Intro
Ahmadis are fond of making silly and stupid parallels.  In the 1930’s, when Mahmud Ahmad was accused of homosexuality and other sex crimes in Qadian by Bashir Misri, he defended himself by saying that ALL holy people are accused of sexual mis-conduct by their followers. This argument sufficed for the poor and ignorant followers of Mahmud Ahmad, however, the Lahori-Ahmadis soon chimed in and objected to Mahmud Ahmad’s arguments.  See below for the exchange.

See these essays also:   https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/15/in-qadian-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-allowed-to-touch-all-women/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/21/bashir-ahmad-misri-and-ahmadiyya/

Appendix in Mumtaz Ahmad Faruqi’s book, Truth Triumphs

Peculiar Technique of Self exoneration

Mudslinging Against the Righteous

Al-Fazl published a Friday Sermon by Mian Mahmud Ahmad Sahib in its issue dated December 2, 1938.  As usual Mian Sahib commented on the opening chapter of the Quran “the Fatiha”.  This time the caption was, “Sheikh Abdur Rahman’s dark vituperation and Maulvi Muhammad Ali Sahib”.  In this connection, my only fault is that I referred to a printed decision of the High Court, which contained serious allegations against Mian Sahib by his former follower.  In my Friday sermon, I said that in the times of Hazrat Mirza Sahib, Qadian enjoyed reputation for the righteous and piety, but now it is known all over the world for something else.  Mian Sahib has given vent to great fury.  The deplorable aspect of the whole matter is that Mian Sahib is at pains to prove that even during the times of Hazrat Sahib, the reputation of Qadian did not arise from piety and purity and that even in those days also, enemies apart, the followers (God Forbid) levelled charges against Hazrat Sahib similar to those now levelled against Mian Sahib. 

Not content with this, he goes on further.  He holds that even the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) had to face similar dark allegations from his disciples. 

This is Mian Sahib’s peculiar technique of self-exoneration.  He scandalizes the righteous in self-defence.  I have no doubt that there are evil-minded people who fling allegations without rhyme or reason.  But one may ascertain from the old Ahmadies and non-Ahmadies whether or not it is a fact that the people who came to Qadian, used to first contact the enemies to gather knowledge about Hazrat Mirza Sahib before taking the oath of fealty.  The visitors always found that even the enemies both, Muslims and Hindus, were convinced of the piety and righteousness of Hazrat Sahib, despite their hostility on grounds of creedal differences.  Even the enemies did not assail the character of Hazrat Sahib.  Thus the question of a follower finding fault with his character did not arise at all as it is in the case of Mian Sahib.  It pains me to learn that Mian Sahib repudiates these irrefutable facts.  He is now consoling his followers in the distant parts of the world, by telling them that even during Hazrat Sahib’s time, people harbored doubts and suspicions against the character of Hazrat sahib, as his own (Mian Sahib’s) enemies and followers do about him.  Mian Sahib may spin a long yarn in his sermons.  He may indulge in verbal jugglery to camouflage facts.  But no historian can deny two evident events.  The first is that there is a world of difference between Qadian of 40 years ago and the Qadian of today.  Qadian, 40 years ago was the Qadian which Sir Muhammad Iqbal regarded as a specimen as it then was a synonym for piety and righteousness.  But today its character is such as even friends shed tears and keep quiet.  It is because it has fallen into the abyss of degradation and ill fame.  This has spread to the nook and corner of the world. 

Mian Sahib hurled a threat at me under the caption of “Maulvi Muhammad Ali and his family”, and declared that he could take revenge by scandalizing me and that he would do it.  My submission in this connection is that if scandal-mongering against me and my family can confer exoneration on him, he is perfectly welcome to do so.  He may use this recipe.  He may abuse me in any manner he likes.  But for God’s sake, he should desist from embroiling the Promised Messiah.  In his sermon, Mian Sahib says, “The allegations which Misri Sahib is levelling against me, are the same which some men of his (Hazrat Sahib’s Community used to level against the Promised Messiah”. 

What a heinous scandal!  This dark lie has been hurled in a Friday Sermon from a pulpit, just to cast a veil on his own failings.  There are statements made in the courts.  Let alone Misri sahib! Here in his (Mian sahib’s) case there is a long line of followers beginning from Maulvi Abdul Karim of Mubahila who levelled allegations against his character.  If there is even a grain of truth in what Mian Sahib says about the Promised Messiah, he should arise and publish a poster or statement in which any follower of Hazrat Sahib levelled such a charge as has been levelled against him. I have abstained from repeating these allegations.  But I now quote them as Mian Sahib himself has published them in Al-Fazl and which hold the Promised Messiah as a target of impious allegations:

“The present Khalifah is licentious.  Under the guise of holiness, he is a womanizer.  He has employed some men and women as agents for this purpose.  Through them, he entraps the innocent boys and girls.  He has set up a society which compromises men and women.  They indulge in adultery.”

