2017 04 The Light April 2017

ْ م ِ اہللِ‏ الرَّْحم ٰ 

سب 

ِ ی م الرَّحم 

ن 

ِ 

The Light 

International Organ of the Centre for the Worldwide 

Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam 

2017 

April 

April 

2016 

The only Islamic organisation upholding the finality of prophethood. 

Webcasting on the world’s first real-time Islamic service at 

www.virtualmosque.co.uk 

This issue is dedicated to the memory of P.C Keith Lambert, who died so that we may live. 

Editors 

Shahid Aziz & Mustaq Ali – UK; 

Zainib Ahmad – USA; Gowsia Selim - India 

Contents 

The Call of the Messiah 2 

Islamophobia, Real or Contrived 3 

By Mr Ebrahim Mohamed 

What is Enlightenment in Islam? 5 

By Muqtedar Khan 

World Interfaith Harmony Week 10 

By HRH Prince Ghazi 

bin Muhammad 

Broadcasts (UK time) 

1. Skype Urdu lecture: Sunday 09:00 

2. Live on www.virtualmosque.co.uk 

‣ Friday Sermon 13:00 

‣ First Sunday of month lecture 15:00. 

3. Radio Radio Virtual Mosque 

Websites 

1. International HQ 

2. Research and History 

3. The Woking Mosque and Mission 

4. The Berlin Mosque and Mission 

5. Quran search 

6. Blog 

Our Recent English Broadcasts 

‣ Charity in Islam Mr Nasir Ahmad discusses 

the concept of charity in Islam and 

points out that it is not only a religious, but 

also a social obligation of every Muslim. 

‣ Equal Opportunities for all Mankind. 

Mr Mustaq Ali discusses chapter 107 of the 

Holy Quran to show that there is no discrimination 

on any basis in providing citizens 

with opportunities in education or employment. 

‣ Spiritual Advancement Through Good 

Deeds. Mr Talha Adnan discusses spiritual 

advancement in Islam. He explains that, in 

Islam, doing good to others is a very important 

part of seeking closeness to Allah. 

‣ The Jinn in Islam Dr Jawad Ahmad looks 

at the concept of the Jinn and explains the correct 

interpretation from the Quranic precepts. 

Interesting external links 

‣ In the US, a Muslim soldier is refused a 

gun! 

‣ Following Orders and what Stanley 

Morgan did. 

‣ Which is the Zero Eco-foot Print Parliament? 

‣ Women at the Top - Rather a Lack of 

Them 

‣ King David's clothes discovered. 

I Shall Love All Mankind.

April 2017 The 

Light 2 

The Innocent Made Immortal 

on 22 nd March 2017 

Keith 

Lambert Kurt Cochran Aysha Frade 

And Leslie Rhodes 

The Call of the Messiah 

by 

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam 

Ahmad, 

The Promised Messiah and 

Mahdi 

Different states of mind in five daily 

prayers 

What are the five daily prayer services? 

They are pictures of your different states of 

mind during the course of the day. You experienced 

five conditions at a time of trial and your 

nature demands that you must pass through 

them. 

The first of these is when you are warned 

that you are about to be afflicted with a calamity. 

For instance, imagine that a warrant has 

been issued for your presence in court. This is 

the first condition which disturbs your serenity 

and contentment. This condition resembles the 

time when the sun begins to decline, as on the 

receipt of the court warrant. Corresponding to 

this condition, the noon prayer (Zuhr) has been 

prescribed, the time of which begins with the 

decline of the sun. 

You experience the second condition when 

you are drawn close to the place of the calamity. 

For instance, when having been taken into custody 

under the warrant you are presented before 

the magistrate. At that time, you are in terror 

and the light of security seems as if it is 

about to depart from you. This condition resembles 

the time when the light of the sun diminishes 

and the human eye can fix itself upon the 

sun and it becomes obvious that the time of its 

setting is near. Corresponding to this spiritual 

I Shall Love All Mankind. 

condition the afternoon prayer (`Asr) service 

has been prescribed. 

The third condition sets in when you lose all 

hope of deliverance from the calamity. For instance, 

when, after the recording of the prosecution 

evidence, which is designed to bring 

about your ruin, you are charged with an offence 

and a charge-sheet is prepared. At this 

time, you almost lose your senses and you begin 

to think of yourself as a prisoner. That condition 

resembles the time when the sun sets and hope 

of daylight comes to an end. The sunset prayer 

service (Maghrib) is prescribed in relation to 

this spiritual condition. 

The fourth condition is when you are afflicted 

by the calamity and its deep darkness envelops 

you completely. For instance, when, after 

the close of the evidence you are convicted and 

sentenced and are committed to the custody of 

the police. This condition resembles the time of 

night-fall, when everything falls into deep darkness. 

The evening prayer service (`Isha) is prescribed 

in conformity with this spiritual condition. 

When you have spent a certain time in the 

darkness of the affliction, Divine mercy surges 

up and delivers you from the darkness, as the 

dawn succeeds the darkness of the night and 

daylight begins to appear. The dawn prayer service 

(Fajr) is prescribed corresponding to this 

spiritual condition. Allah, Most High, in view of 

your five changing states of mind has prescribed 

five prayer services for you. You can thus understand 

that these services have been prescribed 

for the benefit of your soul. If you desire 

security against these calamities, you should not 

neglect the five daily services as they are a reflection 

of your inner and spiritual conditions. 

Prayer is a remedy for the calamities that may 

threaten. You know not what type of circumstances 

the new day may confront you with. So, 

before the beginning of the day, entreat your Divine 

Master earnestly that the day may prove to 

be a source of benefit and blessing for you. 

(Kishti-i Nuh — Noah’s Ark, continued) 

If you desire security against these calamities, 

you should not neglect the five daily 

services as they reflect your inner and 

spiritual conditions.



Islamophobia, Real or 

Contrived? 

Real Threat to World Peace. 

Compiled by Ebrahim Mohamed, South Africa 

Islam offers Peace and Justice – Not 

Fear! 

The very name ‘Islam’ means Peace! Muslims 

who do not live up to this lofty ideal, like 

the minority terror groups, do not represent 

Islam. Any unbiased seeker of truth will tell you 

that true governance, according to the rule 

Book of Islam, the Holy Quran, is based on 

equality, justice and high moral standards. Such 

was the example set by the Holy Prophet 

Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Holy 

Quran testifies to this fact: “Certainly, you have 

in the Messenger of God (i.e. Muhammad) an excellent 

exemplar” (33:21). 

Many renowned academics, clerics and 

statesmen from different faiths who studied the 

life of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace and 

the blessings of God be upon him) as an historical 

figure, have come to some fascinating conclusions. 

Here are some examples to reflect 

upon: 

George Bernard Shaw, well-known Irish 

dramatist and Nobel Prize recipient for Literature 

said: 

“I have studied him (Muhammad) - the 

wonderful man . . . He was by far the most 

remarkable man that ever set foot on this 

earth. He preached a religion, founded a 

The very name ‘Islam’ 

means Peace! Muslims 

who do not live up to 

this lofty ideal, like the 

minority terror groups, 

do not represent Islam. 

state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, 

initiated numerous social and political reforms, 

established a powerful and dynamic 

society to practice and represent his teachings 

and completely revolutionized the 

worlds of human thought and behaviour for 

all times to come. 


I have always held the religion of Muhammad 

in high estimation because of its wonderful 

vitality. 

It is the only 

GBS - ‘he 

religion which 

(Muhammad) 

must 

appears to me 

to possess that 

be called a 

assimilating 

Saviour of 

capacity to the 

Humanity.’ 

changing 

phase of existence 

which 

can make itself appeal to every age. I have 

studied him – the wonderful man and in my 

opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he 

must be called a Saviour of Humanity. 

I believe that if a man like him were to assume 

the dictatorship of the modern world 

he would succeed in solving its problem in 

a way that would bring much needed peace 

and happiness. I have prophesied about the 

faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable 

to the Europe of tomorrow as it is 

beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of 

today.” 

The Rev. Bosworth Smith, carefully studied 

the life of Prophet Muhammad, and in his 

book, Mohammad and Mohammadism, published 

in 1874, writes: 

“Head of the State as well as the Church, he 

was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was 

Pope without the Pope’s pretensions, and 

Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without 

a standing army, without a bodyguard, 

without a police force, without a fixed revenue. 

If ever a man had the right to say that 

he ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, 

for he had all the powers without 

their supports. He cared not for the dressings 

of power. The simplicity of his private 

life was in keeping with his public life.” 

Annie Besant, a prominent British 

women’s rights activist, writer and spokesperson 

for the National Secular Society, wrote in 

her book, The Life and Teachings of Muhammad 

(1932), p.4:



“It is impossible for anyone who studies the 

life and character of the great Prophet of 

Arabia, who knew how he taught and how 

he lived, to feel anything but reverence for 

that mighty 

Boswoth Smith - If 

ever a man had the 

right to say that he 

Prophet, one of 

the great messengers 

of the 

ruled by a right divine, 

Supreme. And 

it was Muham- 

mad, 

although in what 

I put to you I 

shall say many 

things which may be familiar to many, yet I 

myself feel, whenever I reread them, a new 

way of admiration, a new sense of reverence 

for that mighty Arabian teacher.” 

Mahatma Gandhi, the pre-eminent leader 

of the Indian Independence Movement in British-ruled 

India, and the person to whom modern 

day non-violence movements trace their 

roots (like that of Dr Martin Luther King Jr.’s 

civil rights movement), after studying the life of 

Prophet Muhammad wrote: 

“I became more than ever convinced that it 

was not the sword that won a place for Islam 

in those days in the scheme of life. It 

was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement 

of the prophet, the scrupulous regard 

for his pledges, his intense devotion to 

his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his 

fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and 

his own mission. These, and not the sword, 

carried everything before them and surmounted 

every trouble.” 

Alphonso La Martine, famous French historian, 

wrote in his, Histoire de la Turqe, 1854, 

Vol 2: 

“If greatness of purpose, smallness of 

means and astounding results, are three criteria 

of human genius, who would dare to 

compare any great man in modern history 

with Muhammad?” 

Dr Michael Hart, an American, scientist by 

profession, more recently, studied important 

historical figures and ranked the top 100 most 

influential persons in history. He published his 

rankings in a book titled: The 100 and number 


one on his list was the “Prophet Muhammad”. 

He writes: 

“He [Muhammad] was the only man in history 

who was supremely successful on both 

the secular and religious level . . . It is this 

unparalleled combination of the secular 

and religious influence which I feel entitles 

Muhammad to be considered to be the most 

influential single figure in human history.” 

Similarly, it was stated in the Encyclopaedia 

Britannica that the Prophet Muhammad 

was: 

“. . . that most successful of all prophets and 

religious personalities.” (11th edition, under 

‘Koran’, 1st paragraph) 

Distinguishing characteristic of the 

Holy Prophet Muhammad (s): 

From an orphan to a king of a great empire, 

the Holy Prophet Muhammad passed through 

all phases of life so that he was able to provide 

a model for people in many different roles. 

If he had not been a labourer, he could not 

have revealed the value and integrity in working 

with one’s own hands and earning an honest 

living. 

If he had not in his youth organized grassroots 

campaigns to 

serve the poor and it was not the 

protect the weaker sword that won 

members of society, a place for Islam 

he could not have - Gandhi 

been an inspiration 

for socially conscious community organizers. 

If he had not married, he would have left 

people unguided in practically half of their daily 

interactions, and could not have shown how to 

be a kind and affectionate spouse and a loving 

parent. 

If he had not been the head of an armed 

force, he could not have served as an example 

for a responsible general or an accountable 

commander-in-chief in the fight for justice. 

If he had not formed rules and regulations



for his community, he could not have been regarded 

as an example for a conscientious legislator. 

If he had not been in the position to decide 

disputes among people, he could not have 

served as a model for an impartial judge or effective 

mediator. 

If he had not had life-long friends, he could 

not have shown the beauty in true and trusted 

companionship. 

And if he had not been persecuted by tyrants, 

and then overcome his persecuting enemies, 

and forgiven them without enforcing any 

punishment against them, he could not have 

practically illustrated the lessons on compassion, 

mercy and forgiveness that are contained 

in all revealed scriptures. 

According to the Holy Quran Muhammad 

was raised as a ‘mercy’ for all the worlds – not 

as a threat to peace to be feared by anyone. 

Finally, Thomas Carlyle, famous Scottish 

philosopher, writer and historian, considered 

one of the most important social commentators 

of his time, who produced the famed work On 

Heroes, Hero-Worship and the Heroic in History, 

after studying the life of Prophet Muhammad, 

concedes: 

The lies (from western critics), which wellmeaning 

zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) 

are disgraceful to ourselves only. (emphasis 

is mine) 

We strongly condemn all acts of violence 

and the abuses of the rights of all humankind 

and the rest of God’s creation – we especially 

condemn, at the top of our voices, 

the ruthless killings conducted in the name 

of Religion or State! 

What is Enlightenment? 

An Islamic Perspective 

M. A Muqtedar Khan, 

University of Delaware 

(First printed in Journal of Religion & Society 

vol. 16 produced by The Kripke Center) 

Abstract 

The lies (from western critics), which 

well-meaning zeal has heaped round this 

man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves 

only. Thomas Carlyle 

This essay draws on Immanuel Kant’s concept 

of enlightenment as an escape from selfimposed 

ignorance and argues that a similar 

concept of enlightenment can be understood 

within the Muslim context as escape from selfimposed 

jahiliyyah 1 , which is understood as fear 

to exercise reason publicly. The article advocates 

for ijtihad 2 , is critical of Taqlid 3 , and invokes 

Islamic sources to invest confidence in 

contemporary use of reason for interpreting Islam. 

Return of Jahiliyyah 

An Enlightenment has come ب ‏ِكُمْ‏ ۖ 

to you from your Lord (Quran 6:104). 

قَدْ‏ جَٓاءَكُم بَصَ‏ ‏ٓائِرُ‏ مِن ر ََّ 

For nearly a millennium and a half, Muslims 

have understood Islam as a human condition 

that is antithetical to jahiliyyah (ignorance). 

Most historical and religious accounts of Islam 

begin with a discussion of the state of ignorance 

in Arabia and often use it as a benchmark to underscore 

the civilizing influence of Islam on the 

barbaric Arabs of pre-Islamic Arabia. The great 

Islamic civilization that was produced with the 

explosion of knowledge in the fields of philosophy, 

science, sociology, medicine, and mathematics 

still remains a central influence on Islamic 

identity and an example of the indubitable 

truth of Islam and its transformative potential. 

In the same vein, the rationality of Islamic 

beliefs and Islamic socio-political order remains 

a major theme in the discourses of Islamic 

intellectuals, scholars, and preachers. The 

point I seek to make is simple: Muslims have always 

understood Islam as enlightenment, the 

path that rescued humanity from ignorance, irrationality, 

and superstitions and catapulted 

1 Jahaliya – Arabic term used for the period in Arabia 

before the advent of the Holy Prophet Muhammad 

(s) meaning days of ignorance. 


2 Ijtihad – Use of reason. 

3 Taqlid – Blindly following the religious decrees 

of religious authorities.



human society towards the apex of civilization, 

towards the realization of a perfect community 

based on divine principles. 

The present Ummah 4 can hardly be described 

as a perfect community or as one that is 

organized around divine principles. It clearly 

lacks enlightenment. This is not to deny the 

presence of many enlightened individuals and 

even movements, but the overall condition of 

the global Muslim community can hardly be described 

as worthy of emulation. Indeed, modern 

revivalist thinkers of Islam are conceptualizing 

the present age as an age of jahiliyyah. Here ignorance 

is defined as the absence of Islam as the 

central fountain from which society derives its 

organizational principles. In order to understand 

the fundamental causes behind this state 

of decay, we need to understand what enlightenment 

is and how it relates to the vigour of societies. 

We need to learn to recognize the conditions 

that indicate the presence or absence of 

enlightenment in society and to elaborate, for 

popular consumption, why Islamization is enlightenment. 

Kant’s Conception of Enlightenment 

In order to elucidate the meaning of the 

term “enlightenment,” I wish to turn to a famous 

essay by Immanuel Kant, originally published 

in Berlinische Monatsschrift in December 

1784, “An Answer to the Question: What is 

Enlightenment?” In this essay, Kant, one of the 

great philosophers of European enlightenment, 

defines enlightenment as “Man’s emergence 

from a self-imposed immaturity.” An enlightened 

man for Kant was “one who had the courage 

to use his own understanding.” In Islamic 

terms, this means one is competent to do one’s 

own ijtihad (independent thinking). Kant was 

seeking to liberate human reason from the 

shackles of stagnant religious traditions that 

had deprived humanity of the freedom to use 

reason. He lamented the fact that, due to indolence 

and cowardice, a great proportion of humanity 

remained in a state of immaturity and 

subcontracted their thinking and faculties of 

judgment to others. For Kant, immaturity was 

the inability of an individual to rely on one’s 

own understanding. Kant argued further that 

society could come out of such a state only if 

“people had the courage and freedom to use 

reason publicly in all matters.” 

The significance of Kant’s analysis and prescriptions 

for modern Muslims is enormous. 

The present Ummah exists in a state of unparalleled 

immaturity. Not only has the capacity to 

think independently and freely nearly disappeared, 

it has become illegitimate. Attempts to 

institutionalize and democratize the spirit of 

ijtihad inspire fear among the masses and incite 

anger, resentment, and opposition from the 

Ulema. The Ulema, by generating discourses 

that have instilled a fear of reason and independent 

thought, have rendered the Islamic 

Ummah incapable of relying on its own judgment. 

The Ummah seems to know only one way 

– Taqlid (imitation). 5 The present Muslim world 

attempts to either ape the West or ape the past 

(a glorified and nebulous golden age). Sadly, we 

fail to realize that even to be good at imitation 

requires creativity and initiative. The condition 

of immaturity or jahiliyyah has become so widespread 

that the Ulema, too, have become immature, 

have ceased to rely on their own rational 

faculties, and have surrendered the cardinal 

function of “judgment/reasoning” to the scholarship 

and religious judgement of a canonized 

and sacralised privileged elite from the second 

and third centuries of Islam. True religious 

scholarship has been reduced to memorization 

and recycling of medieval opinions and methodologies. 

New scholars are appreciated as long as 

they are seen as revivers of the past, and those 

who seek to reform or institute new practices 

are immediately viewed with suspicion. We remain 

a civilization that is petrified to think, following 

those who refuse to think. In the absence 

of new, invigorating thought, widespread immaturity 

prevails. 

From Taqlid to Ijtihad 

The twentieth century has proved to be 

4 Ummah – The Muslim Community. 


5 On what is Taqlid [the blind imitation of 

madhahib], often seen as an antithetical view to 

the ijtihadi view, see Ahmed: 42-47.



more fortunate for the Ummah. More and more 

Muslims have mustered the courage to rely on 

their own reason and have sought to understand 

Islam and make it more relevant and 

meaningful to contemporary life. The impact of 

their ijtihad is unprecedented. Global movements 

for the revival of Islam have mushroomed 

and the power and vitality of Islamic 

principles and ideas have galvanized Muslims 

everywhere. Nevertheless, the shadow of immaturity 

or jahiliyyah continues to dog even the 

most vibrant of Islamic movements. It is my fear 

that we may lose the momentum that independent 

thought spawned by thinkers like Sir Syed 

Ahmed Khan and Muhammad Abduh, Fazlur 

Rahman and Malik Bennabi, Syed Nursi and Ali 

Bulac, Abdolkarim Soroush, Javed Ghamdi, and 

Tariq Ramadan and many others have provided. 

This fear stems from my perception that independent 

thinking still remains spectacular but 

episodic, revolutionary but rare. We need independent 

thinking to become routine. The followers 

of some of these great thinkers have not 

emulated their leaders’ spirit of ijtihad and 

movements that have sprung from some of their 

ideas have once again institutionalized Taqlid. 

In this discussion, I am clearly departing 

from the traditional Islamic understanding of 

the term jahiliyyah. I am referring to the refusal 

of Muslims in general to rely on their own judgment 

and reasoning as Jahiliyyah. Taqlid without 

reflection is jahiliyyah, immaturity, and lack 

of enlightenment. I would like to point out how 

the concept of jahiliyyah itself has evolved. 

From the Quran, we can glean that jahiliyyah 

means the ignorance of the all-powerful, merciful, 

and omniscient God. Ignorance in the Quran 

is defined basically as ignorance of God, God’s 

nature and attributes, and God’s expectations of 

humanity. Subsequently, in the discourses of Islamic 

scholars, the term jahiliyyah slowly 

evolved to mean ignorance of Islamic principles 

and ignorance of what it takes to be a good Muslim. 

This understanding still dominates traditional 

discourses. Recent endeavours at ijtihad 

by the pioneers of contemporary Islamic revival 

have redefined jahiliyyah as absence of Islamic 

governance. This understanding of jahiliyyah is 


largely due to the political polemics of Maulana 

Maududi (from the Indian sub-continent) and 

Syed Qutb (Egypt). Unfortunately, their followers, 

too, remain in a state of jahiliyyah, for they 

have fallen into the habit of imitating their new 

demigods and sacrificed their own capacity, 

right, and duty to think. This is clearly evident 

in the immature and often violent manner in 

which they respond to any disagreement or criticism 

of these new masters. These reactions are 

very similar to the reactions of the traditional 

Ulema and their followers to any attempt at approaching 

the Islamic heritage from a critical 

perspective. This is another manifestation that 

the Muslim Ummah exists in a state of self-imposed 

jahiliyyah. How does one escape this stifling 

and stultifying condition? How do we 

move from immaturity to enlightenment? How 

do we spark what Kant calls an age of enlightenment, 

a precursor to the enlightened society? 

