Intro
Syed Nazeer Hussain of Delhi (1805–1902), his name has many variations, it could also be Maulawi Nadhir Husain or Maulvi Nazeer Hussain of Delhi or Miyan Nadhir Husain Dehlvi and Maulavi Sayyed Nadhir Husain Dehlvi. was a leading scholar of the reformist Ahl-i Hadith movement and one of its major proponents in India. Earning the appellation shaykh al-kull (teacher of all, or the shaykh of all knowledge) for his authority among early Ahl-i Hadith scholars, he is regarded, alongside Siddiq Hasan Khan (1832–1890), as the founder of the movement and has been described as “perhaps the single most influential figure in the spread of the Ahl-i-Ḥadīth”. Among Syed Nazeer Husain’s students were Imdadullah Muhajir ,Makki, Muhammad Qasim Nanotvi and Rashid Ahmad Gangohi,[29] the founding figures of the Deobandi movement. Although Mirza Ghulam Ahmad never studied under him. Prior to pledging his allegiance to Ghulam Ahmad and becoming his foremost disciple, Hakim Nur-ud-Din had also studied under Husain. Other students of Husain included the Afghan-Indian scholar Abdullah Ghaznavi; the two major Ahl-i Hadith proponents Muhammad Husain Batalvi and Sana’ullah Amritsari, both vociferous opponents of the early Ahmadiyya movement;[33] and the Indian hadith scholar Shams-ul-Haq Azimabadi.The modernist founder of the Aligarh Movement and Muslim University Syed Ahmad Khan, also studied under Husain in the 1850s.
In Oct-1891, he had a 5-minute debate with MGA in Delhi at the famous Jamia Masjid.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
His works
Syed Nazeer Husain’s Fatwas were collected posthumously by some of his students into two large volumes called fatawa Naziriyya. Other written works by him include the following:
- Mi’yar al-haq (Criterion for Truth; Urdu)
- Waqi’at al-fatwa wa dafi’at al-balawi (Event of the Fatwa and Defence Against the Affliction; Urdu)
- Thabut al-haq al-haqeeq (Proof of the Veritable Truth; Urdu)
- Risalah fi tahli al-nisa bi al-dhahab (Treatise on the Adornment of Women with Gold; Urdu)
- Al-masa’il al-arba’a (The Four Issues; Urdu)
- Falah al-wali ba ‘itiba’ al-nabi (Felicity for the Saint in Following the Prophet; Persian)
— Risalah fi ibtal ‘amal al-mawlid (Treatise on the Erroneousness of the Practice of Mawlid; Arabic)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1857–1868
Nazeer Husain advocated political quietism and was among a large number of Muslim ulema, from both the Sunni and Shia sects, who supported British rule and rejected calls for armed jihad against it.[13][14] He was also among a number of Muslim scholars, including the muftis of Mecca, who declared British India to be dar al-Islam (abode of peace) and not Dar al-harb (abode of war).[14] During the Indian Rebellion of 1857, he resisted pressure from the mutineers to call for a jihad and instead declared in favour of British rule, viewing the Muslim-British relationship as a legal contract which could not be broken unless their religious rights were breached.[15] Despite having denied any involvement in the rebellion in its aftermath and having strongly opposed the declaration of jihad as sinful and a faithless breach of covenant,[12] Husain was widely believed to have been among a group of Delhi ulema pressured into signing a jihad fatwa.[16]
Because he was seen by the British as the only scholar of the Ahl-i Hadith who could allay the conflict between the movement and followers of the prevailing Hanafi school of thought, which often resulted in civil disturbances that the Government sought to prevent, and because he also knew English which was very rare among Indian Muslim scholars at the time, Husain’s turbulent relations with the British at Delhi had improved.[7] He was granted a letter of recommendation by the government to the British Vice Consul in Jedda when he travelled there in 1883 to perform the Hajj pilgrimage. However, he was already denounced as a Wahhabi by Indian Hanafis to the Ottoman governor of Jedda who had him arrested and imprisoned before he could present the letter. He was later released with the intervention of the British Vice Consul.[3]
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1868
He was arrested in 1868 by the British on suspicion of being the leader of the Wahhabi insurgents in Delhi and detained for six months but was eventually released without charge after it had emerged that he had not supported the rebels.[17][18] Husain consistently denied any links with the Wahhabis as well as any role in the Delhi uprising in 1857.[17]
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1870
Within a couple of years of his release from prison in 1868, Hussain, together with Siddiq Hasan Khan of Bhopal and Muhammad Husain Batalvi (c.1840–1920), two influential fellow alumni of the Madrasah-i Rahimiyah, formally founded the politico-religious organisation known as the Jamaat Ahl-i Hadith, the Party of the People of the Hadith.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1884
He read out MGA’s nikkah (marriage ceremony) with a Nusrat Jehan, who’s family was also Ahl-e-Hadith. MGA gave him Rs. 5 and a prayer mat (See Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1885
Siddiq Hassan Khan and other top Maulvi’s call MGA a Kafir and tear up the Braheen e Ahmadiyya and sent it to Qadian as such.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1891, Feb-March
MGA challenges Syed Nazeer Hussain of Delhi to a Mubahila in Amritsar, he also challenges Batalvi, Maulawi Abdul Jabbar and Maulawi Abdul Haq (see Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1891, September 29th
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s debate with Syed Nazeer Hussain of Delhi in 1891 – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
MGA reached Delhi on September 29th, 1891, and stayed at Kothi Nawab Loharu, Ballimara.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-2-1891
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s debate with Syed Nazeer Hussain of Delhi in 1891 – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
MGA and his team publish a leaflet inviting Maulawi Muhammad Nadhir Husain or Maulawi Abu Muhammad Abdul Haq to a written debate. Maulawi Muhammad Nadhir Husain was roughly 88 years old. Maulawi Abu Muhammad Abdul Haq refused to have a written debate per Ahmadi sources (See Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-6-1891
On October 6th, 1891, repeating his invitation to a debate as he published another announcement the Akhbar Khair Khah Hind Press, Delhi (see Dard). Maulawi Muhammad Nadhir Husain announced that a debate would be held with MGA on a certain date. MGA was invited to the place at the time of the meeting when his house was surrounded by hundreds of angry people who were hurling abuse upon MGA from the street. Thus, MGA didn’t show up to the debate.
Via Maulvi Sanaullah and “Tahrik-e-Mirza”
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2020/01/28/in-1884-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-that-the-quran-6109-4828-and-932-was-also-revealed-to-him/
“Because Maulvi Sayyed Mian Nadheer Hussain, who is the chief of the Ahl Al Hadith, has published an edict against me that I am a disbeliever and an apostate as I believe that Isa ibn Maryam (peace be upon him) is dead. Because of his fatwa people are afflicted with serious doubts and were left confused. However, it’s you who has forsaken the beliefs with regards to the life of Isa. You have forsaken the teachings of the Qur’an and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad.
Firstly he claimed to be from Ahl al-Hadith and went on to declare his fellow Muslim brothers, the Hanafis, to be innovators and accused the revered Imam Abu Hanifah (RA) of not receiving many of the Prophetic Hadith and that he remained incognizant about the Prophetic hadith for most of the time. Now despite Mian Nadheer’s claim to follow the Qur’an and the hadith, he believes with conviction that Isa ibn Maryam is still alive. This is the height of perplexity. If anyone from among the people, who is ignorant or a layman, would make such a claim against what Allah has said and what the Prophet said, it would not be much of a big deal. But these people who continue to teach the Qur’an and Hadith, day in and out, if they make such baseless claims, then it saddens me that this is their knowledge, their service of the Qur’an and hadith. It cannot be hidden from anyone that the Qur’an and the Prophetic hadiths have been resonantly
proclaiming that in reality Hazrat Masih (peace be upon him) has passed away, but those who do not fear Allah and are oblivious of the day of judgement, hold strong prejudice and put the Qur’an and Hadith to the side. May Allah Almighty have mercy on this Ummah, who have the Qur’an and Hadith to rely upon.
