MGA's Ilzami Jawab: Eight Rules He Set, Eight Rules He Broke

Ilzami Jawab — an “accusative answer” or counter-argument — is a legitimate rhetorical device. When an opponent attacks your position by appealing to a shared source, you may turn the same source back against them. In the context of 19th-century Muslim-Christian polemics, it meant: when a Christian missionary insulted the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ using the Bible, a Muslim apologist could respond by pointing to difficult passages in the Christian’s own scripture to level the playing field.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (MGA) understood this device and used it extensively in his debates with Christian missionaries. More significantly, he was careful to set out the conditions under which Ilzami Jawab is permissible — a detailed framework that appears in Chashma Marifat (Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 23, p. 389) and across his Malfuzat.

The problem is not with the device. The problem is that MGA violated every condition he himself set — producing writings about Isa ibn Maryam (AS) that, judged by his own published rules, constitute kufr, jahalat (ignorance), and a departure from Quranic teaching.

This article documents the rules and the violations side by side, from MGA’s own works.

The Eight Conditions MGA Set for Ilzami Jawab

All eight rules below come from MGA’s own published writings:

Rule 1: Remember That Isa (AS) Is a Prophet of Allah

“It is obvious that how much respect and reverence Muslims have for Hazrat Isa (AS) and consider him as God’s beloved messenger and chosen one, but when a bigoted priest does not stop disrespecting the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ… a Muslim gives a reply that the priest finds harsh, but still this method does not go beyond the boundaries of respect, rather (the Muslim) still keeps good intentions in his heart.

Because in Islam, disrespecting a prophet is disbelief, and it is obligatory to believe in all prophets. So, Muslims face great difficulties because they have loved ones on both sides.”

— Chashma Marifat, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 23, p. 389

Rule 2: Never Show Disrespect to Any Prophet — It Is Obligatory to Believe in All

Same source: “in Islam, disrespecting a prophet is disbelief, and it is obligatory to believe in all prophets.” — RK 23:389

Rule 3: It Is Kufr to Disrespect a Prophet Even Indirectly

“It is severe disobedience to even hint an insult to any Prophet and it is the cause of divine wrath.”

— Chashma Marifat, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 23, p. 389

Rule 4: Even in Ilzami Jawab, Maintain Islamic Manners and Right Intention

Same source: “still keeps good intentions in his heart” is the standard even when the priest is hostile. The manner of reply must remain within the limits of Islamic decorum.

Rule 5: Patience Is Better Than Reacting

“It is better to be patient with the ignorant ones.”

— Chashma Marifat, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 23, p. 389

Rule 6: Using Harsh Words Against Isa (AS) Makes You a Jahil (Ignorant)

“Some ignorant Muslims say some harsh words about Prophet Jesus AS when responding to the foul language of a Christian against Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.”

— Majmooah Ishtiharat, Vol. 3, p. 544, Edition 1989

MGA applies the label jahil specifically to Muslims who use harsh language about Isa (AS) even in self-defence.

Rule 7: Using Inappropriate Words Against the Elders of Other Nations Is Uncivilised and Against the Quran

“Someone may think in his heart that Muslims, during debates, also use inappropriate words against the elders of other nations. So, remember that they go against the Quranic teachings and sometimes the reason for their bad manners is the same people who abuse Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.”

— Chashma Marifat, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 23, p. 389

Even if provoked, using inappropriate words against religious figures of other faiths violates the Quran on MGA’s own account.

Rule 8: Ilzami Jawab Against Christians Must Come Only from the Bible

“When replying to Christians… only for the sake of warning, Ilzami Jawab from their authentic books, which are binding on them, are given. These people should point out anything that we have written as an accusative answer about Hazrat Isa AS and that is not found in the Gospel.”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 9, pp. 335–336

The justification for using any hard material about Isa (AS) is: it comes from their own Bible. If a passage is not in the Bible, it cannot be presented as a legitimate Ilzami Jawab.