An Islamic Perspective of Enlightenment 

It is important that we first understand enlightenment 

and its Islamic nature. The Quran 

describes the human being as the best of creations, 

and this claim is premised on the human 

ability to reason (95:4). 

have indeed created man in the best of molds 

(Quran 95:4) 

ٓ أَحْسَنِ‏ تَقْوِيم َّ 

We ل ‏َقَدْ‏ خَلَقْنَا ٱْلِْنسَنَ‏ ‏ِفِ‏ 

The Quran does not invite blind followers; it 

demands and exhorts us to reflect and use our 

reason to read God’s signs in nature, history, 

and text (12:109). In all its presentations, the 

Quran presents evidence and proofs and, indeed, 

demands arguments and proofs from 

those who disbelieve its message. There is no 

suggestion or expectation in the Quran that the 

human being ceases to be the best of creations 

and becomes an ape (reversing evolution!). The 

Quran does not ask believers to surrender their 

reasoning capacity, the very faculty on which it 

is relying for the cognition of God. It is reason, 

not ritual, which connects humanity with 

the divine, and this theme is the central essence 

of the Quran. Until the guardians of Islam 

and Muslims, their intellectuals, and 

their Ulema realize and emphasize this at 

every opportunity, the Muslim community 

will remain immature.



Once a man came to Umm Ayesha, the wife 

of Prophet Muhammad (s), and asked her to describe 

to him the character of the late Prophet 

of Islam (Imam Muslim). Ayesha’s reply was at 

once succinct and deeply profound. She said, 

Have you not read the Quran? The Prophet’s 

character was the embodiment of the Quran itself. 

This tradition is very well known and often 

invoked in the praise of the Prophet and to invite 

Muslims to imitate the Prophet. Unfortunately, 

very little substantive analysis of what 

Ayesha meant is available in contemporary popular 

discourses. The tradition is used to inspire 

awe in the Prophet and to generate deep respect 

for his persona, but little else. There is rarely 

any effort made at advancing the meaning of 

this equation in terms of the Prophet’s qualities 

and the Quran’s character. The Quran, besides 

other things, is also the best tafseer (exegesis) 

of itself. The Quran describes itself, as the 

bearer of the truth and most importantly as Furqan: 

Blessed تَبَارَكَ‏ ٱل ‏َذِى نَز ‏َلَ‏ ٱل ‏ْفُرْقَانَ‏ عََلَ‏ ٰ عَبْدِهِۦ لِيَكُونَ‏ لِلْعَلَمِنيَ‏ نَذِيرًا 

is He Who hath revealed unto His slave the Criterion 

(of right and wrong), that he may be a 

warner to the peoples (Quran 25.1) 

فُرْقَانً‏ ‏ًۭا وََّيُكَف ‏ِرْ‏ عَنكُمْ‏ سَيِ ‏َاتِكُ‏ ‏ْم 

يَٓأَي ‏ُهَا ٱل ‏َذِينَ‏ ءَامَنُو ٓ ا۟‏ إِن تَت ‏َقُوا۟‏ َ ٱّلل َ ‏َيَ‏ ‏ْعَل ل ‏َكُمْ‏ 

O ye who believe! if ye fear وَيَغْفِرْ‏ ل ‏َكُمْ‏ ۗ وَٱّلل َ ُ ذُو ٱل ‏ْفَضْ‏ لِ‏ ٱل ‏ْعَظِ‏ يمَِّ‏ 

Allah, He will grant you a criterion (to judge between 

right and wrong), remove from you (all) 

evil (that may afflict) you, and forgive you: for 

Allah is the Lord of grace unbounded. (Quran 

8.29) 

Furqan means “criterion for judgment” or 

“capacity to discern.” It also means to differentiate 

between the right and wrong, and between 

justice and injustice. This understanding of the 

Quran implies that the Prophet’s personality, 

which is the prototype for a Muslim, is the embodiment 

of the capacity to judge. If this is what 

Ayesha meant, then it means that to be like the 

Prophet is to have Furqan, which is to be capable 

of discernment. 

One of the enduring myths of Islamic beliefs 

is the extreme glorification of early Muslims. 

Muslim scholars, searching for authority (necessary 

in the absence of reason) to support 


their interpretations of Islam created a hierarchy 

of interpretive privilege in Islam. The veracity 

of a particular opinion depends upon the 

personality and reputation of the person with 

whom it corresponds. The Prophet is on the top 

of the pyramid, followed by his companions, 

then come the companions of the companions, 

followed by the classical scholars. While the status 

of the Prophet is indubitable, the rest of the 

pyramid weighs upon the reason of subsequent 

generations of Muslims to the point that today, 

even to disagree with a companion or with one 

of the classical scholars leads to calls for excommunication 

(takfir) and even endangers life itself. 

Islamic scholars have subtly propagated 

the myth that early Muslims are far superior in 

intellect and virtue than later Muslims no matter 

what the issue is and, therefore, contemporary 

understandings and interpretations must 

defer to past understandings and interpretations. 

Such a hierarchy cannot be derived from the 

Quran without prejudicial interpretation of 

Quranic phrases like “Are they equal, those who 

know and those who do not” (39:9). This creative 

interpretation with selective references to 

the ahadith (traditions) has created a prison 

from which Muslim thinking finds it impossible 

to escape. The opinions of early jurists, which 

even for them were contingent on time and 

place, have today become the default for divine 

law. Human opinions are treated as if they were 

the very words of God and often there is no differentiation 

between the opinions of say, Imam 

Al-Shafi, (a prominent medieval jurist) and laws 

of Allah. To challenge the eminent jurist’s opinions 

or even to subject them to a critical analysis 

is interpreted as an assault on Islam and Allah’s 

divine Shariah. This has led to an incredibly 

tragic state of things, where to think is tantamount 

to not only launching an un-Islamic project 

but an anti-Islamic one. Thinking has been 

rendered illegitimate because it necessarily 

threatens the hegemony of past opinions. 

