Friday Sermon
30 August 2024
Muhammadsa: The Great Exemplar
After reciting the tashahhud, ta‘awwuz, and Surah al-Fatihah, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa stated:
In the historical accounts from the life of the Holy Prophetsa which were being mentioned in the sermons prior to the Jalsa in Germany, the incident of Ifk [the Great Calumny] in relation to Hazrat Aishara was also mentioned. With regards to this, the Promised Messiahas states:
“God Almighty has made it an integral part of His own noble attributes to avert prophecies of warning on the basis of repentance, seeking forgiveness, prayer, and charity, so did He teach the same morals to man as is evidenced by the Holy Quran and the Hadith. When—out of sheer maliciousness—the hypocrites had perpetrated a calumny against Hazrat Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, some unwary Companions also had joined in this narrative. One of those Companions used to get his meal, twice a day, from the home of Hazrat Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him. Due to this lapse, Hazrat Abu Bakrra pledged that he would never again feed him as a punishment for this misdeed, whereupon the verse was revealed:
وَلۡيَعۡفُوۡا وَلۡيَصۡفَحُوۡاؕ اَلَا تُحِبُّوۡنَ اَنۡ يَّغۡفِرَ اللّٰہُ لَکُمۡ ؕ وَاللّٰہُ غَفُوۡرٌ رَّحِيۡمٌ
“[Let them forgive and pass over the offence. Do you not desire that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful. (The Holy Quran, 24:23)]
“At that, Hazrat Abu Bakr broke his pledge and restored his meals as usual.”
The Promised Messiahas states:
“It is for this reason that it is part of Islamic morality that should one pledge something by way of punishment, the breaking of that pledge is a component of good morals. For example, if someone swears regarding his servant, ‘I will certainly strike him fifty times with a shoe,’ then forgiving him upon his repentance and earnest supplication is the practice of Islam, so that one may act upon تخلق باخلاق اللّٰہ, i.e., mirroring the attributes of Allah. Nevertheless, it is not permissible to break a promise; one will be held accountable for the breach of promise, but not for breaking a pledge of chastisement.” (Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya, Part 5, pp. 181)
Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmadra mentions the incident of the Great Calumny in light of the narration in Sahih al-Bukhari. He writes:
“It is the most detailed and well-composed of all narrations. The facts, which are ascertained from the narrations related by other narrators in parts, have been brought together in this sole narration. In addition to this, such enlightening insight is derived from this narration on the domestic life of the Holy Prophetsa that no historian can disregard it. Then, with regard to authenticity, this narration is of such an exceptionally high calibre that it leaves no room for uncertainty and doubt. Now, one should contemplate the magnitude of this conspiracy hatched by the hypocrites. The motive was not only to attack the honour of a chaste, extremely righteous, pious lady, rather, the greater objective was to directly destroy the honour of the Foundersa of Islam, and to dangerously shake the Islamic society. This filthy and vile propaganda was spread by the hypocrites in such a manner that simple, yet loyal Muslims were caught in this snare of deception. The names of Hassan bin Thabitra, the poet, Hamnah bint Jahash, the sister of Zainabra bint Jahash, and Mistah bin Uthathah, have especially been recorded. However, it is a testimony to her lofty character that Hazrat Aishara forgave them all, and did not harbour a grudge against them in her heart. As such, it is mentioned that after this occurrence, whenever Hassan bin Thabit would come to visit Hazrat Aishara, she would receive him graciously. On one occasion, when he presented himself before Hazrat Aishara, a Muslim named Masruq, who was present as well, became astonished and said, ‘What! Do you grant Hassan the permission of audience?’ Hazrat Aishara responded, ‘Let it be, the poor man has lost his sight, is this not misery enough? (He had developed an eye ailment.) Then, I cannot forget that Hassan would compose verses in support of the Holy Prophetsa against his enemies.’ Hence, Hassan was granted permission, upon which he came in and sat down. He spoke a verse in praise of Hazrat Aishara:
حَصَانٌ رَزَانٌ مَا تُزَنُّ بِرِيْبَةٍ
وَتُصْبِحُ غَرْثٰي مِنْ لُحُوْمِ الْغَوَافِلِ
“‘She is a pure and chaste woman, who possesses wisdom and foresight, and her position is above and beyond doubt and uncertainty; she does not eat the flesh of upright and innocent women, i.e., she does not slander them, nor does she speak ill of them in their absence.’