The Embedded Self-Contradiction: Bible as Evidence vs. Bible as Apostasy

Before even reaching MGA’s violations, Rule 8 creates an irresolvable problem that MGA does not resolve. In Malfuzat, he also declared:

“The source of all blessings is the Quran, neither the Gospel nor the Torah. Whoever abandons the Quran and leans towards them (Gospel and Torah), he is an apostate and a disbeliever. But he who leans towards the Quran is a Muslim.”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 3, p. 208

Rule 8 says: cite the Bible to make your Ilzami Jawab valid. Malfuzat 3:208 says: leaning toward the Bible makes you an apostate.

These two cannot coexist as a coherent framework. By MGA’s own logic, the very act of relying on Gospel passages as proof — which is the foundation of his Ilzami Jawab defence — constitutes apostasy.

The Eight Violations

Violation 1 — The Drinking Allegation (Rules 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 violated)

MGA began a carefully hedged discussion by first describing Isa (AS) in measured terms:

“Undoubtedly, we consider the Messiah son of Maryam to be a righteous person and that he was better than many people of his time.”

— Dafi al-Bala, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 18, p. 219

He then immediately qualified this:

“This is our statement only as a good assumption. Otherwise, it is possible that some righteous people during the time of Hazrat Isa (AS) were more virtuous and higher than him.”

— Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 18, p. 219

And then arrived at his central argument:

“There is no evidence that the righteousness of the Messiah was greater than that of other righteous people of his time. Rather, in one respect Yahya (AS) possesses a superiority over him: he did not drink alcohol, nor is it recorded anywhere that a prostitute ever came to him and massaged his head with perfumed oil purchased from her own earnings; or touched his body and rubbed it with her hair; or that a young woman who had no relationship with him was placed into his service. For this very reason, Allah has referred to Yahya in the Quran as chaste (حصور) and not to Isa (AS) — because such stories stand as a hindrance in the Messiah being referred to as chaste.”

— Dafi al-Bala, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 18, p. 220

He then compounded the allegation:

“Moreover, Isa (AS) repented of all his sins at the hand of Yahya, whom the Christians call John, who was later identified as Elijah, and became one of his special followers.”

— Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 18, p. 220

MGA dedicated a nine-page article in the Review of Religions (March 1902) to this theme:

“Not only the objections of the Jews, but it is also proven from the Gospel that Jesus was guilty of it (drinking) all his life… hence, no one has any doubt that Jesus Christ used to drink alcohol.”

— Review of Religions, March 1902, p. 110

“The reason why alcohol has harmed European societies is because Jesus used to drink alcohol, maybe because of an illness or because of an old habit. But O Muslims, your Prophet is free from every intoxicant and he is truly innocent.”

— Kashti Nuh, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 19, p. 71

Compare this to MGA’s own definition of alcohol, stated in the same volume of Malfuzat from which he quotes:

“Alcohol, which is the mother of all filthy things, has been considered halal (in Christianity). It makes a person completely unaware of humility (in worship), which is the main part of Islam. A person who is drunk all the time… what can possibly stop him from committing other evils?”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 5, p. 151

And then, in the same Malfuzat Vol. 5 passage, describing Jesus’s first miracle:

“The first miracle of Christ was of wine. So why not there be such boldness (in drinking)? The most pious among them (i.e., among the followers of Jesus) must at minimum consume one bottle of brandy.”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 5, p. 151

The person MGA described as possibly being among “the source of all sins” (umm al-khabaith drinkers) is the same prophet of Allah he is supposed to revere as a messenger, per his own Rule 1.

Violation 2 — Explicit Sexual Allegations (Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 violated)

“Young age, habit of drinking alcohol, and then single, and a beautiful prostitute woman is lying in front of him, touching her body with his (body). Is it the conduct of a pious man? And what is the evidence that Jesus didn’t have sexual excitement when touched by this prostitute? How sad, that it was not possible for Jesus (as he was single) to have intercourse with one of his wives, after gazing at this transgressor.”

