‘I shall cause thy message to reach the corners of the world.’ This was one of the earliest revelations received by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad( a s ), a person hardly known outside Qadian, a village in the Punjab. At the time of this revelation he did not even have a message to convey and wondered what the import of such a revelation might be. What is clear from these words, however, is that the message he was later to deliver was intended for the whole world and was not to be confined just to the Punjab or just the country of India. Since he claimed to be only a devoted servant of Hadhrat M u h a m m a d( s a ) the founder of Islam, propagating only the faith of M u h a m m a d( s a ), it was clear from the above revelation that Islam had universal relevance and appeal. Muslims have claimed this since the earliest days of Islam, for the Holy Prophet ( s a ) of Islam was commanded to convey his message to the whole of mankind in the early Makkan revelations. Muslims believe this contrasts with all other faiths whose messages were for localised benefit and addressed to specific nations. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam A h m a d( a s ) claimed that he was the Promised Messiah and Reformer of the Age awaited by all great world revealed religions: his message was therefore addressed to followers of all faiths. With the spread of channels of commu- nication, today’s world is much e n l a rged as compared with previous ages. The message of Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad( a s ), and hence that of Muhammad( s a ), has already reached the shores of America, Australia, New Zealand, etc. Hence, in view of the revelation, ‘I shall cause thy message to reach the corners of the world,’ it would be futile today to claim that Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam A h m a d( a s ) originally envisaged his remit to only cover the Indian sub- continent. To suggest that it was only later incidental successes that led his followers to claim universal application of his teachings, would carry no weight. This in effect is 2 The Review of Religions – Nov 2004 Editorial what orientalists have consistently claimed about the mission of the Holy Prophet of Islam( s a ), so much so that they question the historicity of the letters he sent out to the rulers of surrounding nations. If similar arguments were used against Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam A h m a d( a s ), objectors would be saying that it is highly unlikely he ever wrote a letter to the Queen of England, head of a great empire. As one who had raised serious questions against the faith of the monarch, it was likely that he would suffer the wrath of her empire for daring to invite her to join Islam. For him to have done so would be against common sense. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad( a s ) had a great amount of common sense. Such is the line of argument used by various orientalists against the view that Muhammad( s a ) e v e r sent out letters to the neighbouring rulers, inviting them to join Islam. In this issue, Nuruddin Muneer’s article refutes the hostile criticism of orientalists who claim that Islam was not originally envisaged as a universal religion. As did the followers of M u h a m m a d( s a ), so too have the followers of Mirza Ghulam A h m a d( a s ) recorded in their histories the fact that he sent a letter to the ruling monarch of a great empire, inviting her to join Islam. They too have recorded its exact contents. This was no ordinary letter, it was to a monarch and therefore carried great sig- nificance for the followers of Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad( a s ). It stands to reason that they would record not only the fact that it was sent but also the actual wording of that letter. Perhaps Ahmadis, should be aware of how future generations of objectors may try and twist history or pick holes in it. In fact, concerned at not receiving a response, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam A h m a d( a s ) followed this by another invitation to Her Majesty Queen Victoria on her Jubilee. A copy can surely be found by any doubting Thomases in the archives of the British Museum. Basit Ahmad – UK 3 Editorial The Review of Religions – Nov 2004
The soul is created by God from the union of two [seminal fluids]. It is not eternal and uncreated as the Vedas claim. Nor is it created somewhere else and then injected into the body at or just before the birth of a human being.