In the announcement of the 2nd of October 1891, this humble servant has included the name of Hazrat Maulana Abu Muhammad Abdul Haqq Ghaznawi. However, during the meetings and discussions, it became clear that the Maulana, an ascetic man, avoids gatherings where there is a fear of hypocrisy and enmity among the people. Being engaged in his work in the interpretation of the Qur’an, it seemed as if he is forced to fulfil the conditions of the announcement, for he seems like a man who wants to be left alone. He does not meet with the rulers, and because of his dervish-like nature, he feels averse to this type of meeting. But Maulvi Nadheer Hussain and his disciple Batalvi who are present in Delhi are eager to deal with such issues. Therefore, if any two of the aforementioned Maulanas are upon the stance that Isa ibn Maryam is alive and can prove it from the Quran and Sahih hadiths, then they can have a debate with me, while keeping in mind and fulfilling the conditions mentioned in the announcement of the 2nd of October 1891. If they show any negligence with the agreed terms and conditions given in the announcement of October 2nd, 1891, and delay the discussion by citing absurd and farcical excuses, then it would be considered that they have conceded and accept that Isa ibn Maryam has died.
In the discussion, the issue of the debate shall be whether it is proved through the Qur’an and authentic Prophetic hadiths that the same Messiah, the son of Maryam, who received the Gospels, is still alive in heaven and will come in the last days, or that he has actually died and someone else will come in his name from the Ummah of the Prophet Muhammad. If it is proven that the Messiah, Isa Ibn Maryam, is alive in the heavens with soul and body, then this humble person will give up his claim, or else if it’s proven otherwise that someone else is going to come from this Ummah taking up the mantle of the Messiah, Isa ibn Maryam, then this humble person will prove that he is indeed the Promised Messiah. Also if the reply to this announcement is not published within the timeframe of one week by Maulvi, then it will be considered that he is being elusive and the sincere students of knowledge are advised to look at my book ‘Izala-e-Auham’ for themselves and not to pay any attention to what these maulvis say. This book consists of sixty parts and this book is full of rivers of knowledge and authentic arguments that shall quench one’s thirst. The price of this book is three rupees.
It should be clear that the request made by Maulana Syed Nadheer Hussain asking about the proof of me being the Promised Messiah and that there should be a discussion about it in presence of the Government Authorities, is a completely biased and unfair demand. It is obvious that the proof of the Promised Messiah will be given by the means of heavenly injunctions? Who can believe in heavenly signs except the one who is the first to show a heavenly sign. It should be made clear that he does not have any belief against the sayings of Allah and His Messenger. Otherwise, a person who has any belief against the Qur’an and Hadith
cannot be considered as a Muslim. He is considered out of the fold of Islam and if he shows even a sign, it is not considered as a greatness of him, but it is called witchcraft. Therefore, Maulvi Mohammed Hussain has also admitted this in his long announcement printed in Ludhiana. In this case, it is clear that the first point that needs a discussion is the same issue (Mirza being the Promised Messiah) which according to them is against the Qur’an and the Hadith. This issue links with the death of Isa Ibn Maryam. That is because it is easy for anyone to understand that if my opponents prove the life of Isa Ibn Maryam from the Qur’an and authentic Hadith then my claim of being the Promised Messiah shall be rejected irrespective of me providing millions of signs because the Qur’an testifies against it. Therefore, the first debate that is necessary is the debate about the death or life of Isa Ibn Maryam, which must be settled because believing signs which are against the Qur’an and Hadith are not from the characteristics of a believer. However, it is the characteristic of an ignoramus who has nothing to do with the Qur’an and Hadith. So fear Allah, O scholars, and peace be upon those who follow the guidance.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-13-1891
Maulawi Muhammad Nadhir Husain seems to have published an announcement which said that his pupils, Abdul Majid and Muhammad Husain, would reply on his behalf and that MGA should address his pupils in the future (see Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-15-1891
Simulataneously, MGA agrees to debate Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali (a disciple of Nadhir Husain). The debate is scheduled to be held at MGA’s house in Delhi on 10-23-1891.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-17-1891
MGA challenged Nadhir Husain to a decisive debate. MGA suggested October 18th, 19th or 20th for the debate and offered a reward of Rs. 25 for each Quranic verse or authentic tradition quoted by his opponents which showed that Jesus (as) was still alive in the flesh in the heavens (see Dard). MGA said that at the end of this debate, he (MGA) would pray for a decisive judgment, and he believed that the wrath of God would overtake Nadhir Husain within one year on account of his transgression in misleading the people (see Tadhkirah, and The Announcement of October 17, 1891, Majmu‘ah Ishtiharat, vol. 1, p. 249). Per Ahmadiyya sources, Nadhir Husain agreed to the debate to be held on October 20th in the Juma‘ Masjid, Delhi (See Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-20-1891
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s debate with Syed Nazeer Hussain of Delhi in 1891 – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
Per Ahmadiyya sources, more than 5,000 people gathered on that day in the Mosque. The
European Superintendent of the city police was himself present there with an Inspector and a police force adequate for the occasion. There was great agitation in the city. Feelings ran high and there was great tension. The 12 disciples of MGA gathered round him. Ch. Sher Muhammad, uncle to Maulawi Sher Ali, was left at the house with another friend. The 12 disciples of MGA accompanied him to the cathedral Mosque in horsedriven carriages, and there the party walked through the angry crowd straight to the mihrab and took their
seats. A little later Nadhir Husain also arrived with Muhammad Husain Batalvi and Abdul Majid.
