There is a humor I see in this issue which I'd like to share with you. I
hope you do not mind my dear friend. I hope you find it as humorous. A
lucrative question to ask is: How is it possible that the Promised of the
Ahmadi Movement [i.e. the Messiah Who is scheduled to appear before the
"end of the world"], to have appeared prior to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself?
Do you see the hypothetical humor in that :-)?
In fact Mirza Ghulam Ahmad offers a rather convincing argument about this
issue. In the book "Cheshmeh-i Ma'rifat" [The Wellspring of Knowledge] he
writes:
"Among the particular requirements of a true claimant [i.e of being the
Messiah. KH] is that he must be made manifest prior to everyone else. For
example consider the time of our Prophet (PBUH) [i.e. Prophet Muhammad
(Peace be Upon Him) KH] was raised. At that time there was no sign of
false claimants. However, when his light illumined the earth Masilamih
the Liar, and Aswad-i 'Unsi and Ibn-i Si'ad and other false prophets
appeared in order that God's support for the truth becomes apparent. At
the time of the appearance of the true Prophet spirituality spreads like
rain from the sky and the majority of peoples will experience true visions
and receive inspiration. For this reason some of the false prophets go
beyond the bounds of propriety and advance claims of prophethood."
A rather lucrative argument don't you agree? I wonder if I need to present
the date for the publication of this work? :-) In any case, my goal is not
to present things out of context. I am fully cognizant of the fact that
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad offers the appearance of "twin eclipses" as another
condition for the truth of one's claim. The point one must contemplate on
is: What happens if the other sign (i.e. the one Hadith of the double eclipse,
upon which the Ahmadi claim stands) was misunderstood by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?!
What happens if the the Day of Resurrection was indeed destined to be the
Day of the appearance of Messiah?! What happens if the Returned Maseeh was
indeed to have claimed "ana rabbokom" [meaning: I am your Lord] Prophet
Muhammad was very clear about this when He said:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established (1) till two
big groups fight each other whereupon there will be a great number of
casualties on both sides and they will be following one and the same
religious doctrine, (2) till about thirty Dajjals (liars) [i.e. anti-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
christs, false-prophets. KH] appear, and each one of them will claim
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
that he is Allah's Apostle,...."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sahih Bukhari 9:237
Please note how claim of "Apostleship" is tied to false claimants. On the
other Hand Prophet of God identifies the Returned Maseeh with the title
"Rabb" or "Lord":
Narrated Ibn Umar:
We were talking about Hajjat-ul-Wada, while the Prophet was amongst us. We
did not know what Hajjat-ul-Wada' signified. The Prophet praised Allah and
then mentioned Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal [The term Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal represent
Christ's Anti, or Anti-Christ. KH] and described him extensively, saying,
"Allah did not send any prophet but that prophet warned his nation of
Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal. Noah and the prophets following him warned (their
people) of him. He [i.e. Al-Masih. KH] will appear amongst you (Of
^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Muhammad's followers), and if it happens that some of his qualities may
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
be hidden from you, but your Lord's State is clear to you and not hidden
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
from you. The Prophet said it thrice. Verily, your Lord is not blind in
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
one eye, while he (i.e. Ad-Dajjal) is blind in the right eye which looks
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
like a grape bulging out (of its cluster)...."
Sahih Bukhari 5:685
Please note the blasphemous sign of "Returned Maseeh"="Lord" advocated by
Prophet Muhammad. Once again I'd like to remind you that neither The Bab,
nor Baha'u'llah identified Themselves with such terms as "Nabi" [prophet]
or "Rasool" [apostle]. They instead adopted the term "Manifestation of the
Cause of God" or in short "Manifestation of God".
My dear friend, I realize that such claim is unacceptable to you and I am
not advocating for a moment that you should give up your belief to embrace
Baha'u'llah. I hope we can agree to disagree and move on.
NM>I also re-collect
NM>hearing from soneone that the Holy Prophet Muhammad in an hadith
NM>also said that he was a Messiah too.
Baha'is fully submits to this with a minor modification: He was "THE
Messiah" of the Christian Dispensation with same authority as Jesus to
reveal, confirm and abrogate the laws of Injeel.
NM>Incidently, I would like to know what Bahai theology says in this regard?
NM>Is there a more general concept of Messiah in Bahai theology?
