Misguided critique of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s appearance reveals theological ignorance

0
Rizwan Butt, Jamia Ahmadiyya UK

Recently, a video surfaced in which a Muslim cleric rehashes long-refuted allegations against the Promised Messiahas, all of which have been extensively addressed in the rich corpus of Ahmadiyya literature and media.

He also made some rather ludicrous and superficial remarks about the Promised Messiah’sas appearance that warrant a short response.

The appearance of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas

While mocking the blessed portrait of the Promised Messiahas, he said: “This is not the characteristic of a prophet.  All the prophets in Islamic theology are described as being beautiful, being handsome, Jesus[as] is described by the Prophet Muhammad[sa]. His particular looks are described, his hair and the beauty of Jesus[as]”.

The argument presented lacks depth and theological merit. It is unlikely to persuade informed individuals due to its shallow nature.  It echoes the petty judgments made by figures like Abu Jahl, who failed to recognise the truth of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa despite his most blessed countenance.

He references a hadith describing Jesusas:

فَأَمَّا عِیْسَى فَأَحْمَرُ جَعْدٌ عَرِیْضُ الصَّدْرِ

“Jesus was of red complexion, had curly hair and a broad chest.”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 3438)

What he fails to realise is that in the very next hadith in the same book of Sahih al-Bukhari, the Holy Prophetsa mentions a dream in which he sees Jesus in the latter days:

أَرَانِي اللَّيْلَةَ عِنْدَ الْكَعْبَةِ فِي الْمَنَامِ، فَإِذَا رَجُلٌ آدَمُ كَأَحْسَنِ مَا يُرَى مِنْ أُدْمِ الرِّجَالِ، تَضْرِبُ لِمَّتُهُ بَيْنَ مَنْكِبَيْهِ، رَجِلُ الشَّعَرِ، يَقْطُرُ رَأْسُهُ مَاءً، وَاضِعًا يَدَيْهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبَىْ رَجُلَيْنِ وَهْوَ يَطُوفُ بِالْبَيْتِ‏.‏ فَقُلْتُ مَنْ هَذَا فَقَالُوا هَذَا الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ‏.‏ ثُمَّ رَأَيْتُ رَجُلاً وَرَاءَهُ جَعْدًا قَطَطًا أَعْوَرَ عَيْنِ الْيُمْنَى كَأَشْبَهِ مَنْ رَأَيْتُ بِابْنِ قَطَنٍ، وَاضِعًا يَدَيْهِ عَلَى مَنْكِبَىْ رَجُلٍ، يَطُوفُ بِالْبَيْتِ، فَقُلْتُ مَنْ هَذَا قَالُوا الْمَسِيحُ الدَّجَّالُ

“While sleeping near the Ka‘bah last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown complexion, the best one can see amongst men of brown complexion and his hair was long, reaching between his shoulders. His hair was lank, water was dripping from his head. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Ka‘bah. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is the Messiah, son of Mary.’ Then I saw another man behind him with very curly hair, blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan more than anyone I’ve seen. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a man while circumambulating the Ka‘bah. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is the Deceitful Messiah (al-Masih ad-Dajjal).’” (Ibid., Hadith No. 3440)

These ahadith substantiate a clear distinction between two individuals: the original Jesusas and a man who would appear in the likeness of Jesusas during the time of the Dajjal. This indicates that the latter cannot be the same Jesusas who was sent to Children of Israel.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, the Promised Messiahas, aligns the description given by the Holy Prophetsa in the above hadith. In one of the biographical works on the Promised Messiahas, we find a description that aligns with what is mentioned in the above hadith:

“His hair was straight, shiny, and soft, reaching his neck. He would keep his hair long.” (Siratul-Mahdi, Vol. 2, p. 413)

The Promised Messiah’sas brother-in-law, Hazrat Mir Muhammad Isma‘ilra provides the following description of him:

“His hair was straight, shiny and silky and was kept dyed with henna. It was not thick or lush. He would never have his head shaved nor would he have his hair cut too short. His hair would reach up to his neck. He would oil his hair with jasmine oil and henna and this was a constant practice.” (Al Hakam [Urdu], 21-28 May 1918)

Having a black beard

The Muslim cleric – while pointing at the picture of the Promised Messiahas – remarked: “Look at his beard; he’s dyed it in black.”