Mian sahib may beguile and satisfy his followers in any manner he likes best.  But there is not an iota of truth in the dark lie that some members of the Lahore section of Ahmadiyya Movement ever levelled any such allegation against the Promised Messiah.  If Mian sahib has any proof in support of his stunt, he may boldly come out into the open. 

The Promised Messiah is in a class by himself.  Mian Sahib has presumed that, God forbid, all the righteous people have been accused of low moral character.  This is why he has not spared even the holy person of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) and has declared that even he was the victim of such dark accusations by his disciples.  In this strain he says:

“Perhaps they think that we alone are being abused and we alone are the people who are subjected to such vituperations, whereas, the fact is that, the scandal mongers set afloat such things against Jesus Christ and they were his followers.  They propagated scandals against the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) and they were his followers.  Thus eminent personalities had to face such allegations from their followers.  This being the case, neither my community nor I, nor for the matter of that anyone else can escape such accusations.”

The question of Prophet Moses and Prophet Jesus apart.  We have before our eyes all the events in the life of the Holy Prophet in the historical perspective.  Is there any Muslim who levelled such charges against the Holy Prophet as have been levelled against Mian Sahib?  That the Holy Prophet’s sacred person was above and beyond calumny is an irrefutable fact and the enemies were challenged thus:

“I have indeed lived among you a life-time before this.  Will you not understand? (10:17)

It meant that even the enemies could not find fault with him.  Is it at all thinkable that the Muslims could or would do it? I ask: Did his (The holy prophet’s) followers (as vainly asserted by Mian Sahib) regard him (the Holy Prophet), God forbid, as of objectional character, as the followers of Mian Sahib regard him by levelling accusations against him?  We there any devoted disciple, who said about him that he is a woman chaser?  Does this technique confer any exoneration on Mian Sahib?  If this technique is tenable to them every evil-doer and a criminal can advance this plea in his defence. 

 

Mian sahib had to take recourse to this erratic course, because he had abandoned the right course.  He has consoled himself with the idea that a guilty person can claim exoneration by accusing another man.  He may or may not admit.  But it is a fact that such charges were levelled against him as simply aspersions on Qadian and the Promised Messiah.  If I had been in Mian Sahib’s place I would have met Maulvi Abdul Karim’s (of Mubahila) challenge by immediately denying on oath the charge, not for my own sake but for the sake of Qadian and the Promised Messiah.  This was the straight course for exoneration which Mian Sahib did not adopt.  Misri Sahib made a demand which was rather difficult. But in view of the disgrace that the rejection of his demand has brought in its wake, it is much easier to accept it and set up an independent Commission to investigate the matter.  After all the followers of Mian Sahib were bound to be the members of this commission.  Nobody could assert that they would give an adverse verdict against their religious leader without rigorously sifting the evidence.  On the contrary their verdict would have been the same as is evident from their professions that even if they were to see Mian Sahib behaving in an objectionable manner they would belie their eyes.  The adoption of this formal technique would have settled the whole affair within the four walls of Qadian.  This would have saved the community the disgrace it is suffering at the moment.

Mian sahib’s assertion that the authors of the accusations, are not his followers because they differ with him on the question of Khilafat, is wrong.  In the first instance this dissension on khilafat, arose because they detected serious drawbacks in the person of the Khalifa himself.  There was no such dissension before this discovery.  Moreover, Mian Sahib had solemnly declared that no one could take Ba’it even if one did not see eye to eye with him in certain matters.  This being his declared formula that even such people may be regarded as his followers, as call the people Muslims, whereas Mian Sahib regards them as Kafirs.  Even such people also are his followers who impute kufr to people whom Mian Sahib regards as Muslims. 

As for the accusers they had been his followers for years together and were very close to him.  After all it is the duty of Mian sahib to explain why they have levelled against him such charges as one does not ordinarily level against one’s enemies. 

I regret to say that I had to waste my time on this vexed issue.  I am perfectly conscious of the fact that the Muslims are dissipating their energies in undoing each other on very petty issues.  This is why their resistance against their genuine enemies is growing weak.  I have always striven to see that my Jamaat should be devoted single-minded to countering the activities of the enemies of Islam.  If Mian Sahib had restricted his vituperations against my person only I would have kept my peace.  But as he tried to defend his person by assailing the holy person of the Holy Prophet, I had no other alternative but to take up pen in defence of the Holy Prophet.  I do not claim to sinlessness.  I am a weak human being and pray for the mercy of God. 

Lahore
December 8, 1938                                                     Muhammad Ali