— Noor al-Quran, No. 2, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 9, p. 449

In Malfuzat he stated:

“Before attacking others, clean your own house! If they have an objection over Moses killing a man, that incident is before the revelation of the Torah. But what happened to the Messiah that he was getting an oil massage from a prostitute, and while Gospel was being revealed to him?”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 3, p. 289

By Rule 3, hinting at an insult to any prophet is “severe disobedience and cause of divine wrath.” These passages do not hint. They make explicit sexual accusations about a prophet of Allah.

Violation 3 — Attacking the Lineage of Isa (AS) (Rules 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 violated)

“His family (lineage) is also very ‘pure’ and ‘virtuous’: three of his paternal and maternal grandmothers were prostitutes, he was developed as a baby through ‘their blood’ — perhaps this impure lineage may also be a condition to be ‘God’! His affinity and companionship with prostitutes was, maybe, due to this very fact, that it has something to do with his impure lineage! Otherwise, no pious person would give a chance to a young prostitute to put her unclean hands on his head…”

— Zamima Risala Anjam Atham, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 11, p. 291

MGA then drew a conclusion:

“We don’t consider such a person of impure thoughts, arrogant and enemies of the righteous, a gentleman — let alone a prophet.”

— Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 11, p. 291

Notice: a prophet of Allah is said to be “not even a gentleman” by the same man who wrote (Rule 1) that “disrespecting a prophet is disbelief.”

Violation 4 — Attacking the Miraculous Birth (Rules 1, 2, 3, 7 violated)

“Although we believe, from the teachings of the Holy Quran, that this pregnancy was only by the power of God… just as thousands of insects are born automatically during the rainy days, and Hazrat Adam (AS) was also born without parents, then this birth of Hazrat Isa (AS) does not prove any greatness. Actually, to be born without a father implies being deprived of some faculties.”

— Chashma Sayhi, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 20, p. 356

He then explicitly identified what faculty Isa (AS) was supposedly “deprived” of:

“The objection is very great that Hazrat Masih (AS) could not give any practical example of a true and perfect relationship with a spouse, simply because he was absolutely deprived of the highest of all manly attributes.”

— Noor al-Quran, No. 2, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 9, p. 392

The miraculous birth that the Quran presents as a divine sign and a demonstration of Allah’s power (Quran 3:45-47, 19:20-21) is reframed by MGA as evidence of a biological deficiency. This is not an Ilzami argument from the Bible. It is a direct assault on a Quranic miracle, using what MGA calls a “deprivation” as the frame.

Violation 5 — Casting Doubt on Isa (AS) Being Divinely Appointed (Rules 1, 2, 3 violated)

“Likewise, look at the life of Christ. He kept on praying all night long and requested his friends to do it. Finally, it came to the point when he said: ‘My God, why have you forsaken me?’ Now, by looking at such a pitiful state — who can say that he was divinely appointed? The portrayal that the priests have put together of the last moments of Christ is absolutely disappointing.”

— Malfuzat, Vol. 1, p. 469

This passage takes the Christian narrative of the crucifixion — which Islamic theology rejects as a fabrication (Quran 4:157: “they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him”) — and then uses that rejected narrative to cast doubt on whether Isa (AS) was even “divinely appointed.” By doing so, MGA both:

• relies on a Christian account he should reject,
• and uses it to undermine the prophetic status of Isa (AS).

The Scorecard

flowchart LR
    subgraph RULES["MGA's Own Rules (RK 23:389)"]
        R1["Rule 1: He is a prophet of Allah"]
        R2["Rule 2: Never disrespect any prophet"]
        R3["Rule 3: Even hinting insult = kufr"]
        R4["Rule 4: Maintain Islamic manners"]
        R5["Rule 5: Patience is better"]
        R6["Rule 6: Harsh words = Jahil (ignorant)"]
        R7["Rule 7: Against Quran"]
        R8["Rule 8: Only from the Bible"]
    end
    subgraph VIOLATIONS["MGA's Own Writings"]
        V1["Drinking allegation — RK 18:220, RK 19:71"]
        V2["Sexual allegations — RK 9:449, Malfuzat 3:289"]
        V3["Prostitute lineage attack — RK 11:291"]
        V4["Miraculous birth = deprivation — RK 20:356"]
        V5["Not even a gentleman — RK 11:291"]
        V6["Not divinely appointed? — Malfuzat 1:469"]
    end
    V1 -->|violates| R1
    V1 -->|violates| R2
    V1 -->|violates| R3
    V2 -->|violates| R1
    V2 -->|violates| R3
    V2 -->|violates| R6
    V3 -->|violates| R1
    V3 -->|violates| R3
    V3 -->|violates| R7
    V4 -->|violates| R1
    V4 -->|violates| R2
    V4 -->|violates| R8
    V5 -->|violates| R1
    V5 -->|violates| R2
    V6 -->|violates| R1
    V6 -->|violates| R2