This comment betrays a fundamental misunderstanding, as a black-and-white photograph cannot show colours other than shades of grey. A so-called scholar should be more discerning in such matters, especially when discussing a figure of religious significance.

Hazrat Mir Muhammad Isma‘ilra describes the beard of the Promised Messiahas as follows:

“His beard was well-groomed, the hair strong, thick, shiny, straight, and soft, dyed red with henna. He would have the excess hair trimmed by the barber when he grew his beard long, that is, he would not keep it untidy and uneven, but would keep it straight down and even. He would also always oil his beard. Once, due to a pustule on his cheek, he had some hair shaved off from there, and these are still with people as a blessing. The blessed beard was on all three sides of his face and was very beautiful. It was not so short that it was sparse or only on the chin, nor so long that the hair reached his eyes.” (Al Hakam [Urdu], 21-28 May 1918)

It is thus clear that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’sas beard was not black, but rather dyed with henna, following the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa, as recorded in the hadith:

“My father and I came to the Holy Prophetsa, and he had dyed his beard with henna.” (Sunan an-Nasa’i, Hadith No. 5083).

Suffering from an eye condition?

In the video the claim was made that the Promised Messiahas had an eye condition, to which the cleric responded, “That also contradicts Islamic theology because prophets do not have eye conditions; they have perfect eyesight. In fact, that’s even a condition for a caliph. If there is a Khalifa, the Khalifa cannot have an eye defect.”

This assertion is problematic on multiple levels. Firstly, there is no basis in the Quran or Sunnah for the claim that prophets must have perfect eyesight. Secondly, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas did not have an eye condition. In fact, he wrote about divine assurance regarding his eyesight:

“Being a diabetic, I was apprehensive about my eyesight for one of the consequences of diabetes is that eyesight can be affected and cataract can set in. On this account, I supplicated and received the revelation:

نَزَلَتِ الرَّحْمَةُ عَلٰى ثَلٰثٍ اَلْعَيْنِ وَعَلٰى الْأُخْرَيَيْنِ

“‘Mercy will descend upon three organs, the eye, and two others organs.’

“In this revelation, the eye is expressly mentioned and the other two organs are not specified. It is commonly said that the proper functioning of life requires that the eye, the ear and intelligence should be preserved. The fulfilment of this revelation can be judged from the fact that I have been suffering from diabetes for eighteen years and doctors and physicians know what a threat this disease constitutes for eyesight. Then what is the power which informed me in advance that I would be exempted from the operation of this rule and then proved it accordingly?” (Tadkhirah [English], p. 353)

Moreover, Islamic history provides examples that contradict this claim. Barelvi scholars, who call themselves Ahl-i Sunnah wa-l-Jama‘at, have written in their commentaries that Prophet Jacobas experienced weakening and whitening of his eyes. Ahmad Riza Khan, whom the Muslim cleric in the video praises highly, translated the verse, وَابۡیَضَّتۡ عَیۡنٰہُ مِنَ الۡحُزۡنِ فَہُوَ کَظِیۡم as:

“And he turned away from them and said, ‘Alas, the separation from Yusuf!’ and his eyes turned white with sorrow, and he kept suppressing his grief.” (Kanzul-Iman [Urdu translation with Tafsir], p. 355)

In the commentary of this verse, Ahmad Riza Khan wrote:

“The blackness of his eyes faded due to continuous weeping, and his vision weakened.” (Ibid.)

This example poses a challenge to the cleric’s argument. If he maintains his position, he would have to question the prophethood of Jacobas – a notion that contradicts established Islamic belief.

Conclusion

It is evident that when discussing Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, critics abandon careful theological reasoning. Their arguments contradict the Quran, Sunnah, and established Islamic principles. This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of thorough research and unbiased analysis in matters of faith and religious history.

No posts to display