There are many traditions of the Prophet 

wherein he has praised Muslims who would 

come later. In one such remarkable tradition, 

the Prophet describes later Muslims as his 

brothers, who are even closer to him than his



companions (Imam Muslim: CI 482). It is not really 

possible to definitively argue from the 

sources that the understanding of Islam of later 

Muslims will be inferior to that of early Muslims. 

However, Muslim eschatology argues that 

there will be general moral decay in society as 

we approach doomsday, but these arguments 

serve a debilitating purpose. Consider the paradox: 

if our objective is to revive Islamic society 

and emulate the moral excellence of early Muslims, 

then we must at least be their equals to 

replicate their efforts. Indeed, we have to be 

better than them for they improved themselves 

with the help of the Prophet and we have to do 

it without his direct personal guidance. 

The other alternative is to surrender to the 

inertia of history and let things be. Why bother 

to emulate those who are inimitable. If things 

are destined to get progressively worse as we 

approach doomsday, then why even raise the 

call for revival? It would be destined to fail. Indeed 

the general lethargy in the global Muslim 

community suggests that such a tacit condition 

has already materialized. But when some Muslims 

look at other non-Muslim societies and remark, 

like Muhammad Abduh did upon visiting 

the West, that “I see Islam without Muslims,” we 

realize that indeed for some people it is still 

possible to produce Islamic values in real life. 

The reality of this is extremely disturbing. First, 

we concede that perhaps humanity is degenerating 

and cannot aspire to equal those who lived 

centuries ago. And then we find that some people 

are able to emulate the past Islamic glory 

even without the explicit assistance of Islamic 

sources. These conditions simultaneously suggest 

that nothing is wrong with humanity itself; 

it is only Muslims who are declining. 

How, if at all, can Muslims as a community 

come out of this inertia of immaturity and inspire 

an age of enlightenment? I think that the 

route to this noble end is through a collective 

emergence from this self-imposed jahiliyyah. 

This task requires major changes in the outlook 

of Muslim intellectuals as well as Muslims in 

general. Our self-imposed immaturity does not 

stem from a complete disregard for reason; on 

the contrary, it stems from a lack of self-confidence. 

We need to encourage the use of reason, 

which we refuse to do so even when freedom is 


available to us. We also need confidence in our 

inherent capacity to understand, interpret, and 

apply Islam in our context. Our problem is not 

the lack of freedom to use reason, but the lack 

of freedom to use Islamic texts directly. We have 

to come out from the feeling of inferiority towards 

the Muslims of the past, take our destinies 

in our hands and chart our own straight 

path. 

Muslim intellectuals and scholars must stop 

acting as if they are defenders and guardians of 

Islam. This position inevitably leads to the conservativeness 

of thought. The responsibility of 

defending and safeguarding Islam is Allah’s responsibility 

and he has said so clearly. It is this 

fear that Islam will be diluted, misinterpreted, 

and distorted by contemporary Muslims who 

are inherently inferior that must be discarded. 

Muslims must stop performing God’s task of 

safeguarding his message and start performing 

the human task of understanding and acting 

upon this message. Muslim scholars and intellectuals 

need to change the psyche of the 

masses by focusing attention not on what Islam 

is but on what Muslims do. The artefact of separating 

Islam from Muslims allows Muslims to 

have the best religion with the worst followers. 

The only way to escape this is to deconstruct the 

myth of the essential Islam and argue that Islam 

is what Muslims do and shift the burden of manifesting 

Islam on to human actions and away 

from sacred, un-implemented texts. We have to 

realize that Islamic civilization, in its totality, inclusive 

of its best and its worst, is also a tafseer 

(exegesis) of the Quran. Therefore, it is not 

enough to glorify ideas confined to text. They 

are meaningless until they are realized in this 

duniya (world). 

Conclusion 

The Muslim community must be made to realize 

that our generations, the communities after 

the advent of Prophet Muhammad, the Seal 

of Prophets, are the best of all generations. 

Never has God ever trusted a people without a 

prophet. There are going to be no more new 

messengers or messages from the All-Mighty. 

We are for the first time on our own. We have 

the revelation and so did past communities. But 

they all needed Prophets to guide them.



Even the great Sahabah (companions of 

Prophet Muhammad) lived life as pagans and in 

ignorance before Prophet Muhammad came to 

them as a guide and messenger. But the present 

Muslim Ummah is the only Ummah that Allah 

has trusted to act on its own. The only difference 

is that, unlike the messages of earlier 

prophets, Allah has promised to safeguard his 

revelations to Prophet Muhammad. We have to 

live up to God’s expectations. And we cannot do 

that until we become capable of acting on our 

own judgment, until we are strong and courageous 

enough to understand and apply his message 

in our times. Maturity and enlightenment 

at one level means simply living in our times. 

We must escape the prisons of past authorities 

and past achievements and focus on our task at 

hand. Very simply, we must grow up and take 

responsibility. Be enlightened and act mature. 

To achieve this noble end, we need to encourage 

in every possible manner, the confidence that 

we are capable of understanding and realizing 

the maqasid (purpose) of Islam and foster a culture 

of tolerance for those who have the courage 

to think. 

