The Message or A Cry of Anguish — Page 58
58 HADRAT MIRZA GHULAM AHMADAS always remain within the bounds of decency and politeness, and restrict their criticism to those books alone that are considered authentic and credible by the opposing party, or it should direct every party to express only the beauties of their respective faiths and strictly refrain from attacking the beliefs and practices of the opposing party. Now every fair-minded person can decide for himself whether or not I have demanded in this writing that the treatise Ummahātul-Mu'minin be banned, or whether any con- tradiction exists between these two memorials of mine. Does contradiction arise on account of answering the objections of the critics by way of defence in order to demonstrate the excellences of their religion? 3. THE THIRD OBJECTION IS: “Had Mirza Şahib not writ- ten Surmah Chashm-e-Aryah Pundit Lekh Ram would not have used abusive language in Takdhīb Barāhīn-e- Ahmadiyyah, nor raised vulgar objections. " The editor here intends to suggest as if “the innocent” Āryas are not to blame at all; rather all the provocation was caused by Surmah Chashm-e-Aryah. But it seems that immediately after levelling this charge, he felt guilty, because, in fact, the Aryas took the initiative in refuting Islam and the vul- gar books by Indarman of Moradabad had already stirred an uproar among the Muslims. So, speaking as a lawyer for the Aryas, he contends that at the time of the writing of Surmah Chashm-e-Aryah the debates of Indarman had become quite old and forgotten. To this we can only say that God the All-Knowing alone can reward him for mak- ing use of so much falsehood and concealing the truth in