“When Hazrat Aishara heard this couplet, she said وَلٰکِنْ اَنْتَ and in another narration the words لَسْتَ کَذَالِکَ have been related, meaning ‘What about your own state, you did not prove to bear this quality, i.e., you took part in levelling an accusation against me though I was innocent.’”
Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmadra writes:
“Let us witness the Arabic scholarship, or prejudice, of Mr Muir (an orientalist), who translates the above-mentioned couplet in an absolutely incorrect manner, in contradiction to the rules of Arabic grammar, and asserts that Hassanra praised the slender body of Aishara, who in turn taunted him on his large figure. Mr Muir has also committed other blatant mistakes while relating this incident. For example, he writes that Safwanra and Aishara were unable to catch the army enroute, and then openly entered Medina before the gaze of all, even though this is absolutely incorrect and categorically baseless. The ahadith and history both substantiate that Safwan and Hazrat Aishara managed to catch up to the Muslim army en route in only a few hours. Thankfully enough, however, in relation to the actual calumny itself, Mr Muir accepts the innocence of Hazrat Aishara. As such, he writes that the life prior to this incident and after it, prove that Hazrat Aishara was free of such allegations.
“In terms of logic and narration, this allegation proves to be clearly false and forged, because except for the absolutely coincidental occurrence that Hazrat Aishara was left behind by the Muslim army, and then she caught up to it in the company of Safwanra, the slanderers had nothing else in their hands. In other words, there were neither witnesses, nor any further evidence, and of course, until a charge is substantiated, it cannot be accepted as true. Especially if the objection relates to such people whose lives are proof of the purity of their dispositions. However, for the additional satisfaction of the Muslims and so that a fundamental rule could be established in relation to such cases for the future, divine revelation was sent down. This revelation confirmed the innocence of Hazrat Aishara and Safwanra, and declared the aspersion as being completely false. Furthermore, it also presented such a fundamental law to the world with regards to occurrences of this nature, that the honour and dignity of the people, peace and harmony of society, and protection of the morality of the community were heavily based upon it.” (Life and Character of the Seal of Prophetssa, Vol. 2, pp. 438-441)
Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra has explained the reason as to why this allegation was levelled against Hazrat Aishara. He writes:
“Let us ponder the real motive behind the allegation levelled against Hazrat Aishara. The reason for this was not because those people had any enmity towards Hazrat Aishara. Why would anyone have any enmity towards a woman who was sitting in her home and had no relation with politics, jurisprudential matters, official positions, distribution of wealth, battles, conquests against the opposing powers, governance, or economy. (She did not have anything to do with these matters.) Thus, there was no reason for anyone to have any personal enmity towards Hazrat Aishara. There are only two possibilities for this allegation to be levelled against her, either God-forbid this allegation was true, which no believer could entertain for even a second, especially as Allah the Almighty had completely rejected this filthy notion from the heavens. Or the second possibility is that this allegation was levelled against Hazrat Aishara in order to cause harm to other people through her.
“We have to ponder over the people whom the hypocrites and their leaders could benefit from disgracing and those whom they could make a target of their enmity. Even from a cursory glance, one will realise that by slandering Hazrat Aishara, their enmity was directed towards two people, one of whom was the Holy Prophetsa and the other being Hazrat Abu Bakrra, because one was her husband and the other was her father. The status of both these personalities was such that there were some who could derive political benefit by defaming them, while others could fuel their hatred. Furthermore, the objectives of some people were dependent upon their defamation. Otherwise, to simply defame Hazrat Aishara alone was of no interest to anyone. At the most, the only parties interested in this could have been the other wives of the Holy Prophetsa. It could have been that seizing the opportunity to degrade Hazrat Aishara and increase their own repute in the eyes of the Holy Prophetsa, the other wives of the Holy Prophetsa, could have taken part in this issue. However, history bears testimony to the fact that none of the Holy Prophet’ssa other wivessa took part in the calumny. On the contrary, in her own testimony, Hazrat Aishara says that among the wives of the Holy Prophetsa, she did not consider anyone to be her contemporary aside from Hazrat Zainab bint Jahshra (because she was the one who would speak out the most).