Any grandiose project towards the development 

of democracy and pluralism, or towards 

the respect of freedom – freedom to believe and 

freedom to chart one’s own destiny – will not 

gain any foothold in the Islamic World until the 

condition of self-imposed immaturity is alleviated. 

Until individual Muslims and their intellectuals 

and scholars can dare to pass judgment 

on the present, and view their heritage from a 

critical perspective without allowing the past to 

prejudice them, until then freedom of thought 

and action – a constitutive element of Islamic 

society – will remain beyond our grasp. 

World Interfaith Harmony 

Week 

H.R.H. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad 

delivers 

H.M. King Abdullah II’s proposal at UN 

Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem Mr. President, 

I have the honour to introduce, on behalf 

of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the 29 


other co-sponsors Albania, Azerbaijan; Bahrain; 

Bangladesh; Costa Rica; the Dominican Republic; 

Egypt; El Salvador; Georgia; Guatemala; 

Guyana; Honduras; Kazakhstan; Kuwait; Liberia; 

Libya; Mauritius; Morocco; Oman; Paraguay; 

Qatar; the Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia; 

Tanzania; Tunisia; Turkey; the United Arab 

Emirates; Uruguay and Yemen, the draft resolution 

A/65/L5 entitled the ‘World Interfaith Harmony 

Week’. 

Allow me to explain in brief the reasoning 

behind this resolution which was launched by 

H.M. King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein before the 

United Nations General Assembly on September 

23 rd 2010. 

As this august assembly is well aware, our 

world is rife with religious tension and, sadly, 

mistrust, dislike and hatred. These religious 

tensions can easily erupt into communal violence. 

They also facilitate the demonizing of the 

other which in turn predisposes public opinion 

to support war against peoples of other religions. 

Thus, for example, according to the results 

of the 2008 Gallup Poll one of the largest 

international religious surveys in history 53% 

of Westerners have ‘unfavourable’ or ‘very unfavourable’ 

opinions of Muslims and 30% of 

Muslims polled worldwide hold negative views 

of Christians. 

The misuse or abuse of religions can thus be 

a cause of world strife, whereas religions should 

be a great foundation for facilitating world 

peace. The remedy for this problem can only 

come from the world’s religions themselves. Religions 

must be part of the solution, not part of 

the problem. Much good work has already been 

done towards this starting really with the Second 

Vatican Council from 1962-1965 by hundreds 

of intra-faith and interfaith groups all 

over the world and of all religions. Yet the forces 

inciting inter-religious tensions (notable among 

them being religious fundamentalisms of various 

kinds) are better organized, more experienced, 

better coordinated, more motivated and 

more ruthless. They have more stratagems, 

more institutes, more money, more power and 

garner more publicity such that they by far outweigh 

all the positive work done by the various 

interfaith initiatives. The sad proof of this is that



religious tensions are on the rise, not on the decline. 

Mr. President, Turning now to the text itself, 

allow me to explain some of its most essential 

terminology and concepts: 1) In the very title 

of the resolution and in the second operative 

paragraph and elsewhere, the word ‘harmony’ 

is used in the Chinese sense of the term. We add 

it to the term ‘tolerance’ (which we have also 

used) because ‘tolerance’ can suggest that the 

other is so negative they have to be ‘tolerated’; 

we cannot use ‘acceptance’ because it implies 

that religions accept each other’s doctrines rather 

than their right to those doctrines and this 

is not the case; we cannot use the term ‘peace’ 

alone because it suggests merely the absence of 

war, and not necessarily the absence of hatred. 

Only the Confucian concept of ‘harmony’ can 

rescue us here because it suggests not merely 

‘peace’, but also ‘beautiful and dynamic interaction 

between different elements within a 

whole’. 

2) In the third operative paragraph, there 

is mention of ‘Love of God and Love of the 

Neighbour, or Love of the Good and Love of the 

Neighbour’. Why is this religious reference necessary 

in a UN resolution? In answer to this 

question, it will be noted first that this draft resolution 

is unique because it is specifically about 

peace between religions and not about anything 

else, therefore some religious references in this 

particular case is only natural. To rigidly maintain 

the contrary would be to disregard the feelings 

of 85% of the world’s population which belongs 

to one or another faith. 

Second and more importantly perhaps we 

include these references because whilst we all 

agree that it is clearly not the business of the UN 

to engage in theology, it is nevertheless the primary 

goal of the UN to make and safeguard 

peace, and without the specific mention of God 

and of the Two Commandments of Love [see: 

Matthew 22:34-40 and Mark 12:28-31] many if 

not most devout Muslims, Christians and Jews 

will consider a secular call for an interfaith harmony 

week a feckless platitude that they cannot 

fully or sincerely support. For in the Holy Bible 

Jesus Christ (echoing the words of Deuteronomy) 

said: Man shall not live by bread alone, but 


by every word of God [Luke 4:4 and Matthew 

4:4, see also: Deuteronomy 8:2-3] and also that: 

Hallowed be Thy Name [Matthew, 6:9], and similar 

meanings are to be found in the Holy Qur’an 

wherein it is stated that no act is rewarded Save 

for seeking the Countenance of [the] Lord, the 

Most High [Al-Layl, 92:19-20] and that: Verily 

the Remembrance of God is of all things the 

greatest [from: Al-Ankabut, 29:45]. In other 

words, for many Muslims, Christians and Jews 

who together make up perhaps 55% of the 

world’s population and (I regret to say) are involved 

in most of the world’s conflicts it is necessary 

to mention the substance of their faiths. 

