Life of Ahmad — Page 240
ANGER OF MULLAHS as 240 concerned he was prepared to enter into Mub a hala if necessary though, according to his own belief, Mub a hala was not necessary or permissible to settle minor differences of opinion amongst Muslims. Anyhow, if eminent mullahs like Nadh i r Husain of Delhi, Muhammad Husain of Batala and Ahmadullah of Amritsar signed a fatwa to the effect that Mub a hala was permissible in such cases, then he would have no course left open but to go to Amritsar for the purpose of the Mub a hala and Abdul H aq must in that case bring with him his family and his friends, as required by the Holy Quran. This letter is dated February 11th, 1891, and was published in a supplement to the Ri a y d -e-Hind , Amritsar, dated March 15th, 1891, pages 1-4. In answer to this Abdul H aq issued another Ishti- h a r : If Mub a hala was not permissible amongst Muslims, why had Ahmad as asked Maulaw i Muhammad Ismael through the pages of his book, Fat h -e-Islam , to hold a Mub a hala with him? To explain this Ahmad as issued an Ishtih a r on April 12th, 1891, and pointed out that the matter then under discussion had not been a minor difference of opinion. Maulaw i Muhammad Ismael had invented an atrocious lie against Ahmad as by saying that a most reliable friend of his, Sayyid Ahmad, had gone to Qadian and seen there with his own eyes some astronomical instruments by means of which Ahmad as foretold the future and that his claim to revelation was all a fraud. This was not a difference of opinion. The