“However, Hazrat Aishara says, ‘I will never forget the beneficence of Zainab upon me. When this allegation was levelled against me, the one person who strongly refuted it was Hazrat Zainabra.’ (Al-Sirah al-Halabiayyh, Ghazwah Banu Mustaliq)
“Hence, if anyone were to have personal resentment towards Hazrat Aishara, it would have been her sister wives. If they wished, they could have partaken in the slander so that Hazrat Aishara would be degraded in the eyes of the Holy Prophetsa thereby elevating their own standing (i.e., the other wives could increase their own honour).
“However, history attests to the fact that the other wives did not involve themselves in the matter at all. If any of them were asked (i.e., the other wives), they only commended Hazrat Aishara. Furthermore, there is no reason for men to harbour enmity against women. Thus, this allegation against her was either because of enmity against the Holy Prophetsa, or enmity against Hazrat Abu Bakrra.
“There was no way for the proponents of this allegation to snatch away the status granted to the Holy Prophetsa, however what they feared was that even after the Holy Prophetsa, they would be unable to fulfil their objectives. They saw that if anyone was capable of being a successor to the Holy Prophetsa, it was Abu Bakrra. They saw this as a threat and thus created an allegation against Hazrat Aishara so that she would fall out of favour in the Holy Prophet’ssa sight as a result of which the stature of Hazrat Abu Bakrra among the Muslims would also diminish. The Muslims would begin thinking ill of Hazrat Abu Bakrra and would abandon the love that they had for him, thereby closing the door for Hazrat Abu Bakrra to become the Khalifa after the Holy Prophetsa. It was for this reason that after the incident of the allegation being levelled against Hazrat Aishara, God Almighty also mentioned the institution of Khilafat in Surah an-Nur of the Holy Quran.
“The ahadith clearly mention that the Companions used to converse among themselves and often said that after the Holy Prophetsa, if anyone holds a significant rank, it is Abu Bakrra. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitab as-sunnah, Bab fi l-tafdil)
“There is a hadith that narrates that the Holy Prophetsa once said to Hazrat Aishara, ‘O Aisha, I intended to appoint Abu Bakr as my successor; however, I did not say anything because I knew that Allah and the believers would be content with none other than him.’ (Sahih Muslim, Kitab fada’iil s-sahabah, Bab min fada’ili abi bakr)
“In other words, they would unanimously chose Abu Bakrra.
“Indeed, the Companions were certain that after the Holy Prophetsa, the only person among them worthy of succeeding him was Abu Bakrra. He alone was deemed fit to become the Khalifa. During the Meccan period, the question of governance and its system did not arise, but after the Holy Prophetsa migrated to Medina, a government was established. Naturally, this sparked concern among the hypocrites, who feared that after the Holy Prophetsa, the institution of Khilafat would be established, which would solidify the Islamic government and lead to their permanent downfall. The opponents, whose hopes had already been shattered by the Holy Prophet’ssa arrival in Medina, became anxious.
“History records that the two Arab tribes in Medina, the Aus and Khazraj, were frequently engaged in battles, leading to much bloodshed. When they realised that their constant fighting was weakening their tribes’ influence, they decided to reconcile and agreed to unite under one leader. As a result, the Aus and Khazraj tribes made amends and chose Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul to be the king of Medina. After this decision, preparations were made, and a crown was ordered for him.
“During the course of this time, some pilgrims returned from Mecca to Medina and reported that the awaited Prophet had appeared in Mecca and that they had pledged allegiance to him. This news led to talks and discussions about the claim of the Holy Prophetsa. Soon after, more people from Medina went to Mecca, accepted Islam, and pledged allegiance to the Holy Prophetsa. They then requested the Holy Prophetsa to send a teacher and preacher with them to guide and educate them. The Holy Prophetsa sent one of his Companions as a missionary, and many people in Medina embraced Islam.
