Contact
AhmadiAnswers | Is The Belief of Isa عليه السلام Being Alive Shirk?
18268
page-template,page-template-full_width,page-template-full_width-php,page,page-id-18268,page-child,parent-pageid-18213,do-etfw,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-9.1.3,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.11.2.1,vc_responsive
 

Is The Belief of Isa عليه السلام Being Alive Shirk?

The allegation of the non Ahmadi Muslims is that Ahmadas before his prophethood and before Allah had told him about the death of Isaas, himself believed that Isaas was alive in the heavens and that later he labelled it as a great shirk. This statement of Ahmadas is extremely misunderstood by his opponents and to understand it, one needs to read all of his statements together.

 

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas has described the belief of Isaas being alive in the heavens through three different categories. The first one as shirk, the second as mabda-e-shirk and the third as munjir-ala-shirk. He used three different words in regards to this belief. This belief itself is explained through the usage of the two latter words. The usage of these words tell us that Ahmadas has not in reality declared this belief as shirk, rather whenever he uses the word shirk for this belief, this was based on mabda-e-shirk and munjir-ala-shirk. According to these words, the belief itself is not shirk, however the belief and spreading of this corrupt belief is what causes shirk to appear. Wherever he called it shirk al azeem or shirk al akbar, he is referring to this belief leading to the worst kinds of shirk. Ahmadas has said that this belief is only shirk by way of mabda-e-shirk and munjir-ala-shirk. It is a belief which leads one to shirk but is not in itself shirk and this is the true meaning of his statements of where he has called this belief shirk al azeem.

 

This concept is well known throughout language and is called majaz-e-mursil and is also used in the Holy Qur’an. For example, grape are halal in itself as a fruit and are not haram, but the juice which is made out of grapes and then prepared as a alcohol or wine it is haram. The concept of majaz-e-mursil is used in the Qur’an where Allah States:

 

وَدَخَلَ مَعَهُ السِّجْنَ فَتَيَانِ ۖ قَالَ أَحَدُهُمَا إِنِّي أَرَانِي أَعْصِرُ خَمْرًا ۖ وَقَالَ الْآخَرُ إِنِّي أَرَانِي أَحْمِلُ فَوْقَ رَأْسِي خُبْزًا تَأْكُلُ الطَّيْرُ مِنْهُ ۖ نَبِّئْنَا بِتَأْوِيلِهِ ۖ إِنَّا نَرَاكَ مِنَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ {37}

 

And with him there entered the prison two young men. One of them said, ‘I saw myself in a dream pressing wine.’ And the other said, ‘I saw myself in a dream carrying upon my head bread of which the birds are eating. Inform us of the interpretation thereof; for we see thee to be of the righteous.(Chapter 12 Verse 37)

 

The Arabic word used in this ayah is not of grapes rather of wine, despite grapes being pressed and note wine. The verse has clearly used the word خَمْرً

 

The scholars of that time said that the person was juicing the grapes and the juice becomes alcohol and that is why the word grape is mentioned as grapes are the reason or cause of alcohol although in reality it is not alcohol. This is why grapes are halal and not haram, but as a result of the grapes, the alcohol which is made is haram. It is in the same way, that Ahmadas has called the belief of Isaas being alive in the heavens a great shirk. When we read his other writings, it is made clear that by shirk he is referring to the belief being so dangerous, that it leads to shirk. The belief of Isaas being alive, due to its deficiencies creates the belief of shirk.

 

Ahmadas has himself said this and it is not something we are making up. We will now post the writings of Ahmadas himself. The first writing is from Tohfa-e-Golarhviyyah Page 99, which is in Ruhani Khazain Volume 17, while the second passage explaining this concept is from the book Ahmadi aur Ghair Ahmadi Main Kia Faraq Hai which is from Ruhani Khazain Volume 20  page 366. Both of these passages will now be attatched below and these are extremely important as they tell us what Ahmadas meant when he called this belief a great shirk as explained above.

shirk2

 

This is a belief which leads one to shirk. Ahmad(as) has further stated in Ahmadi or Ghair Ahmadi Main Kia Faraq Hay?  In regards to mabda-e-shirk:

 

shirk3

 

Ahmadas has clearly explained in which way it is shirk and it is shirk in the same way Allah has used the word wine instead of grapes in the Qur’an. The outcome of pressing grapes leads to wine, and the outcome of beliving Isaas is alive in the heavens leads to shirk. The second part of this allegation is that the anti Ahmadis ask a foolish question of whether this means the sahaba committed shirk. This itself shows pure ignorance since it was the belief of the sahaba and of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw that Isaas has died.