Otherwise, hoping to foster peace between religions 

by foisting upon them an external and 

purely secular and bureaucratic language is 

simply a house divided against itself which shall 

not stand [Matthew, 12:25]. 

Third, it will be noted that this language excludes 

no one, of any religion or of no faith at all: 

every person of goodwill, with or without faith 

can and should commit to Love of the Neighbour 

and Love of God or Love of the Neighbour 

and Love of the Good. Loving the neighbour and 

the good is after all the essence of goodwill. And 

referring to ‘the Good’ obviously does not necessarily 

imply belief in God or in a particular religion, 

even though for many believers ‘the 

Good’ is God precisely: Jesus Christ said: ‘No one 

is Good but God Alone’ [Mark, 10:18; Luke 

18:19, and Matthew 19:17], and ‘the Good’ (Al- 

Barr) is one of God’s Names in the Holy Qur’an 

[Al-Tur, 52:28]. Thus, speaking of ‘the Good’ is a 

theologically-correct but inclusive formula in so 

far as it goes that unites all humanity and leaves 

out no one. 

Fourth, there is another reason why it is 

specifically necessary to mention love of the 

neighbour: it sets an invaluable practical standard 

based upon which people can ask themselves 

and each other if their actions stem from 

love towards the neighbour or not. Indeed, as 

the Prophet Muhammad said: “None of you has 

faith [in God] until you love for your neighbour 

what you love for yourself.” [Sahih Muslim, 

Kitab al-Iman, Vol. p.67, Hadith no.45]. 

3) Also in the third operative paragraph, 

the phrase ‘on a voluntary basis’ is used because



the entire proposal must be purely voluntary. 

No place of worship should be forced to observe 

the World Interfaith Harmony Week; for whilst 

we hope to encourage interfaith harmony, the 

last thing we want is for anyone at all to feel that 

anything is being imposed on his or her faith, 

beliefs or convictions. Nevertheless, one can 

conceive of positive incentives to encourage and 

help support and monitor the implementation 

of this resolution. 

4) Finally, also in the third operative paragraph, 

the phrase ‘each according to their own 

religious traditions or convictions’ is vital because 

the different religions do not necessarily 

interpret ‘Love of God and the Neighbour’ in exactly 

the same way, and do not all want it said 

that they do. This phrase thus avoids the dangers 

of syncretism or reductionism and allows 

for religious differences within the same goal of 

working towards inter-religious peace and harmony. 

In summary, then, I very humbly ask the 

member states of the United Nations General 

Assembly to adopt the proposed draft resolution 

for the World Interfaith Harmony Week, 

noting that it excludes no individual, compromises 

no one, commits no one, forces no one, 

harms no one, costs nothing, and on the contrary, 

includes everyone, celebrates everyone, 

benefits everyone, unites everyone and has the 

potential to bring much needed Peace and Harmony 

to the entire world insha-Allah. Thankyou 

Mr. President. 

Draft Resolution A/65/L5 Sixty-fifth Session 

World Interfaith Harmony Week The General 

Assembly, Recalling its resolutions 53/243 

of 6 October 1999 on the declaration and program 

of action relating to a culture of peace; 

57/6 of November 2002 concerning the promotion 

of a culture of peace and non-violence; 

58/128 of 19 December 2003 on the promotion 

Only the Worldwide Ahmadiyya Anjumans Ishaat 

Islam based in Lahore can defend Islam and the 

honour of the Holy Prophet Muhammad. 

Join us in this struggle. 

of religious and cultural understanding, harmony 

and cooperation; 64/164 of 18 December 

2009 on the elimination of all forms of intolerance 

and discrimination based on religion or 

belief; 64/81 of 7 December 2009 on the promotion 

of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, 

understanding and cooperation for 

peace, and 64/14 of 10 November 2009 on the 

Alliance of Civilizations; Recognizing the imperative 

need for dialogue among different faiths 

and religions in enhancing mutual understanding, 

harmony and cooperation among people; 

Recalling with appreciation various global, regional 

and sub-regional initiatives on mutual 

understanding and interfaith harmony including, 

inter alia, the Tripartite Forum for Interfaith 

Cooperation for Peace, and the ‘A Common 

Word’, Recognizing that the moral imperatives 

of all religions, convictions, and beliefs call for 

peace, tolerance, and mutual understanding: 

1.Reaffirms that mutual understanding and interreligious 

dialogue constitute important dimensions 

of a culture of peace; 2. Proclaims the 

first week of February of every year the World 

Interfaith Harmony Week between all religions, 

faiths and beliefs; 3. Encourages all States to 

support, on a voluntary basis, the spread of the 

message of interfaith harmony and goodwill in 

the world’s Churches, Mosques, Synagogues, 

Temples and other places of Worship during 

that week based on Love of God and Love of the 

Neighbour, or based on Love of the Good and 

Love of the Neighbour, each according to their 

own religious traditions or convictions; 4. Requests 

the Secretary-General to keep the General 

Assembly informed of the implementation 

of the present resolution. 

Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam Lahore (UK) 

Founders of the first Islamic Mission in the UK, established 1913 as the Woking Muslim Mission. 

Dar-us-Salaam, 15 Stanley Avenue, Wembley, UK, HA0 4JQ 

Centre: 020 8903 2689 ∙ President: 01793 740670 ∙ Secretary: 07737 240777 ∙ Treasurer: 01932 348283 

E-mail: info@aaiil.uk 

Websites: www.aaiil.org/uk | www.ahmadiyya.org | www.virtualmosque.co.uk 

Donations: https://www.cafonline.org/charityprofile/aaiiluk 

I Shall Love All Mankind.

2017 04 The Light April 2017

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?