“Around the same time, the Holy Prophetsa and his Companions were facing severe persecution in Makkah. The people of Medina were aware of this and invited the Holy Prophetsa to migrate to their city. Subsequently, the Holy Prophetsa, along with his Companions, migrated to Medina. (Ibn Hisham, Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Nabaza min Zikr Munafiqin wa Bad’i Islam al-Ansar al-Aqabah al-Ula)
“The crown prepared for Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul became meaningless, as the people of Medina no longer needed another king when they had found the King of both worlds [i.e., the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa]. Upon seeing his chances of becoming a king vanish before his eyes, Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul became enraged, and though he outwardly joined the Muslims, he continued to place hurdles for Islam. If he could hope for anything, it would be that after the demise of the Holy Prophetsa, he could still become the king of Medina . However, God Almighty frustrated even these plans, for even his own son was a devout Muslim. This meant that even if he happened to become king, the leadership would eventually return to Islam.
“Furthermore, God Almighty thwarted his plans by establishing a new system among the Muslims. They began asking the Holy Prophetsa various questions about the future of the Islamic government, what would happen after him, and what course of action the Muslims should take. Witnessing this, Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul became fearful that the Islamic government would be established in such a way that he would have no part in it. To prevent this, he realised that the only person capable of establishing the Islamic government on Islamic principles was Abu Bakrra. He noticed that after the Holy Prophetsa, the Muslims would naturally turn to Abu Bakrra, whom they esteemed above all others.
“Therefore, Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul saw his success in discrediting Abu Bakrra, diminishing his standing in the eyes of the people, and even tarnishing his reputation in the sight of the Holy Prophetsa. His opportunity to execute this malicious intent came when Hazrat Aishara was left behind during one of the expeditions, and this wretched individual slandered her with a vile accusation. Though the Holy Quran only hints at this incident, the ahadith provide more detail. Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul’s objective was to humiliate Hazrat Abu Bakrra in the eyes of the people and to strain his relationship with the Holy Prophetsa. He hoped this would hinder the establishment of the system he saw as inevitable, which would consequently crush his ambitions.
“A hypocrite, in his delusion, always believes his death to be distant and speculates about the deaths of others. Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul, too, thought his death was far off and failed to realise that he would die writhing in agony during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa. He continued to imagine that once the Holy Prophetsa passed away, he would become the ruler of Arabia. However, he saw that Abu Bakr’sra piety, righteousness, and greatness were widely acknowledged among the Muslims. When the Holy Prophetsa was unable to lead the prayers, Abu Bakrra led them in his place.
“If one was unable to seek an edict from the Holy Prophetsa, the Muslims would seek the edict from Abu Bakrra. Realising this, Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul became extremely worried about his hopes for future leadership and so he sought to remove [this worry]. Hence, in order to remove it and to diminish the renown and esteem of Hazrat Abu Bakrra in the sight of Muslims, he created an allegation against Hazrat Aishara, so that the Holy Prophetsa would develop an aversion to Hazrat Aishara. As a result of developing an aversion for her), he sought to diminish Hazrat Abu Bakr’sra honour in the sight of the Holy Prophetsa and all Muslims, thereby halting any chance of him becoming the Khalifa.” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, Vol. 8, pp. 519-524, chapter 24, verse 36)
Whilst mentioning the connection between the incident of the Great Calumny and the Khilafat of Hazrat Abu Bakrra, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra further writes:
“In Surah an-Nur, the subject matter mentioned from beginning to end is the same. First, the calumny against Hazrat Aishara is mentioned. The actual reason for this calumny against her was to humiliate Hazrat Abu Bakrra and to ruin his relationship with the Holy Prophetsa and subsequently diminish his honour in the sight of Muslims. This was so he would not become the Khalifa after the Holy Prophet’ssa demise – because Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul had realised that if the Muslims looked towards anyone after the Holy Prophetsa, it was Abu Bakrra and if Khilafat was established through Abu Bakrra, then Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul’s dreams of leadership would never be fulfilled. Therefore, right after mentioning this allegation, Allah the Almighty mentions Khilafat and says that Khilafat is not a monarchy. Rather, it is a means of maintaining the divine light which is why its establishment rests in the hands of Allah the Almighty. To lose Khilafat would be to lose the light of prophethood and the light of God. Hence, He will certainly establish this light, and will appoint whoever He chooses as the Khalifa. In fact, He promises that He will not appoint just a single Khalifa, but will grant the mantle of Khilafat to many from among the Muslims and will thus extend the era of this spiritual light. If you wish to create allegations, then go ahead; you cannot erase Khilafat, nor can you hinder Abu Bakrra from becoming the Khalifa, because Khilafat is a light. This light is one of the manifestations of Allah and no human efforts can erase it.” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, Vol. 8, p. 526, chapter 24, verse 36)
The Promised Messiahas states:
“The state of the Prophets is also such that when God Almighty informs them of a matter, they either distance themselves from it, or adopt it. Observe, in the matter of the calumny against Aishara, the Holy Prophetsa was not initially bestowed knowledge regarding it and the matter progressed to the extent that Hazrat Aishara went to her father’s home and the Holy Prophetsa also said that if she had done this this then she should repent. Observation of these incidents clearly shows the degree of anguish which the Holy Prophetsa was in, yet the reality was not made apparent to him for some time. However, when God Almighty revealed Hazrat Aisha’sra acquittal and said:
اَلۡخَبِيۡثٰتُ لِلۡخَبِيۡثِيۡنَ وَالۡخَبِيۡثُوۡنَ لِلۡخَبِيۡثٰتِ ۚ وَالطَّيِّبٰتُ لِلطَّيِّبِيۡنَ وَالطَّيِّبُوۡنَ لِلطَّيِّبٰتِ
“(Ch.24: V.27)
“[‘Bad things are for bad men, and bad men are for bad things. And good things are for good men, and good men are for good things’]
“The reality regarding this calumny became clear to him. Does this in any way change the stature of the Holy Prophetsa? Absolutely not. Anyone who thinks this, is unjust and does not fear God and has reached the stage of disbelief. The Holy Prophetsa never claimed to be a knower of the unseen, nor did any of the other Prophetsas. Being Knower of the Unseen is a rank of God. Had such people been aware of the established ways of the Prophetsas they would never raise such allegations.” (Malfuzat, Vol. 3, 2022, p. 316)
The Promised Messiahas thus also silenced those who raised allegations against him as well.
Mention is also found of the Holy Prophetsa mediating peace between the chieftains of Aus and Khazraj. Much resentment had arisen between them. In one narration, it is mentioned that after a few days, the Holy Prophetsa took the hand of Hazrat Sa’d bin Mu’adhra and, along with some other Companions, departed and went to Hazrat Sa’d bin ‘Ubadahra. There, they spoke for a short while. Hazrat Sa’d bin ‘Ubadahra presented food, and the Holy Prophetsa, Hazrat Sa’d bin Mu’adhra, and the other Companions ate from it. Then, the Holy Prophetsa left.
The Holy Prophetsa waited for a few days, after which he took the hand of Hazrat Sa’d bin ‘Ubadahra and, along with some Companions, went to the home of Hazrat Sa’d bin Mu’adhra this time. They spoke for a short while; Hazrat Sa’d bin Mu’adhra offered food, and the Holy Prophetsa, Hazrat Sa’d bin ‘Ubadahra, and the other Companions ate from it. After that, the Holy Prophetsa returned. He did this in order to remove the resentment that had developed in their hearts due to the earlier incident. (Waqidi, Kitab al-Maghazi, Vol. 1, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, p. 371)
In other words, he visited one person’s house with the other, and on the second occasion, he visited the latter’s house with the former so that any ill feeling would dissipate. They both ate there, and fed each other as well, and this way, their resentment was gone. This was one of the methods the Holy Prophetsa used to foster love and affection and establish peace between people.