 

Here is a famous hadith of Bukhari, which is obviously not the saying of Muhammadsaw but an incident which took place on his death and proves the consensus of the sahaba was that all of the messengers before the Holy Prophetsaw have already died.

 

حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ بُكَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا اللَّيْثُ، عَنْ عُقَيْلٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي أَبُو سَلَمَةَ، أَنَّ عَائِشَةَ، أَخْبَرَتْهُ أَنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ أَقْبَلَ عَلَى فَرَسٍ مِنْ مَسْكَنِهِ بِالسُّنْحِ حَتَّى نَزَلَ، فَدَخَلَ الْمَسْجِدَ فَلَمْ يُكَلِّمِ النَّاسَ حَتَّى دَخَلَ عَلَى عَائِشَةَ، فَتَيَمَّمَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَهْوَ مُغَشًّى بِثَوْبِ حِبَرَةٍ، فَكَشَفَ عَنْ وَجْهِهِ ثُمَّ أَكَبَّ عَلَيْهِ فَقَبَّلَهُ وَبَكَى‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ بِأَبِي أَنْتَ وَأُمِّي، وَاللَّهِ لاَ يَجْمَعُ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ مَوْتَتَيْنِ، أَمَّا الْمَوْتَةُ الَّتِي كُتِبَتْ عَلَيْكَ فَقَدْ مُتَّهَا‏.‏ قَالَ الزُّهْرِيُّ وَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ، خَرَجَ وَعُمَرُ يُكَلِّمُ النَّاسَ فَقَالَ اجْلِسْ يَا عُمَرُ، فَأَبَى عُمَرُ أَنْ يَجْلِسَ‏.‏ فَأَقْبَلَ النَّاسُ إِلَيْهِ وَتَرَكُوا عُمَرَ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ أَمَّا بَعْدُ مَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ يَعْبُدُ مُحَمَّدًا صلى الله عليه وسلم فَإِنَّ مُحَمَّدًا قَدْ مَاتَ، وَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ يَعْبُدُ اللَّهَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ حَىٌّ لاَ يَمُوتُ، قَالَ اللَّهُ ‏{‏وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ‏}‏ إِلَى قَوْلِهِ ‏{‏الشَّاكِرِينَ‏}‏ وَقَالَ وَاللَّهِ لَكَأَنَّ النَّاسَ لَمْ يَعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَنْزَلَ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ حَتَّى تَلاَهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، فَتَلَقَّاهَا مِنْهُ النَّاسُ كُلُّهُمْ فَمَا أَسْمَعُ بَشَرًا مِنَ النَّاسِ إِلاَّ يَتْلُوهَا‏.‏ فَأَخْبَرَنِي سَعِيدُ بْنُ الْمُسَيَّبِ أَنَّ عُمَرَ قَالَ وَاللَّهِ مَا هُوَ إِلاَّ أَنْ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا بَكْرٍ تَلاَهَا فَعَقِرْتُ حَتَّى مَا تُقِلُّنِي رِجْلاَىَ، وَحَتَّى أَهْوَيْتُ إِلَى الأَرْضِ حِينَ سَمِعْتُهُ تَلاَهَا أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَدْ مَاتَ‏.‏

 

 Narrated `Aisha: Abu Bakr came from his house at As-Sunh on a horse. He dismounted and entered the Mosque, but did not speak to the people till he entered upon `Aisha and went straight to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) who was covered with Hibra cloth (i.e. a kind of Yemenite cloth). He then uncovered the Prophet’s face and bowed over him and kissed him and wept, saying, “Let my father and mother be sacrificed for you. By Allah, Allah will never cause you to die twice. As for the death which was written for you, has come upon you.”

