Sanaullah: Akhri Faisla Announcement was a Mubahila

Introduction

The non-Ahmadis allege that the Promised Messiah’s (AS) last announcement Akhari Faisla, regarding the Sanaullah was not a Mubahila but a one-sided prayer. Since Ahmad (AS) died before Sanaullah, his prayers were not accepted, and thus, he is a false prophet.

In this article, we will show how the Akhri Faisla announcement was a Mubahila challenge. Sanuallah himself accepts this in his multiple writings, his followers accept this, and the Promised Messiah (AS) himself agrees to it. Since it was a Mubahila, both parties had to agree to it before Allah decides the matter.

Sanaullah runs away 4 times

It is necessary to give context that before the announcement titled Akhri Faisla was written by the Promised Messiah (AS), Sanaullah had run away from the challenge of Mubahila 3 times, over the course of 11 years!¹Article: Did Sanaullah win the Mubahila against the Promised Messiah (AS)?

As soon as he ran away for the 3rd time on April 12th, 1907, on April 15th, 1907, Promised Messiah (AS) issued him the Mubahila challenge for the last time so that everyone could witness and it could serve as a concluding remark for his back and forth with Sanaullah.

Sanaullah agrees with Ahmadis

1) Sanaullah accepts that the announcement was for a Mubahila

Not only did Sanaullah run away from the Mubahila multiple times, he even understood that the Akhri Faisla (Final Verdict) announcement of the Promised Messiah (AS) was indeed a Mubahila.

The first reference is from his reply immediately after the announcement.

کرشن جی نے خاکسار کو مباہلہ کے لیے بلایا جس کا جواب اہلحدیث وار اپریل شاہ میں مفصل دیا گیا جس کا خلاصہ یہ تھا کہ میں حسب اقرار خود تمہارے کذب پر حلف اٹھانے کو تیار ہوں بشر طیکہ تم یہ بتا دو کہ اس حلف کا نتیجہ کیا ہو گا

Krishan gee has called this humble self for a Mubahila whose detailed answer is given in Ahl-e-Hadith, 19th April 1907. The summary of it is that I am ready to take an oath on you being a liar only if you tell me what will be the outcome of this oath.

My permission was not taken regarding this prayer, and it was published without my permission.

This is not acceptable to me, nor would any sensible person agree to such a challenge.

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 26 April 1907, pg 3]

The rest of these are from both, during the lifetime of the Promised Messiah (AS) and after his death. Thus, Sanaullah stayed consistent on his view.

مرزا جی نے میرے ساتھ مباہلہ کا ایک طولانی اشتہار دیا

Mirza ji published a long Mubahila challenge against me.

[Muraqqa Qadiani, December 1907, pg 3]

وہ (حضرت مسیح موعود ) اپنے اشتہار مباہلہ ۱۵ اپریل ۱۹۰۷ میں چیخ اٹھا تھا کہ اہلِ حدیث نے میری عمارت کو ہلا دیا ہے

He [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS] cried out in his Mubahila announcement of April 15, 1907 that Ahl-e-Hadith had shaken my foundation…

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 19 June 1908, pg 4]

کرشن قادیانی نے ۱۵ ا پریل ۱۹۰۷ کو میرے ساتھ مباہلہ کا اشتہار شائع کیا تھا۔

(مرقع قادیانی جون ١٩٠۸)

Krishan Qadiani published a challenge of Mubahila against me on 15th April 1907.

[Muraqqa Qadiani, June 1908, pg 18]

آج تک مرزا صاحب نے کسی مخالف سے ایسا کھلا مباہلہ نہیں کیا تھا بلکہ ہمیشہ گول مول رکھا کرتے تھے ۔

(اشتہار مرزا قادیانی کا انتقال اور اس کا نتیجہ شائع کردہ ثناء اللہ ۳۱ مئی ۱۹۰۸)

Until today, Mirza Sahib had never had such an open Mubahila with any opponent…

[Mirza Qadiani ka Inteqal or is ka nateeja, Announcement by Sanuallah, 31 May 1908]

This proves categorically that Sanaullah understood the specific announcement of Akhari Faisla as a Mubahila and not a one-sided prayer.