They were seated in the adjoining veranda. It was the time of ‘Asr, all Muslims in the mosque prayed together. MGA and his disciples had did not join the prayers. Nadhir Husain declared that MGA was a Kafir, thus, a debate with him was invalid, MGA was a Kafir since he claimed prophethood and denied miracles. MGA and his team immediately denied their claim to prophethood and claimed that they believed in miracles (both lies). MGA even claimed that he believed in the Miraaj, however, he had just recently denied it in Izala Auham. MGA even had a British official make the announcement a second time. There was an uproar. The British official ordered all Muslims to leave the mosque. MGA and his group of 12 Ahmadi’s were the only ones allowed to stay. MGA and his disciples exited the mosque via the north gate, however, the carriage and driver that they had rented was gone. The superintendant of the local police also showed up. A mob scene erupted. MGA’s disciples found another carriage for hire, they escaped via British escort, Maulvi Abdul Karim traveled with MGA in the carriage and a few others, all the others walked, they were Sayyid Amir Ali Shah, Ghulam Qadir Fasih,
Muhammad Khan of Kapurthala, Hakim Fadl Din of Bhera, Pir Sirajul Haq, and six others (see Dard).
Contents of this written debate were published by the Ahmadiyya Movement in 1905 from Qadian under the name of Al-Haq Mubahathah Dehli (1891). The debate itself was held on October 20, 1891, in the Jami‘a Masjid, Delhi and barely lasted a few minutes, the British police immediately forced the crowd to disperse and moved MGA to safety (See Hidden Treasures).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-21-1891 and 10-22-1891
MGA wrote three letters to Maulawi Muhammad Bashir on October 21st, 22nd and 23rd
and the following points were further laid down: The debate should begin after the Friday prayers in MGA’s house. (2) Maulawi Muhammad Bashir would write the first paper. (3) Maulawi Muhammad Bashir would bring only 10 men with him. (4) Maulawi Muhammad Husain Batalvi and Maulawi Abdul Majid would not be allowed to take part. (5) Not more than five papers would be exchanged. It should be noted that it was not agreed that the papers would be written in the meeting (See Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-23-1891
On October 23rd, 1891, MGA had another announcement published wherein he desperately tried to explain himself for what happened at the Jama Masjid, Delhi and the lack of a proper debate, which was printed at the Iftikhar Press, Delhi. A detailed report of everything that happened was published in a supplement to the Punjab Gazette, dated November 14th (see Dard). On the same day, MGA had another debate with Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali, who was another disciple of Nadhir Husain on a Friday (see Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-28-1891
MGA abruptly leaves the debate. MGA breaks his own contract, which is a serious crime per the Quran. Only 3 arguments had been put forward by Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali and no response had been given by MGA and his team. MGA flees to Patiala wherein his father-in-law was ill, however, Mir Nasir Nawab hadn’t accepted Ahmadiyya yet. Patiala was 157 miles to the west, about halfway home towards Qadian (see Dard).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________10-30-1891
On roughly this day, MGA arrives with his team in Patiala at the house of Sh. Fadl Karim (see Dard). Per Ahmadiyya sources, a local imam, Muhammad Ishaq, came to see MGA and had a talk with him on the subject of the death of Jesus.The imam destroyed MGA and spread the news in the town with the comment that MGA had been defeated. In defense, MGA issue a leaflet on October 31st in which he asked the imam to have a debate with him. He waited there till November 2nd, but the mullah did not come forward. Then MGA returned to Qadian.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________11-3-1891
MGA returns to Qadian safe and sound.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________12-27-1891