Condemned by His Own Followers

One of MGA’s own followers — Mir Muhammad Ishaq Qadiani — unwittingly recorded the verdict on MGA’s own writings:

“The cursed Jews say that Jesus was a drunkard (may God protect us). Thus, whoever says that Jesus Christ was a drunk is following the path of the Jews.”

— Kasr e Saleeb, p. 22, Mir Muhammad Ishaq Qadiani

MGA himself acknowledged this irony in a rare moment of self-awareness:

“Once a friend suggested that opium is useful for diabetes… I replied that if I use opium I am afraid that people will mock and say: ‘the first Messiah was a drunkard and the second is an opium addict.’”

— Naseem Dawat, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 19, p. 435

MGA knew the accusation was the kind of thing people would mock him for applying to himself — yet he had already applied it to Isa (AS) across multiple published works.

The Islamic Position

The Quran speaks about Isa (AS) in terms that leave no room for the allegations above:

“Behold! The angels said: ‘O Mary! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be the Messiah, Isa the son of Mary, distinguished in this world and the Hereafter, and among those nearest to Allah.’” — Quran 3:45

“And (We made him) a messenger to the Children of Israel, saying: ‘I have come to you with a sign from your Lord: I make for you from clay the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah…’” — Quran 3:49

“And mention in the Book, Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place toward the east. She took, in seclusion, a screen from them. Then We sent to her Our Spirit, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects. She said, ‘I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you fear Allah.’ He said, ‘I am only the messenger of your Lord to give you (news of) a pure boy.’” — Quran 19:16-19

The Quran describes the birth of Isa (AS) as a sign (ayah) from Allah, his life as distinguished, and his status as among those nearest to Allah. The same Quran describes Yahya (AS) as hasoor (chaste). But note: the Quran does not describe Isa (AS) as a drunkard, morally compromised, or “deprived of manly faculties.” That characterisation belongs entirely to MGA — who then used his own rules to condemn anyone who agreed with him.

Conclusion

MGA’s Ilzami Jawab framework, if followed consistently, condemns his own writings about Isa (AS). Every accusation he made about the Messiah:

• Was made about a prophet of Allah — violating Rules 1, 2, and 3.
• Went well beyond the Bible (fabricating sexual speculation and attributing physical deficiencies) — violating Rule 8.
• Was characterised by him as “Jahil” behaviour and “against the Quran” when done by others — violating Rules 6 and 7.
• Used as a rhetorical club that he himself acknowledged would cause “mockery” if applied to himself — see the opium anecdote (RK 19:435).

The function of the Ilzami Jawab defence is to provide cover: “I was only using their own sources to respond.” But that defence fails here on every level. The writings were not pure Ilzami Jawab from scripture. They were personal opinion, speculation, and fabricated accusations — stated by a man who had explicitly told his followers that doing precisely this makes one a jahil, a rule-breaker against the Quran, and a person who has “hints at insults” to a prophet — which MGA himself said was kufr and “the cause of divine wrath.”

The eight rules were not aspirational guidelines. They were MGA’s own published standards. By those standards, MGA’s writings about Isa ibn Maryam (AS) fall outside the bounds of Islam he himself defined.

Primary-Source References

Note: All Urdu passages have been verified for textual authenticity against the Ruhani Khazain corpus. Page numbers follow the standard Ruhani Khazain edition used in the scholarly literature.