? We see that the Bahais — in far lesser matters — display ghayrat and go even to the point of killing, though we do not consider killing permissible. But we regard shamelessness with the utmost disapproval.
Baha'u'llah had two sons: 'Abbas Effendi and Muhammad 'Ali Effendi. Baha'u'llah first designated 'Abbas as his successor and then Muhammad 'Ali. But his son 'Abdu'l-Bahā became Caliph and forbade people from meeting Muhammad 'Ali Effendi. Kheiralla, an American Bahai missionary who was a follower of 'Abbas, came from America to Acre. Muhammad 'Ali — Baha'u'llah's own son — came to meet him, but Kheiralla refused, saying: "My master has forbidden me from meeting you." See — for an ordinary difference, he cut off even Baha'u'llah's own son from meeting him, not on account of any deception or fraud. If that is how they act without any deception, how then can they call the treatment you mete out because of their deception and fraud unjust? And can they accuse you of narrow-heartedness?
Remember: a person who acts on only one virtue cannot be called a person of good character. It is like the saying about a monkey that found a piece of turmeric and set himself up as a herbalist. Good character is not merely about being kind. If an occasion calls for ghayrat and one still says, "I should be kind," that person is shameless. Gentleness will be called gentleness only when it is in its proper place and occasion. The Promised Messiah(as) used to say: if a coward says, "Look how merciful I am — I have not killed anyone," he will not be called merciful. Similarly, if the honour of the country is at stake, people's wealth and lives are in danger, and he is told to take up the sword and fight the enemies — yet he throws down the sword and says, "In a time of peace I did not kill anyone; why should I kill now? This is against compassion" — would such a person be called compassionate? No — he would be called a coward and a person without ghayrat, because he is a liar. This is not the moment for compassion; it is the moment for courage and ghayrat. Good character, therefore, consists in the presence of all kinds of moral qualities. If you are kind to people but do not show ghayrat when the occasion demands it, that kindness is mere cowardice and weakness — it arose not from virtue but from self-indulgence. True virtue and taqwa is that which is in its right place.
I counsel the friends of my Jama'at to be committed to all noble moral qualities (akhlāq hasana), and not to be satisfied with false shells or mistake a husk for the kernel. Show ghayrat when the occasion demands it. Use love and anger at the right time and in the right way — yield when the occasion calls for yielding and express anger when the occasion calls for anger. Only then will they truly be called people of good character. To abandon one side entirely and to emphasize only one other is not good character. You cannot deceive the world and events with a husk. You may please your own ego with it, but the results will make the matter plain to you. So do not be satisfied with it. May Allah have mercy on us and instill His love within us. May our personal ego and self-interest be erased and everything become for Allah alone. May we, being in Allah, become entirely for Allah. May there be born in us ghayrat, love, and ardour for His messengers, and may there arise in us their true and sincere love — by which Allah's pleasure is gained and the reformation of people is achieved. May Allah grant us the ability through His grace. Āmīn.
In the second khutba, Huzur said: I wish to mention two things. First, I said yesterday that I would deliver the next part of the lecture today. I was not aware that today was Friday. So that lecture will not be today but will be after 'Asr tomorrow.
Second, a very sincere friend — Muhammad Isma'il Sahib, a poet from Targari — has passed away. He was a person of great fervour and sincerity. Some of his poems gave much assistance in tabligh. The Promised Messiah(as) had greatly appreciated his book Chitthi-e-Masih. He was a great opponent of the hookah and always debated about it, saying, "If you have not eliminated this flaw, what have you eliminated?" Though to insist on a single matter is not true wisdom, yet because of his iman and his aversion to evil, this insistence of his was also greatly pleasing. After the prayer I will lead his funeral prayer. Other friends should also join.
(Al-Fazl, 4 April 1924)
¹ Ibn 'Umar(ra) reported that when the Holy Prophet(sa) saw a town he wanted to enter, he would say three times: "O Allah, bless us in it. O Allah, provide us with its fruits, make us beloved to its people, and make the righteous of its people beloved to us." — Recorded in al-Mu'jam al-Awsat by al-Tabarani (No. 4755) and by Ibn Hibban, with al-Haythami grading its chain as jayyid (very good).
² This is a reference to the account of Ka'b ibn Malik(ra) and his two companions — Murarah ibn al-Rabi' and Hilal ibn Umayyah — who, despite being sincere believers, were unable to join the Expedition of Tabuk. The Holy Prophet(sa) forbade the Muslims from speaking with them for fifty days until Allah accepted their repentance. This incident is recorded in detail in Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Military Expeditions (Kitab al-Maghazi), Hadith 4418. https://readhadith.app/hadith/bukhari-4418
³ This couplet — قمر ہے چاند اوروں کا ہمارا چاند قرآن ہے ("The moon is the beloved of others; our beloved is the Quran") — is from the poetry of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(as), the Promised Messiah, found in Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, Part 3 (Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 1, pp. 198–204).https://new.alislam.org/library/books/rk-braheen-ahmadiyya-vol-3?option=options&page=226
Related Resources