 

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: Abu Bakr went out while `Umar bin Al-Khattab was talking to the people. Abu Bakr said, “Sit down, O `Umar!” But `Umar refused to sit down. So the people came to Abu Bakr and left `Umar. Abu Bakr said, “To proceed, if anyone amongst you used to worship Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but if (anyone of) you used to worship Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die. Allah said:–“Muhammad is no more than a messenger, and indeed messengers have passed away before him..(till the end of the Verse )……Allah will reward to those who are thankful.” (3.145) By Allah, it was as if the people never knew that Allah had revealed this Verse before till Abu Bakr recited it and all the people received it from him, and I heard everybody reciting it (then). Narrated Az-Zuhri: Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab told me that `Umar said, “By Allah, when I heard Abu Bakr reciting it, my legs could not support me and I fell down at the very moment of hearing him reciting it, declaring that the Prophet () had died.”(Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Hadith 733)

 

When Abu Bakrra narrated this ayah, all of the companions were relieved. Hazrat Umarra , one who who was at one point ready to kill anyone who said the ProphetSaw had died, stated:

 

“I became afraid. Both my legs began to tremble, so much so that when I heard that the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw had passed away, I fell to the ground” (Musnad Ahmad)

 

The mujadids also did not commit shirk as this belief is not shirk in itself, rather leads to shirk. This belief spread into Islam 300 years after the Prophetsaw died. Furthermore, the mujadids are forgiven for this and this only applies now as it has been made clear by Allah through his prophet. Furthermore, it was the time of Ahmadas where this belief was being used to convert even the Muslim imams into Christianity. We must understand that a Prophet only states something when Allah tells him and they act by Allah’s command. Allah States in the Qur’an:

 

لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ وَهُمْ بِأَمْرِهِ يَعْمَلُونَ {28}

 

They speak not before He speaks, and they act only by His command. (Chapter 21 verse 28)

 

The reason this belief leads to shirk is clear and Muslims themselves have accepted this. The Christians converted thousands of Muslims and would simply ask them who is better, a Prophet who has died or a Prophet who is alive in the heavens? The Muslims would have no sufficient answer to this. The Christians would often raise a question of a boat and would say that if there are two boats and one is being lead by someone who is alive, while the second by someone who is dead, which boat would you choose? These questions caused the Muslims to go astray and apostate. The Qur’an further proves that this concept leads to shirk as Allah States:

 

أَوْ يَكُونَ لَكَ بَيْتٌ مِنْ زُخْرُفٍ أَوْ تَرْقَىٰ فِي السَّمَاءِ وَلَنْ نُؤْمِنَ لِرُقِيِّكَ حَتَّىٰ تُنَزِّلَ عَلَيْنَا كِتَابًا نَقْرَؤُهُ ۗ قُلْ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي هَلْ كُنْتُ إِلَّا بَشَرًا رَسُولًا {94} وَمَا مَنَعَ النَّاسَ أَنْ يُؤْمِنُوا إِذْ جَاءَهُمُ الْهُدَىٰ إِلَّا أَنْ قَالُوا أَبَعَثَ اللَّهُ بَشَرًا رَسُولًا{95}

 

‘Or thou have a house of gold or thou ascend up into heaven; and we will not believe in thy ascension until thou send down to us a book that we can read.’ Say, ‘Holy is my Lord! I am not but a man sent as a Messenger.’And nothing has prevented men from believing when the guidance came to them save that they said, ‘Has Allah sent a man as a Messenger?’(Chapter 17 Verses 94-95)

 


This shows us that no human being can go to the heavens physically and that Allah is pure from causing such to happen. Such arguments were used by the Christians that if Isaas is in heavens he cannot be human since the Qur’an says no human physically ascends. Many Muslim imams even apostated because of the preaching of the Christians which included Abdullah Atham and Imam ud Din.

 

Now in regards to a Prophets views being corrected, this is totally normal and we see this throughout the history of the Prophets. We have many examples from the life of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw where he was corrected by Allah and made a mistake in interpretation as Ahmadas did with the belief of Isaas in his early years.