In various narrations, the number of those who had levelled this allegation differs. In one narration by Hazrat Ibn Abbasra, the number of those who falsely accused Hazrat Aishara is mentioned as three. Another narration by Hazrat Ibn Abbasra states that the number was between three and ten. Ibn Uyainah recorded it as forty, while Mujahid mentioned it as between ten to fifteen. (Al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Quran, Tafsir Qurtubi, Vol. 2, Surah an-Nur 24:12, Dar Ibn Hazm, p. 2169)
Regarding the punishment of those involved in the incident of the Great Calumny, it is mentioned in Sunan Abi Dawud that the Holy Prophetsa ordered the punishment for two men and one woman, who had spread the rumour about indecency. They were Hazrat Hassan bin Thabitra and Mistah bin Uthathara. Nufaili narrates that people said that the one woman mentioned was Hamnah bint Jahsh. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitab al-Hudood, Bab haddi l-qazf, Hadith 4475)
Allamah Mawardi stated that there is a difference of opinion regarding whether those involved in the incident of the Great Calumny were given the hadd punishment [punishment commanded by God]. One opinion is that the Holy Prophetsa did not administer the hadd punishment to any of them, while another opinion is that the Holy Prophetsa ordered the hadd punishment of Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul, Mistah bin Uthatha, Hassan bin Thabit, and Hamnah bint Jahsh. Imam Qurtubi stated that the most famous narrations and recognised opinions among scholars is that Hassan, Mistah, and Hamnah were given the hadd punishment, but there is no mention of Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulool being given the hadd punishment. (Al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Quran, Tafsir Qurtubi, Vol. 2, Surah al-Nur 24:12, Dar Ibn Hazm, pp. 2170-2171)
Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra stated in a sermon regarding this, “Due to the false accusation against Hazrat Aishara, three individuals were flogged, one of whom was Hassan bin Thabit, the chief poet of the Holy Prophetsa. Another was Mistah, who was the paternal uncle of Hazrat Aishara and was the maternal cousin of Hazrat Abu Bakrra. He was such a poor man that he lived in the home of Hazrat Abu Bakrra. He ate there, and Hazrat Abu Bakrra himself would arrange for his clothing. A woman was also among them [the guilty], and all three were punished.” (Khutbat-e-Mahmud, Vol. 18, pp. 279-280)
In his commentary of Surah an-Nur, verse 36, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maudra further writes about the flogging of Ibn Salul and says:
لِکُلِّ امۡرِيٴٍ مِّنۡہُمۡ مَّا اکۡتَسَبَ مِنَ الۡاِثۡمِ
“‘That among those who make accusations, each shall receive a punishment according to what they have earned.’
“Thus, those who participated in the conspiracy to level accusations were each given eighty lashes. And then it is stated:
وَالَّذِيۡ تَوَلّٰي کِبۡرَہٗ مِنۡہُمۡ لَہٗ عَذَابٌ عَظِيۡمٌ
“‘However, there is one person among them who is the greatest mischief maker, and is the founder of all this discord, namely Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Sulul. Not only will We flog him, but We will also punish him ourselves.’ In accordance with this warning, he was also flogged (Al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, Bab maghaziyyati rasulillahsa, Ghazwatu ani mustaliq)
“Later he also received punishment from Allah the Almighty. He died during the lifetime of the Holy Prophetsa whilst writhing in agony.” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, Vol. 8, p. 524, chapter 24, verse 36)
This brings these accounts to a conclusion.
Regarding the Jalsa Salana in Germany, I would like to say that the attendees, whether they were external guests or those who attended for the first time, expressed very positive sentiments and were very happy, complimenting the overall environment. Similarly, through the various modes of media and news outlets, the true message of Islam and Ahmadiyyat reached millions. As such, the Jalsa is a great means of propagation, enabling the message of Islam to reach such places where we ourselves are unable to reach. May Allah the Almighty enable this to bear virtuous and long lasting results and enable Ahmadis to always truly derive benefit from this.