The first annual Jalsa in Ahmadiyya history is held at Qadian, MGA and his team had already pre-written out “Nishan Asmani” which is read out to the less than 100 Ahmadi’s who are present. In this book, MGA talks about Batalvi and Nazeer Hussain. MGA calls him Miyan Nadhir Husain (See Asmani Faisalah, page-1, online english edition). MGA mentions Miyan Nadhir Husain 22 times, he mentions, and Muhammad Husain Batalawi 29 times. Per Ahmadiyya sources, the book itself was published in the early part of 1892, by May at the latest (see Hidden Treasures).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1892–June
MGA and his team publish “Nishan Asmani”, Mian Nadhir Hussain is mentioned 9 times.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1893
MGA mentions Nadhir Hussain in his book “The Truth Revealed”, “Sachai Ka Izhar”.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1898
MGA claims that he has Nadhir Hussain sign a edict of Kufr vs. his own disciple, Syed Muhammad Hussain Batalvi.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1902–April
MGA publishes “”Dafi‘ul-Bala’ Wa Mi‘yaro Ahlil-Istifa”””, English Version, “””Defence Against the Plague and a Criterion for the Elect of God”””, wherein he mentions his debate with Nadhir in 1891 as well as the fact that Nadhir was the first cleric to sign his stamp of approval of MGA’s apostacy.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1902–Sep 1st
‘Tofha Golarviyyah is published. MGA mentions Nadhir Hussain.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1902–Oct
Syed Nazeer Husain died on 13 October 1902 in Delhi. MGA is happy about this and in classic fashion backdates a fake revelation. As can be seen, this wasn’t published until 2 weeks after Nadhir Hussain died, however, 20 years later Mufti Muhammad Sadiq claims that MGA got the revelation on August 15th, 1902 (See Zikr-e-Habib), Mirza Bashir Ahmad also commented that the words of this ilham also point to the year* of his death (See Tadhkirah). The reference is to the al-Hakam, vol. 6, no. 39, October 31, 1902, p. 7–10:
[Arabic] The leading ones will be driven to their graves.
and
[Arabic] One who was in error has died a rebel.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1906-1907
In Haqiqatul Wahy, Nadhir Hussain is mentioned 11 times. MGA claims that he published a sign in the early versions of the Braheen e Ahmadiyya wherein Maulawi Nadhir Husain of Delhi would issue a verdict proclaiming me (MGA) a disbeliever, however, on closer research, the sign doesn’t seem to exist. In fact, the word Nadhir doesn’t exist in the first 4 volumes of the Braheen.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1908–Oct
Braheen e Ahmadiyya volume 5 is published, Nadhir Hussain is mentioned once.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1943
Maulvi Abdul Kareem is mentioned in the ROR of Dec-1943 in terms of Hafiz Muhammad Yusuf. In 1901, Hafiz Muhammad Yusuf had told MGA that Maulvi Abdul Kareem had put forward the absurd claim that MGA=Muhammad (saw)(astagfarullah). MGA counter argues in Malfuzat that he had been saying this the early 1880’s and via the Barahin series (1-4 only) and Muslims like Maulvi Nazir Ahmad of Delhi had praised this book. MGA alleges that Munshi Abdul Haq and Babu Muhammad (aka ilahi Bakhsh) also witnessed this. MGA also mentioned Nawab Siddiq Hassan Khan.
In the ROR of Dec-1943, the famous book (by Babu Ilahi Bakhsh, the accountant) “Asai Moosa” (1899). This is a 455 pages book which contains his correspondence with Mirza, all of his Ilham particularly about the lies of Mirza, and the failed Ilham of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani. His name is written as Munshi ilahi Bakhsh (and in the ROR of Dec-1943 as Babu Muhammad). ilahi Bakhsh accused MGA and his family of being poor people (paupers) and those who sold out for a few coins. MGA tells ilahi Bakhsh to go and look at the Punjab Chiefs, however, Mirza Ghulam Murtaza lied to Lepel Griffin therein.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essays
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Nazeer_Husain
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/07/03/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-mubahila-in-1889-with-syed-muhammad-hussain-batalvi/
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome
7 Pingback