 

For example we see that the Holy Prophetsaw stated:

 

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُسْهِرٍ، وَابْنُ، فُضَيْلٍ عَنِ الْمُخْتَارِ، ح وَحَدَّثَنِي عَلِيُّ بْنُ حُجْرٍ السَّعْدِيُّ، – وَاللَّفْظُ لَهُ – حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُسْهِرٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا الْمُخْتَارُ، بْنُ فُلْفُلٍ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، قَالَ جَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ يَا خَيْرَ الْبَرِيَّةِ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ “‏ ذَاكَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ ‏”‏ ‏.‏

 

Anas b. Malik reported that a person came to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) and said:O, the best of creation; thereupon Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: He is Ibrahim (peace be upon him).(Sahih Muslim Hadith #2369 a)

 

But later stated:

 

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عُمَرَ، حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنِ ابْنِ جُدْعَانَ، عَنْ أَبِي نَضْرَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ “‏ أَنَا سَيِّدُ وَلَدِ آدَمَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَلاَ فَخْرَ وَبِيَدِي لِوَاءُ الْحَمْدِ وَلاَ فَخْرَ وَمَا مِنْ نَبِيٍّ يَوْمَئِذٍ آدَمُ فَمَنْ سِوَاهُ إِلاَّ تَحْتَ لِوَائِي وَأَنَا أَوَّلُ مَنْ تَنْشَقُّ عَنْهُ الأَرْضُ وَلاَ فَخْرَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى وَفِي الْحَدِيثِ قِصَّةٌ وَهَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ ‏.‏ وَقَدْ رُوِيَ بِهَذَا الإِسْنَادِ عَنْ أَبِي نَضْرَةَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏

 

Narrated Abu Sa’eed:that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “I am the master of the children of Adam on the Day of Judgement, and I am not boasting. The Banner of Praise will be in my hand, and I am not boasting. There will not be a Prophet on that day, not Adam nor anyone other than him, except that he will be under my banner. And I am the first one for whom the earth will be opened for, and I am not bragging.”(Jami’at Tirmidhi, Volume 1, Book 46, Hadith #3615)

 

And after the first statement, Allah also revealed to the Holy Prophetsaw that he is Khataman-nabiyyin, the seal of all the Prophets. Prior to this he had also once said:

 

حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي الأَعْمَشُ، عَنْ أَبِي وَائِلٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ “‏ مَا يَنْبَغِي لأَحَدٍ أَنْ يَقُولَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ مَتَّى ‏”‏‏.‏

 

Narrated `Abdullah:The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “None has the right to say that I am better than Jonah bin Matta.”(Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith #127)

 

This shows us that the Holy Prophetsaw did not speak about him being greater until Allah revealed it to him. This does not in any way mean he was wrong, rather all Prophets are revealed to gradually and this has also been explained in depth in the section in regards to Prophets being revealed to gradullay under “allegations on Revelations”. We see more incidents of the change of way in the Prophetsaw as well, and one of the most famous is the change of the Qibla. The Prophetsaw originally prayed towards the Qibla of the Jews and only changed it once Allah revealed it to him that it should be changed to the Holy Ka’ba. We also see mistakes in interpretation of revelation and misunderstanding of some revelations by the Holy Prophetsaw as well which is called an mistake of ijtihad. One example is of the misunderstanding of when the sahaba would do umrah with the Prophetsaw. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas states in regards to it:

 

“It cannot be doubted that the Holy Prophetsaw had untertaken this journey hoping that he would be able to perform the sacred rites at the Ka’aba and this is undoubtedly a part of the Holy Prophetsaw’s vision. But, since he had not been made aware of the error which had been committed in understanding the actual meaning of this vision, God knows after how many days arduous journey he reached Mecca. Had the Holy Prophetsaw been made aware of this enroute to Mecca, he would have definitely returned to Medina”(Izala Auham, Page 688, Ruhani Khazain Volume 3, page 473)

 

This is one clear misunderstanding of a revelation. Another example we see from the life of the Prophetsaw is one of his dreams which states:

 

حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْعَلاَءِ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو أُسَامَةَ، عَنْ بُرَيْدٍ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ أَبِي بُرْدَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي مُوسَى، أُرَاهُ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ “‏ رَأَيْتُ فِي الْمَنَامِ أَنِّي أُهَاجِرُ مِنْ مَكَّةَ إِلَى أَرْضٍ بِهَا نَخْلٌ، فَذَهَبَ وَهَلِي إِلَى أَنَّهَا الْيَمَامَةُ أَوْ هَجَرٌ، فَإِذَا هِيَ الْمَدِينَةُ يَثْرِبُ، وَرَأَيْتُ فِيهَا بَقَرًا وَاللَّهُ خَيْرٌ، فَإِذَا هُمُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ يَوْمَ أُحُدٍ، وَإِذَا الْخَيْرُ مَا جَاءَ اللَّهُ مِنَ الْخَيْرِ وَثَوَابِ الصِّدْقِ الَّذِي أَتَانَا اللَّهُ بِهِ بَعْدَ يَوْمِ بَدْرٍ ‏”‏‏.‏

 

Narrated Abu Musa:The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “I saw in a dream that I was migrating from Mecca to a land where there were date palm trees. I thought that it might be the land of Al-Yamama or Hajar, but behold, it turned out to be Yathrib (i.e. Medina). And I saw cows (being slaughtered) there, but the reward given by Allah is better (than worldly benefits). Behold, those cows proved to symbolize the believers (who were killed) on the Day (of the battle) of Uhud, and the good (which I saw in the dream) was the good and the reward and the truth which Allah bestowed upon us after the Badr battle. (or the Battle of Uhud) and that was the victory bestowed by Allah in the Battle of Khaibar and the conquest of Mecca) .(Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith #7035)

 

In the same way this was a mistake of Ahmadas which Allah corrected. In reality, from the first book of Ahmadas he was called Isa by Allah, meaning in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. The problem was that he misunderstood the revelation and thought it referred to him being like Isaas. He only announced the death of Isaas once Allah had made it clear to him.

 

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas beautifully states:

 

“These are the divine Revelations which I have already noted on the afore-mentioned pages of Baraheen-e-Ahmadiyya; which explicity as well as implicitly, connotes my humble-selfs being the Matheel-e- Maud. Albeit, it was not resolved in Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya on the basis of divine revelation as to what is the real truth regarding the advent of Hazrat Messiah Son of Maryas as people are waiting for, that he will get out of the paradise and, with his hands resting on the shoulders of the angels, he will literally descend from the heaven to the eart. Instead, whatever I have written in regarding the second coming in this world of Messiah son of Mary, it was written in light of the celebrated well-known and commonly held belief, to which the contemporary thinking of my Muslim brothers is inclined. Thus, it was only in the context of this apparent belief, that I had written that: I am only matheel-e-mauood, and my caliphate is simply a caliphate in the spiritual sense; but when the Messiah will come, he will have vicegerency that will be both explicit as well as physical. This statement, which was made in braheen-e-Ahmadiyya was in accord that a recipient of Revelation must observe the basic following of the related traditions of his Prophet. This is so, because those who are recipients of Revelations from God the exalted, they do not speak without being spoken to, and they do not comprehend without the comprehension that is provided to them, and they do not make any claim unless they are so commanded; and they, of their own accord, are not capable of taking any daring initiative. For the same reason our Holy Prophetsaw used to prefer to follow the religious faith- traditions of the People of the Book, up until he would receive a divine revelation in regard to the observance of certain acts of worship. And right from the time of receiving such a revelation and learning about the truth, he would abandon the earlier practice. Thus, in accordance with this, no discussion was undertaken in Brahin-e-Ahmadiyya, from my own point of view, about Hazrat Messiah son Of Mary. But now that God the exalted has manifested the reality of this matter to my humble self, then it become absolutely imperative to make a general proclamation of it (Izala-e-Auham, Ruhani Khazain vol 3 page 196-197)

 

And:

 

“There is no contradiction in my sayings. I only follow the revelation of God Almighty. Until I had no knowledge about it, I used to say what I said in the beginning. And when I received knowledge from Him I said against it. I am a human being and do not claim to be knower of the unseen. This is the actual matter, anyone may accept it or not. (Haqīqatul Wahī Ruhani Khazain. Vol-22, P-154)

 

There is also a different way of answering this allegation through the way of a ilzami jawab, however the truth in regards to what type of shirk this is according to Ahmadas is already mentioned. There is a hadith which states:

 

