The Holy War — Page 33
Proceedings—Debate 23 May 1893 33 Reply from Mr. Abdullah Atham, Christian First— In reply to your inquiry, my respected Mirza [Ghulam Ahmad], I request that you please elaborate on the word ‘istiqr a ’ [Reasoning from Induction]. Does it not mean experience or cus- tomary ? Please state if there is any other meaning apart from these. Second— In your second premise, you state that revelation should be self-explanatory and it should not be made to depend on reason- ing. Most of this is true, but to understand it, the comparison of revelation and intellect is that of the eye and light. If there is light but no eye, then that is useless; similarly, if there is an eye but no light then that is also worthless. To understand something we must have intellect even if the matter to be understood is a revelation. What I mean to say is that whatever matter is not supported by revelation and is only a man-made idea, then it will not be involved in the revelation, but whatever matter is a revelation, and is lit up by the Divine light of revelation from below, can human intellect not serve as a niche to house it? Third— Sir, why do you ask for the Jews to agree with us while the words are present, as are the lexicons, and the rules as well? Do the translation yourself, and whatever meanings result, those would be acceptable. I cannot take responsibility word for word, but over- all, summarily, Christ has taken upon himself all prophecies in this passage.