Continue to focus on prayers. May Allah the Almighty always keep us wrapped in His mantle of grace and mercy.
At the end, I will also mention a deceased person and will lead their funeral prayer [in absentia], insha-Allah.
Imam Muhammad Bello Sahib was from Sudan, and recently passed away.
اِنَّا لِلّٰہِ وَاِنَّاۤ اِلَيۡہِ رٰجِعُوۡنَ
[Surely, to Allah we belong and to Him shall we return.]
The President of the Jamaat in Sudan writes about him, that the incident of his Bai’at was as follows: In 1966, an Ahmadi Imam from Nigeria, Isa Abdullah Bin Lail Sahib, came to visit him as a guest and preached to the villagers. The late Imam Muhammad Bin Bello was the first to have the opportunity to do Bai‘at. In those days, it was not possible to contact the Khalifa or the headquarters from Sudan; however, these Ahmadi members remained firm in their faith in Ahmadiyyat.
They faced severe opposition. Imam Muhammad Bello Sahib used to lead the Ahmadis in prayer. There, the Ahmadi Mosque was made of grass and straw, a sort of hut, which the non-Ahmadis set on fire, and they expelled the Ahmadis from the village. As a result, these Ahmadis migrated southward. There too they built a small mosque of grass and straw. Opposition arose there as well, and the opponents burned down the Ahmadi mosque and expelled the Ahmadis from that area.
One party of these Ahmadis moved far away from there, while the other, which included Imam Bello, went to Dueim city. There, they became guests of Abdullah Bin Awaz Qasim Sahib, who was the principal of Jamia Bakht al-Rida, but their families opposed them, and these Ahmadis were also expelled from there. These helpless people were driven out from there as well. Finally, they decided to go to Nigeria, to Imam Isa Abdullah Bin Lail Sahib, through whom they had become Ahmadis. Thus, this group of poor Ahmadis, along with their wives and children, set off for Nigeria riding on donkeys and other animals, but mostly on foot.
They had no provisions for the journey, nor visa documents, etc. There were many difficulties on the journey; however, they possessed the wealth of faith. They safeguarded their faith and continued their migration with the same zeal and passion, and never sacrificed their religion. Eventually, they reached Nigeria and stayed with Imam Isa Bin Lail Sahib for thirteen years. After that, Imam Isa Sahib advised them to return to Sudan based on a dream. They did not like this suggestion, but Imam Isa told them that it was a command from their Lord. Reluctantly, they agreed to return to Sudan. Imam Isa Sahib was shown in a dream that these people would return to Sudan after three years. After the completion of three years, these Ahmadi emigrants set out for their homeland. Imam Muhammad Bello was the first to return. In Sudan, they settled back in their original village, Kiuneza. This was in 2010. After the return of these Ahmadis to Sudan, a group called Boko Haram emerged in Nigeria. If these Sudanese Ahmadis had been in Nigeria at that time, only God knows how this group would have treated them. It was then that they understood the divine, hidden wisdom behind their return from Nigeria. However, upon returning to Kuneza, they once again faced severe opposition. The small mosque that they had built was burned down once more. Their homes were attacked, and cases were filed against them. They were again expelled from the village.
Then the current war began, and the situation throughout Sudan worsened, with no one remaining safe there. The Ahmadis also scattered into various parts of Sudan, in order to save their lives and find peace, and even now in different areas, they are living in great hardship and poverty. May Allah the Almighty elevate the rank of the deceased, grant him forgiveness, and strengthen the faith of the remaining Ahmadis. May Allah the Almighty change their circumstances, and as I mentioned, there is great unrest in the country; may Allah the Almighty bring an end to this disorder. May Allah the Almighty have mercy on these people and make them fulfil the rights of one another. May Muslims fulfil the rights of brotherhood towards each other, and may Allah the Almighty remove the discord within Islamic governments. May Allah the Almighty grant Ahmadis the ability to live a life of true peace and tranquillity.
(Official Urdu transcript published in the Daily Al Fazl International, 15 September 2024. Translated by The Review of Religions.)