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا شَرِيكٌ، عَنْ عُمَارَةَ بْنِ الْقَعْقَاعِ، وَابْنِ، شُبْرُمَةَ عَنْ أَبِي زُرْعَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ جَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ نَبِّئْنِي بِأَحَقِّ النَّاسِ مِنِّي بِحُسْنِ الصُّحْبَةِ فَقَالَ ‏”‏ نَعَمْ وَأَبِيكَ لَتُنَبَّأَنَّ أُمُّكَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ ثُمَّ مَنْ قَالَ ‏”‏ ثُمَّ أُمُّكَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ ثُمَّ مَنْ قَالَ ‏”‏ ثُمَّ أُمُّكَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ ثُمَّ مَنْ قَالَ ‏”‏ ثُمَّ أَبُوكَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ نَبِّئْنِي يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ عَنْ مَالِي كَيْفَ أَتَصَدَّقُ فِيهِ قَالَ ‏”‏ نَعَمْ وَاللَّهِ لَتُنَبَّأَنَّ أَنْ تَصَدَّقَ وَأَنْتَ صَحِيحٌ شَحِيحٌ تَأْمُلُ الْعَيْشَ وَتَخَافُ الْفَقْرَ وَلاَ تُمْهِلْ حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغَتْ نَفْسُكَ هَاهُنَا قُلْتَ مَالِي لِفُلاَنٍ وَمَالِي لِفُلاَنٍ وَهُوَ لَهُمْ وَإِنْ كَرِهْتَ ‏”‏ ‏.‏

 

It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said:“A man came to the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: “O Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), tell me, which of the people has most right to my good companionship?’ He said: ‘Yes, by your father, you will certainly be told.’ He said: ‘Your mother,’ He said: ‘Then who?’ He said: Then your mother.’ He said: ‘Then who?’ He said: Then your mother.’ He said: ‘Then who?’ He said: Then your father.’ He said: ‘Tell me, O Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) about my wealth- how should I give in charity?’ He said: ‘Yes, by Allah (SWT) you will certainly be told. You should give in charity when you are still healthy and greedy for wealth, hoping for a long life and fearing poverty. Do not tarry until your soul reaches here and you say: “My wealth of for so-and-so,” and “My wealth of for so-and-so,” and it will be for them even though you dislike that.’”(Sunan Ibn Maja, Volume 3, Book 22, Hadith 2706)

 

In this statement it is clear that a oath was made by ones father but the Holy Prophetsaw after being told that this is shirk and told us:

 

حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ عُفَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، عَنْ يُونُسَ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، قَالَ قَالَ سَالِمٌ قَالَ ابْنُ عُمَرَ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ، يَقُولُ قَالَ لِي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏”‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَنْهَاكُمْ أَنْ تَحْلِفُوا بِآبَائِكُمْ ‏”‏‏.‏ قَالَ عُمَرُ فَوَاللَّهِ مَا حَلَفْتُ بِهَا مُنْذُ سَمِعْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ذَاكِرًا وَلاَ آثِرًا‏.‏ قَالَ مُجَاهِدٌ ‏{‏أَوْ أَثَرَةٍ مِنْ عِلْمٍ‏}‏ يَأْثُرُ عِلْمًا‏.‏ تَابَعَهُ عُقَيْلٌ وَالزُّبَيْدِيُّ وَإِسْحَاقُ الْكَلْبِيُّ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ‏.‏ وَقَالَ ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ وَمَعْمَرٌ عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ سَمِعَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم عُمَرَ‏.‏

 

Narrated Ibn `Umar:I heard `Umar saying, “Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said to me, ‘Allah forbids you to swear by your fathers.” `Umar said, “By Allah! Since I heard that from the Prophet (ﷺ) , I have not taken such an oath, neither intentionally, nor by reporting the oath of someone else.”(Sahih Buhari, Volume 8, Book 78, Hadith #642)

 

Another narration tells us:

 

وعن ابن عمر رضي الله عنهما أنه سمع رجلا يقول‏:‏ لا والكعبة، قال ابن عمر‏:‏ لا تحلف بغير الله، فإني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول‏:‏ ‏”‏من حلف بغير الله، فقد كفر أو أشرك‏”‏‏.‏‏(‏‏(‏ رواه الترمذي وقال حديث حسن‏)‏‏)‏

 

Ibn ‘Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) said:I heard a man saying: “No, by the Ka’bah.” I admonished him: “Do not swear by any thing besides Allah, for I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) saying, ‘He who swears by anyone or anything other than Allah, has indeed committed an act of Kufr or Shirk’.(Riyad as-Salihin, Book 18, Hadith #201)

 

Furthermore, it is important to understand that shirk is based off of niyyah, and if someone does something by mistake not knowing that it is shirk, it is not in reality shirk. For example, we see that after Hazrat Umarra accepted Islam, he unknowingly swore by his father. It is narrated:

 

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا لَيْثٌ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ ـ رضى الله عنهما أَنَّهُ أَدْرَكَ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ فِي رَكْبٍ وَهْوَ يَحْلِفُ بِأَبِيهِ، فَنَادَاهُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ “‏ أَلاَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَنْهَاكُمْ أَنْ تَحْلِفُوا بِآبَائِكُمْ، فَمَنْ كَانَ حَالِفًا فَلْيَحْلِفْ بِاللَّهِ، وَإِلاَّ فَلْيَصْمُتْ ‏”‏‏.‏

Narrated Ibn `Umar:

 

that he found `Umar bin Al-Khattab in a group of people and he was swearing by his father. So Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) called them, saying, “Verily! Allah forbids you to swear by your fathers. If one has to take an oath, he should swear by Allah or otherwise keep quiet.” (Sahih al Bukhari, #6108)

 

Can any sincere Muslim now claim that Hazrat Umarra became a mushrik God forbid, even after accepting Islam? Such a statement would not be acceptable. It is clear that according to Islam our deeds are judged by our intentions as the Holy Prophetsaw stated:

 

حَدَّثَنَا الْحُمَيْدِيُّ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الزُّبَيْرِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ سَعِيدٍ الأَنْصَارِيُّ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ التَّيْمِيُّ، أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ عَلْقَمَةَ بْنَ وَقَّاصٍ اللَّيْثِيَّ، يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏ “‏ إِنَّمَا الأَعْمَالُ بِالنِّيَّاتِ، وَإِنَّمَا لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مَا نَوَى، فَمَنْ كَانَتْ هِجْرَتُهُ إِلَى دُنْيَا يُصِيبُهَا أَوْ إِلَى امْرَأَةٍ يَنْكِحُهَا فَهِجْرَتُهُ إِلَى مَا هَاجَرَ إِلَيْهِ ‏”‏‏.‏

­

Narrated ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab:

 

I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying, “The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended. So whoever emigrated for worldly benefits or for a woman to marry, his emigration was for what he emigrated for.” (Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith #1)

 

It is however clear that this belief of Isaas being alive in the heavens is not shirk in itself as some people think, rather it is one that leads to shirk. If we for a moment believe it is shirk, we cannot say Ahmadas or the mujajdids for example had committed shirk, as it was unintentional. Their niyyah was always pure. Once Allah revealed to Ahmadas that Isaas has died and will not return, never did he repeat this belief again. Some sadly raise the allegation that Ahmadas has blamed the Mujadids for this view. This is absolutely false. Ahmadas himself stated:

 

” It is the height of ignorance to look toward the heavens now to see when ibn Maryam shall descend. However, the ulema before me who held that ibn Maryam shall descend from the heavens due to their faulty interpretation are blameless in the sight of God, and they should not be criticised. There was no flaw in their intentions; rather, it was a misunderstanding on account of human weakness. May God forgive them, because they were not granted knowledge. Their error in ijtihad [reasoning] was akin to the error in judgement made by Dawud [David] in the case of the ghanamul-qaum; however, his son Sulaiman [Solomon] was bestowed understanding by God [concerning the matter]. Twenty-two years ago, I recorded the revelation on the last page3 of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya :

 

ففہمناھا سلیمان

 

[So we have instructed Sulaiman in those signs.]

 

It relates to the discussion at hand. It is clear from the above-mentioned revelations cited in Barahin that people would criticise me, saying: Have you discovered  meanings of the Holy Quran and ahadith, which you now present, that were not known to our earlier scholars and elders. Allah the Exalted retorted that although such is precisely the case, there was nothing extraordinary in this. After all, the ulema of the past were not Prophets. When Dawud, who was a Prophet, erred in his judgement, God granted his son Sulaiman the ability to arrive at a just decision. So this ‘Sulaiman’, who has been appointed as the Promised Messiah, is more correct [in his judgement] than your elders in the same way that Prophet Sulaiman proved to be more correct than his father Dawud.” (Defence Against the Plague and Criterion For the Elect of God, Pages 26-27)

He also states:

In Brahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, God Almighty has named me ‘Isa, and has told me that He and His Messengersa had prophesied my advent. But as a body of Muslims was firmly of the faith—and I too believed—that Jesusas would descend from heaven, I was not inclined to construe God’s revelation literally but interpreted it differently and continued in the belief which I shared with the common Muslims and even set it forth in Brahin-e-Ahmadiyyah. Thereafter, Divine revelations descended upon me like torrential rain, affirming that I am the Promised Messiah who was to come. At the same time hundreds of signs appeared, and both heaven and earth rose to affirm my truthfulness. The bright signs of God compelled me to believe that I am the Messiah that was to come in the latter days. This was despite the fact that my earlier belief was that which I had set down in Brahin-e-Ahmadiyyah. Not relying entirely upon the revelation that was vouchsafed to me, I sought adjudication from the Holy Qur’an and I was convinced by several conclusive verses that Jesus son of Maryas had indeed died, and that the last Khalifah would appear from among the Muslims under the title of the Promised Messiah. As there is no darkness left after the dawn of day, in the same way, hundreds of signs, heavenly testimonies, several conclusive verses of the Holy Qur’an, and a number of clear and categorical Ahadith compelled me to believe that I am the Promised Messiah. I had no desire for such a thing and it was enough for me that God should be pleased with me. I led a life of seclusion and no one was aware of my existence, nor did I desire that people should recognize me, but it was God Who pulled me out of my solitude. I had wished to live and die in seclusion, but He decreed that He would make me known with honour throughout the world. If you want to know, then ask God why He did so. I have no say in the matter.

Similarly, in the beginning I believed that I bore no resemblance to the Messiah, Son of Maryas. He was a Prophet and one of the distinguished men of God. Therefore, whenever something in my revelation appeared to exalt me above him, I interpreted it as partial exaltation. But in due course, Divine revelation, which descended upon me like plentiful rain, did not permit me to continue in this belief and the title of ‘Prophet’ was clearly bestowed upon me, albeit with the proviso that I was a Prophet in one aspect, and follower of a Prophet in another. The instances of Divine revelation that I have cited in this book also reveal what God Almighty says concerning me vis-à-vis Jesus son of Maryas. How can I reject the continuous revelations that I have received in the course of twenty-three years? I believe in those holy revelations as I believe in all the Divine

Revelations that have preceded me. I also understand that Jesus son of Maryas was the last Khalifah of Mosesas and I am the last Khalifah of the Prophetsa, who is the Best of Messengers. Therefore, God willed that, compared to Jesusas, I should not be deficient in any respect. I do realize that these words of mine will not be welcome to those whose love for Jesus borders on worship. However, I pay no heed to them. How can I reject the Divine command and revert to darkness from the light that has been granted to me. In short, I am not guilty of any contradiction. I only follow that which is revealed to me by Almighty God. Until I was enlightened by Him, I continued to assert what I had said in the beginning. But when God bestowed knowledge upon me, I said to the contrary. I am a human being and do not claim to know that which is hidden. This is the fact, whether anyone accepts it or not. I do not know why God did so, but I know this much that God’s jealousy is deeply aroused in heaven against the Christians. They have reviled the Holy Prophetsa in a manner which would well-nigh rend the heavens asunder. In this manner, God reveals that the lowly servants of that Messengersa are more exalted than the Israelite Messiah son of Mary. He who is provoked and angered by these words may die in his anger but God has done as He willed and He always does what He wills. What power does a man have to object as to why God did so? (Haqiqatul-Wahi, Ruhani Khazain, Volume 22, Pages 153-155)

This entire allegation is in fact answered in the same passage the non Ahmadi Muslims quote. Ahmadas has clearly stated on page 94 in Dhameema Haqiqatul Wahi, al-Istafta’a which has the Arabic and Urdu translation, just under ten lines from what he quotes, that Ahmadas clearly states that many made this mistake of the belief of Isaas being alive, however everyone who has made this mistake after researching, is completely forgiven. Anyone who belives in Isaas being alive, without knowing the evidence is also forgiven.The previous Muslims of 300 years after Islam, and even Muslims of today who truly do their research are included in this. Heas says except those whom the Imam has brought clear proofs to and cleared these misconceptions that they had. This is because he is the just arbitrater. This shows that this allegation cannot even apply to him, as this title is his alone an he makes it clear only those are not forgiven whom the just arbitrater has himself answered or given evidence to.