2) Sanaullah’s followers accept that it was a Mubahila

Not only Sanaullah, but even his followers accept that the announcement of Akhri Faisla was a challenge to Mubahila. This is written in the Seerat book of Sanaullah after his death.

تو وہ آخر کار اوچھے ہتھیاروں پر اتر آیا ۔ پہلے تو حضرت مولانا پر دشنام طرازی کر کے اپنی تہذیب و خوش خلقی کا ثبوت دیا ۔ پھر مباہلہ کا چیلنج دیا ، اور لکھا کہ جھوٹا سچے کی زندگی میں ہلاک ہو جائے گا
حضرت مولانا مرحوم نے یہ مباہلہ قبول کیا۔ جس کا یہ نتیجہ ہوا کہ مرنا قاریان ۲۶ رمئی نثار کو ڈاکٹر مرزا یعقوب بیگ آف احمد یہ بلڈ نگس لاہور کے مکان میں “ہیضہ” سے ہلاک ہو گیا اور مولانا ثناء اللہ بفضلہ تعالیٰ ان کے بعد چالیس سال تک زندہ رہے۔

Then he challenged him for a Mubahila and wrote “Liar will die within the lifetime of the truthful”.

Hazrat Maulana accepted this Mubahila challenge and the result of it was that Mirza Qadiani died of “Diarrhea”… and due to Allah’s mercy, Maulana Sanaullah lived for 40 years after his death.

[Seerat Sanai Sawanih Hayat Sanaullah Amritasri, pg 203]

Any Anti-Ahmadi who says otherwise is not only going against Sanaullah but also their other spiritual fathers who wrote and compiled his seerat.

3) Sanaullah accepts that the Mubahila is an “Akhri Faisla”

Furthermore, Sanaullah also agrees that a Mubahila is indeed a “Final verdict” between two parties. He writes this in his tafsir of the Holy Quran and quotes the Mubahila verse along with its explanation.

ایسے لوگوں کو جوکسی دلیل کو نہ جانیں کسی علمی بات کو نہ سمجھیں بغرض بد را بدر باتید رسانید کہ دے کہ آؤ ایک آخری فیصلہ بھی سنو، ہم اپنے بیٹے اور تمہارے بیٹے ، اپنی بیٹیاں اور تمہاری بیٹیاں ، اپنے بھائی بند نزدیکی اور تمہارے بھائی بند نزدیکی بلائیں۔ پھر عاجزی سے جھوٹوں پر خدا کی لعنت کریں۔ خدا خود فیصلہ دنیا میں ہی کر دے گا

(تفسیر ثنائی, جلد ا, صفحه ۲۲۲،۲۲۳)

To such people who do not know any arguments and do not understand any scholarly matter … and say come and hear a final decision. We call our sons and your sons, our daughters and your daughters and our people and your people.Then humbly curse the liars. God himself will decide within this life.

[Tafseer-e-Sanai, vol. 1, pg. 214-215]

4) Sanaullah makes the allegation that Mubahila isn’t the Sunnah of Prophets

Another interesting point that proves that Sanaullah understood the announcement of Akhri Faisla was a Mubahila because, in his reply to the announcement, he challenges the Ahmadis to prove that other prophets have done Mubahila challenges to his enemies. He said that the Prophets can curse (Bad’dua) against their enemies but not send challenges of Mubahila.

مرزائو! کسی نبی نے بھی اس طرح اپنے مخالفوں کو اس طریق فیصلہ کے لئے بلایا ہے؟ بتلاؤ تو انعام لو

Mirzao! Has any prophet called his opponents to a judgment in this way? Come tell me and get the reward!

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 26 April 1907]

This is because Sanaullah believed that prophets can do one-sided prayers (Bad’dua) against their enemies, but they never challenged anyone for prayer duels.

اس قسم کے واقعات بیشمار ھتے ہیں جن میں حضرات انبیاء علیہم السلام نے مخالفوں پر بد دعائیں کیں

(روئداد مباحثہ لدھیانہ)

There are many such incidents in which the Prophets (peace be upon them) sent curses (Bad’dua) to their opponents.

[Rawaidad Mubahisa Ludhiana, pg 67]

This proves that Sanaullah agreed that Promised Messiah (AS) was challenging him for Mubahila which is why he asked Ahmadis to prove if any other prophet has done the same in the past.

Promised Messiah (AS) understood the announcement as a Mubahila

Now one may ask that even if Sanaullah understood the announcement of Akhari Faisla as a Mubahila, it does not mean that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) also thought the same. To even answer this weak attempt of the Anti-Ahmadis, we will show his own writings below.

1) The announcement was a Mubahila

Firstly, the title of the announcement proves that it was a Mubahila. It says, “Maulvi Sanaullah ke sath Akhri Faisla” or “Final verdict WITH Maluvi Sanaullah“. It does not say “Final verdict FOR Maulvi Sanaullah”. This is because a Mubahila is a consensual two-sided prayer as explained below.

Secondly, the announcement starts with the words: بخدمت مولوی ثناء اللہ (To Maulvi Sanaullah Sahib). If it was supposed to be a one-sided prayer, there was no need to specifically refer to Sanaullah or to send it to him at all.

2) Mubahila is an Akhri Faisla

The Promised Messiah (AS) labels Mubahila as an “Akhri Faisla” (Final verdict) just like Sanuallah does in his tafsir quoted above. He does this during his challenge of Mubahila to Muhammad Hussain Battalvi. So Akhari Faisla is indeed a Mubahila.

اب یہ اشتہار ۲۱ نومبر ۱۸۹۸ء آخری فیصلہ ہے۔ چاہیے کہ ہر ایک طالب صادق صبر سے انتظار کرے۔

Now this announcement dated 21 Novemeber 1898, is a final verdict. Every yearner of truth must now wait.

[Ruhani Khazain, vol. 14, pg. 166]

Furthermore, Promised Messiah (AS) explains that Mubahila is the final method of reaching a decision as per the Quran. This is exactly what Sanaullah explains in his tafsir as quoted above.

کیونکہ جب کسی طرح جھگڑا فیصلہ نہ ہو سکے تو آخری طریق خدا کا فیصلہ ہے جس کو مباہلہ کہتے

Because when the dispute cannot be decided somehow, the last method is the decision of God, which is called Mubahila.

[Majmua-e-Ishtaharat, vol. 2, pg 447]w

3) Mubahila is a consensual two-sided prayer

He further explains that Mubahila prayer is never one-sided and it requires consent from both parties.

میں نے تو بٹالوی صاحب کے سمجھانے کے لئے یہ بھی لکھ دیا تھا کہ مباہلہ میں صرف ایک طرف سے بددعا نہیں ہوتی بلکہ دونوں طرف سے بددعا ہوتی ہے

In order to explain to Battalvi sahib, I even wrote that in a Mubahila, prayer isn’t only done from one side but it is done from both.

[Ruhani Khazain, vol. 14, pg. 173-174]

This is why when Promised Messiah (AS) publishes the Akhri Faisla announcement, Sanaullah replies by saying that he does not accept the prayer. It is a common process in any Mubahila.

My permission was not taken regarding this prayer, and it was published without my permission.

This is not acceptable to me, nor would any sensible person agree to such a challenge.

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 26 April 1907, pg 5]

4) Mubahila is a prayer

Similarly, Promised Messiah (AS) even explains that a Mubahila is just a prayer. Akhri Faisla also had the same prayer.

لیکن ۲۱ نومبر ۱۸۹۸ء کا ہمارا اشتہار جو مباہلہ کے رنگ میں شیخ محمد حسین اور اُس کے دو ہمراز رفیقوں کے مقابل پر نکلا ہے وہ صرف ایک دعا ہے

But the announcement of 21 November 1898 which was sent as a challenge of Mubahila to Sheikh Muhammad Hussain is only a prayer (Dua).

[Ruhani Khazain, vol. 14, pg. 174]

Every Mubahila is a prayer where one invokes Allah as explained in the Holy Quran. Whoever does not know this is ignorant.

Now whoso disputes with thee concerning him, after what has come to thee of knowledge, say to him, ‘Come, let us call our sons and your sons, and our women and your women, and our people and your people; then let us pray fervently and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie.’

[Quran 3:61]

What if it was a prayer?

Now imagine that even after the plethora of proofs listed above and after showing how Sanaullah ran away from the Mubahila 4 times, someone still insists on being blind and ignorant and claims that the announcement was a prayer. It was not a Mubahila. Even then it does not help the Anti-Ahmadis.

Not all the prayers of a prophet have to be accepted for them to be considered truthful. If this is what they think, then according to them, Prophet (SAW) himself was not a prophet either. God forbid!

I asked my Lord three things and He has granted me two but has withheld one. I begged my Lord that my Ummah should not be destroyed because of famine and He granted me this. And I begged my Lord that my Ummah should not be destroyed by drowning (by deluge) and He granted me this. And I begged my Lord that there should be no bloodshed among the people of my Ummah, but He did not grant it.

[Sahih Muslim 2890a]

I sought permission to beg forgiveness for my mother, but He did not grant it to me. I sought permission from Him to visit her grave, and He granted it (permission) to me.

[Sahih Muslim 976a]

Refuting Anti-Ahmadis

1) Verdict is in the Hands of God?

One of the allegations of Anti-Ahmadis is that the announcement was not a Mubahila since Promised Messiah (AS) wrote this at the end:

In the end I request Maulvi Sanaullah to publish this article in his journal and he may write whatever he wishes underneath it. Now the verdict is in God’s Hands.”

[Majmua-e-Ishtaharat, vol. 3, pg 446-448]

They claim that since he asked Sanaullah to write anything under this announcement, that means it is not a challenge but a prayer for the destruction of Sanaullah.

Refutation

This is already explained above that the purpose of writing this statement was for Sanaullah to either accept the Mubahila or reject it. That is what it means to write anything underneath the announcement. Since Promised Messiah (AS) received excuses from Sanaullah for 11 years, this was his (as) last invitation to show the world that he (as) had indeed sent the challenge. Now it was up to Sanaullah to accept or reject.

What did Sanaullah do after receiving this? He wrote:

کرشن جی نے خاکسار کو مباہلہ کے لیے بلایا جس کا جواب اہلحدیث وار اپریل شاہ میں مفصل دیا گیا جس کا خلاصہ یہ تھا کہ میں حسب اقرار خود تمہارے کذب پر حلف اٹھانے کو تیار ہوں بشر طیکہ تم یہ بتا دو کہ اس حلف کا نتیجہ کیا ہو گا

Krishan gee has called this humble self for a Mubahila whose detailed answer is given in Ahl-e-Hadith, 19th April 1907. The summary of it is that I am ready to take an oath on you being a liar only if you tell me what will be the outcome of this oath.

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 26 April 1907, pg 3]

My permission was not taken regarding this prayer, and it was published without my permission.

This is not acceptable to me, nor would any sensible person agree to such a challenge.

[Ahl-e-Hadith, 26 April 1907, pg 5]

He accepts it was a Mubahila and then proceeds to reject the invitation. Thus, the Mubahila never began. This was him running away for the 4th time from the Promised Messiah (AS) in the past 11 years!

2) Liars die before the truthful?

Anti-Ahmadis claim that liars die before the truthful and that the Promised Messiah (AS) himself agreed to it.

Refutation

This is a clear lie. Promised Messiah (AS) does not say this anywhere at all and neither this rule is true.

Firstly, Musaylimah was a false prophet and outlived the Prophet Muhammad (SAW). This is clear kufr. Even Sanaullah disagrees with these Anti-Ahmadis.

The Holy Prophet, in spite of being a true prophet, died before Musaylimah Kazzab.

[Muraqqa Qadiani, April 1907]

Secondly, the Promised Messiah (AS) refutes this allegation within his own lifetime.

Where is it written that the liar dies in the lifetime of the truthful persson? I have not written this in any of my publications. Bring it before me. In which book have I written this?

What I have written is that the liar in a Mubahila dies within the lifetime of the righteous person. Musaylimah Kazzab never participated in a Mubahila. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) had merely said the following: “Even if you live after my demise, you will be killed.” So that is what transpired. Musaylimah Kazzab was murdered shortly thereafter, and Prophet Muhammad’s prophecy was fulfilled. It is incorrect to assert that the liar dies within the life of the righteous person. It is absolutely incorrect to make such an assertion. Did all of Prophet Muhammad’s enemies die within hislifetime? The fact is that thousands of his enemies survived him. Yes, a liar in a Mubahila dies within the lifetime of the truthful person. Similarly, my enemies shall remain alive after my demise. It is required that the opposition should stay until the Day of Judgment as is evident from the following Quranic verse: And make those who follow thee above those who disbelieve to the day of Resurrection.²Quran 3:55

I am amazed when I hear such things. Just look at how my statements are distorted before presentation. The art of distortion has been perfected to the point where even the Jews have been outdone. Has it ever happened in the life of any prophet, saint or spiritually-elevated person that all their enemies died during their lives? Rather, unbelievers and hypocrites remained alive afte rtheir demise. Yes, this much is true that if a liar engages in a Mubahilawith a righteous person, then he shall die within the life of the righteous person. Such has been the fate of those who have entered into a Mubahilawith us.

I feel sorry for such members of my community. Do they not have the simple intelligence to ask the objector as to where have I written that the liars perish and die within the lifetime of the truthful ones without entering into a Mubahila? They should demand to see where such a thing has been written. Our community needs to improve in every aspect of their knowledge and understanding. Members should be able to respond to such objections by exercising their own mental faculties, and use their spiritual insight to solve such issues. But worldly pursuit stifles common sense to the point where they cannot ask the objector forthe citation of the book where I have written that the liars die in the life- time of the truthful person. In fact, liars will exist till Judgment Day.

[Al-Hakam, October 10, 1907]

3) Al Badr said it is not Mubahila

Anti-Ahmadis also quote Al-Badr newspaper where it is mentioned that the announcement of Akhri Faisla was not a Mubahila.

Refutation

Firstly, the non-Ahmadis won’t show you that the newspaper is quoting the letter of an Ahmadi named Ghulam Muhammad³Al Badr, August 22, 1907. It is not the words of the Promised Messiah (AS), nor Sanaullah. They both agreed that the announcement was a Mubahila.

Secondly, they might ask why did Al Badr even publish the letter if it had misleading content? It is because the newspaper also published letters from enemies like Abdul Hakeem, Sanaullah e.t.c and we don’t agree with what they say.

Thirdly, it is also possible that Mufti Muhammad Sadiq (editor of Al-Badr) misunderstood like Ghulam Muhammad (author of the letter). This is also fine and does not change the fact that the author of the announcement and the one receiving it i.e Promised Messiah (AS) and Sanaullah both agreed that it was a Mubahila.

Summary

We have proven multiple things.

1. Sanaullah ran from the Mubahila 4 times.
2. Sanaullah accepts Akhri Faisla (Last Verdict) announcement was a Mubahila.
   • Not once but at least 5 times!
3. Sanaullah accepts that Mubahila is the last decision in the court of Allah.
4. Promised Messiah (AS) explains that Mubahila is the last decision as well.
5. Promised Messiah (AS) agrees that Mubahila is a two-sided prayer. Not one-sided.
6. Even if it was a prayer, it still does not help the Anti-Ahmadis prove anything.
7. Promised Messiah (AS) death was not unexpected.⁴Prophecies of his death
   • He had already published numerous revelations which hinted at his near death and Sanaullah and other enemies were aware of this too as they published/mentioned them in their writings.