In my humble opinion if you re-examine all the materials posted to this
newsgroup, regarding this issue, you will see that your question has been
addressed far more than once. I attempted to capture the gist of it in
this article. As it was mentioned above: The Day of Resurrection has
already passed.
NM>Ahmadi Muslims claim that the Promised Messiah and Mahdi are the same -
NM>this is somewhat different from what is written above. (According to
NM>one hadith ".. there is no Mahdi except Jesus".)
I very much respect the Ahmadi opinion on this issue. We must move on to
other issues.
KH> The following quote is even more interesting in its implications! In
KH> the book of Azalat-ul O'aham page 278, Hazrat Ghulam Ahmad writes:
QUOTE> "These days which is the time of the appearance of the Promised
QUOTE> Messiah, no one except this servant (i.e. Hazrat Ghulam Ahmad is
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> referring to himself. KH) has advanced a claim to be the Promised
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> Messiah."
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^
KH> I do not need to say how wrong this claim was.
KH> In the book of "Khutbat'ul-Ilhamiah" p. 126 Hazrat Ghulam Ahmad writes:
QUOTE> "Say, who has claimed to be the Promised Messiah except myself?"
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
KH> NOTE: The claims of The Bab in 1844 and Baha'u'llah in 1863 were advanced
KH> prior to that of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. This is a matter of history.
KH> In the book of "Shahadat'ul-Qur'an" page 65 Hazrat Ghulam Ahmad writes:
QUOTE> "Now we have to see how many people have claimed to be the Promised
QUOTE> Messiah? If we consider for the sake of example that ten people have,
QUOTE> among Muslims, advanced such a claim from among them one must be for
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> sure true in his claim of Messiahnicship. Why? Because the signs of
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> the appearance of the Promised Messiah have appeared in Syria, Iraq,
QUOTE> Egypt, etc.... Only one person has since claimed to be the Promised
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> Messiah (i.e. He is referring to himself. KH) then he is the Promised
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
QUOTE> Messiah. If his claim of Messiahnicship is proven false it will be
QUOTE> ^^^^^^^
QUOTE> necessary for all the prophecies about the appearance of Messiah also
QUOTE> be false, since all signs have appeared. Thus, we must say either
QUOTE> Ghulam Ahmad is the Promised Messiah or that all the signs offered
QUOTE> in various Ahadith must be false."
KH> What does this mean when you have other claims preceding that of Mirza
KH> Ghulam Ahmad?
KH> Once again, it is noteworthy that The Bab advanced His claim of being the
KH> Mahdi in 1844 AD, and Baha'u'llah proclaimed to be the appearance of the
KH> Father Who had come to glorify the Son (Jesus) in 1863 AD. Both of these
KH> proclamations caused much emotional response throughout the Muslim world.
KH> Hazrat Ghulam Ahmad's logic must of necessity apply to both The Bab and
KH> Baha'u'llah considering the fact that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad publicized his
KH> claims around 1890 AD (i.e. 46 years after The Bab and 27 years after
KH> Baha'u'llah).
NM>The simple answer is that Hazrat Ahmad was referring to the sign of the
NM>appearence of Promised Messiah i.e. the eclipses of the sun and the
NM>moon in the month of Ramadhan in 1894, as mentioned in Dar-ul-Qutani.
Just one Hadith nullifies all the other references in various Holy Texts!?
Regardless of this, let us agree to disagree and move on.
NM>Hazrat Ahmad set down some conditions which the true claimant must
NM>fulfill; these included that the claimant should have claimed to be the
NM>Promised Mahdi/Messiah before the eclipses (this avoids obvious
NM>retrospective justification), and also that the claimant should be
NM>alive at the time of the eclipses (to avoid retrospective justification
NM>by his future followers). It is true that no one alive at the time,
NM>except he alone, all over the world claimed to be the Promised Messiah
NM>and/or the Mahdi on the basis of the appearance of these heavenly signs.
This is fine. Let us agree to disagree and move on my friend.
NM>(Also note that in the above quotes, Hazrat Ahmad is referring to
NM>cliamants to the Promised Messiah, so the Bab does not come in to the
NM>context here.)
Once again, unlike the Ahmadi beliefs, the Baha'i theology, similar to the
Muslim theology separates between Mahdi and Isaa. The Bab claimed to be the
awaited Mahdi and Baha'u'llah claimed to be the Return of Isaa bin Maryam.
This issue has been discussed in great details. Let us agree to disagree
and move on.
Part I of II