Intro
Our brother, @IslaamWins recently came on a live stream with Bro Imtiaz and thoroughly/surgically explains what is ilzaami jawaab and how the Qadiani’s don’t use it.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

An ilzaami jawaab is like a rhetorical question. It is a response that involves wit and sometimes reverse psychology, in order to turn the tables and to demand consistency. We will look at a couple of examples from the Qur-aan, in shaa Allaah:

  1.   Ibraaheem AS wittily said: the big idol destroyed the others. Here, Ibraaheem employed THEIR beliefs against them. He did not subscribe to those views himself and the idolators knew that.

Another example is the claim of the kaafirs that say Muhammad SAS produced the qur-aan himself. So Allaah responds by saying to them: you bring something better than this or the same as this, if you believe a human could really do it. Meaning, if Muhammad PBUH was able to produce this miraculous book, then let’s see you guys produce something better or the same like it! They cannot, therefore proving that they lied in accusing Muhammad SAS of having invented the Qur-aan.

(It is said that Imaam Abu Haneefa gave atheists a similar reply when he explained to them that he had traveled to the debate on a boat that not only built itself from a tree that appeared from nothing, but also sailed itself to him and guided him to the debate without any rowing or sailor.)

 

  1.   Allaah said: do you (Jews) envy (and abuse Muhammad & the sahaabah), for the same things that Allaah blessed the family of Ibraaheem with…(the family you claim to belong to)?

The Jews ask about the punishment of the adulterer. But Allaah revealed to them the same ruling as he revealed again in the Qur- aan. Why do Jews take issue with only the Qur-aan, with regards to this issue?

 

In point 2, the accuser and the accused share similarity, where the accuser is being pulled up on their hypocrisy/inconsistency. We are not insulting them or their beliefs because in this regard we have similarity. Rather, we are exposing their hypocrisy and their disloyalty to their scriptures and their own history. To bring the analogy closer to the topic and connect to no. 2 above, it is a well known ilzaami jawaab to say to Christians that they are hypocrites if they attack prophet Muhammad SAS for multiple wives. That they already believe in polygyny for Ibraaheem, Daawuud and Sulaymaan.

 

Let’s now come to Ghulaam. It is not an ilzaami jawaab if you insult unbelievers and simultaneously throw your own scripture or prophet under the bus, in order to make this insult. Unless you are not a Muslim of course, and that’s the point. He did abuse normative Islamic beliefs because he didn’t believe in them himself, or he was a complete jaahil in regards to these beliefs. Why else would you attack your own beliefs in order to insult Christians? This is something Christians often do, in favour of liberal arguments against Islaam which apply much more against Christianity. And we often have to tell them that they are not Christians but that they are secular liberals or closeted atheists.

 

In a very similar vein, if a Shiite abused Abu Bakr Ra because they know we love him, then we should not return the insult by abusing Ali Ra (whom they claim to love) because we too love Ali Ra even more than them! As Imtiyaaz Bai said, this is not an ilzaami jawaab at all. If we criticize the false prophet Ghulaam, then should Ghulaamists respond with insults against prophet Muhammad SAS or Eesaa AS? The fact is that this is actually what ghulaamists literally do.

 

And this is what Ghulaam did. He abused the Christians by abusing prophet Eesaa AS and his mother, in a matter that we already believe in, as part of our own religion. Her miracle pregnancy, that she was not to blame for her slander, that Eesaa AS miraculously spoke as a baby and will speak miraculously in middle age at the end of time, and that Eesaa AS hadn’t married yet. You cannot degrade a prophet of Allaah and his mother on the very same belief that we Muslims hold and say this will be a good slap to the Christians. This is not how an ilzaami jawaab works. And in this is the open secret. That Ghulaam is not a Muslim and he doesn’t subscribe to these beliefs revealed in the Qur-aan. He considers such verses in the Qur-aan to be Christian ideas and that is why he attacked these things. To say it is an ilzaami jawaab, is shameless dishonesty and unconvincing sophistry of Ghulaamist apologists. And whoever attacks the prophets or ridicules explicit statements of Allaah about them, the way Ghulaam did, then they are unbelievers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________1908
Chashma-e-Ma‘rifat, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 23, page 389

26:28 time stamp

“””..it is obvious that how much respect and reverence Muslims have for Hazrat Eisa (as) and him as God’s beloved messenger and chosen one, but when a bigoted priest does not stop disrespecting the Prophet Muhammad (saw), and if his foul language goes beyond the limit, only then a Muslim, who has been hurt by the priest’s words, gives a reply that the priest finds harsh, it is an accusatory answer, but still their method (of answering) does not go beyond the boundaries of respect, rather (Muslims) still keeps good intentions in his heart. Because in Islam, disrespecting a prophet is disbelief, and it is obligatory to believe in all the prophets. So Muslims face great difficulties because they have loved ones on both sides, but it is better to be patient with the ignorant ones. It is because it is severe disobedience to even hint an insult to any prophet and it is the cause of divine wrath…”

Scans


______________________________________________________________________________________________
Majmua Ishtiharat, Vol. 3, Page 544, 1989 edition

“”Some ignorant Muslims say some harsh words against Prophet Jesus (as), when responding to the foul language of a Christian against Prophet Muhammad (saw)…”.

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Malfuzat, Vol.  , pages 335-336

“””…It remains clear that sometimes harsh words are used when replying to the Christians, so it is quite clear that when our feelings are hurt and all kinds of unjustified attacks are made on our Prophet (Saw), only for the sake of warning, ilzami jawab (accusative answer), from their authentic books, which are binding on them, are given. These people should point out anything that we have written as an accusative answer about Hazrat Eisa (as) and that is not found in the Gospel….””” 

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Malfuzat Vol. 6, page 282, 1984 edition

“….But when having argumentation with the Christians, they are not content until Jesus (as) is called God or son of God. Therefore, what their book contains has to be shown to them, in order to defeat this great disbelief (that Jesus is God)…”””

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 1903, Malfuzat, Vol. 3, page 289

“”…in a discussion, there is nothing for the Christians, except humiliation and regret. Before attacking others, clean your own house! If they object over Moses (as) killing a man, then that incident is before the revelation of the Torah. But what happened to the Messiah that he was getting an oil massage from a prostitute, and while Gospel was being revealed to him..”

Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Malfuzat, Vol. 9, page 479, 1984 edition

“””…When we are deeply hurt and unjustified attacks of all kinds are made on our Holy Prophet (Saw), only then, as a warning, we retaliate in kind on the basis of their (Christians) own authentic books….they aught to poiunt out in my writings anything which I have written as a retaliatory response and it is not found in the gospels…after all, it is not possible for me that on hearing the insult of the Holy Prophet (saw), I remain silent..”””

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1923
(Mirza Bashir Ahmad, 2008, Sirat al-Mahdi, Rabwah: Nizarat-e Isha‘at, Vol. 2., p. 20)
Ilzam as dialectical refutation in Islamic thought: Aristotelian origins and the argumentum ex concessis tradition

“Dr. Mir Muhammad Isma‘il related to me that Mawlawi Nur ad-Din, the First Caliph, had this special characteristic that he could silence an objector or opponent in just one or two sentences, and he often gave ilzami responses. However, the method of MGA was that when someone raised an objection, he would always give a detailed and demonstrative (tahqiqi) response, clarifying the issue from multiple angles. His aim was not merely to silence the objector, but rather to ensure that the truth would somehow become firmly established in their mind.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s

IslaamAlwaysWins (@IslaamWins) / X (twitter.com)

MGA used Christian sources vs. Muslims! That’s not ilzami jawab! – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism