I was browsing some blogs recently by a Muslim Londoner – who intrigued me as he had many posts on teh topic of tasawwuf and sufism.  I was even more interested to learn that he displayed an inclination towards a Tariqah which immediately caused me to respect him a great deal more, as I have respect for anyone who joins a Tariqah.  This is because I had assumed that anyone who has adopted a sufi Tariqah will be on a path to cleanse and purify his/her soul and his/her heart and will be free from many of the vices of the average/unserious muslim who is not on such a path, or at least, is not too serious about it.However, as I read on, I found that this person who had an inclination towards the practice of Tasawwuf started to adopt slander and defamation as his mannerisms, towards Mirza Ghulam Ahmad al-Qadiani.It is obvious that he disagrees with both Ahmadis and Mirza Ghulam Ahamd al-Qadiani, but which Tariqah teaches slander and defamation as a maqaam (stage) or in suluk (behaviour)?  The type of discourse adopted by the person behind the ’Indigo Jo’ blog (also known as ‘blogistan’) was vile and extremely disappointing.  I had not become averse to sufis – this just seemed like a rose whose thorns were sharp and whose petals gave much colour but no fragrance.   I respect his freedom to air his views and also the right he has to an opinion, but when I respectfully submitted a response to him, he replied:

 ”I did not post your article because this blog is my personal blog, and comments should be comments and not whole articles. In any case, it advanced a well-known historical falsehood, namely that Ghulam Ahmad was a mujaddid and did not claim to be a prophet. Numerous Islamic scholars, and others, who were present at the time say otherwise.

I have no obligation to facilitate your “free expression”; if you want that, get your own blog. In any case, it applies only to truth, not falsehood.”

I accept that it is his personal blog and he had no obligation to approve my comments, but they were comments which were respectfully put and were giving the other side of the story.  So it is evident that Mr. Indigo Jo does not want people to even hear the other side of the story – but rather wants to plug his own propagandised version of what he so forcefully calls ‘The Truth’ (as if is is an objective thing)!

But I must congratulate Mr. Jo for saying this – at least he has not hidden his prejudice – neither against Ahmadis, nor against freedom of expression.  Further he elicits the “well known historical falsehood that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a Mujaddid and did not claim to be a prophet”. 

What he glaringly fails to mention is that I asserted in my response the clarifications to his claim to Prophethood in the terms of being an Ummati, Zilli and Buruzi, tabi‘i and laa-taashar’i Nabi – Mirza Ghulam Ahamd clarifies this himself by stating that “I am not an independent Prophet”, but he has chosen conveniently to ignore this.  He further asserts this to be a universal truth – well, I would assert to him that although the majority of the world, including numerous scholars of other faiths do not believe in the Chosen One, Sayyiduna Muhammad Mustafa (saw) as the Messenger of Allah adn as the final law bearing prophet to be sent by Allah, this does not evidence a person’s truth or falsehood – yet again, as is the way of those who reject Allah’s appointees and vicegerents, he has shot himself in the foot by alleging something on the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, which could easily be alleged by the followers of all other religions upon our Immaculate Master-Prophet (saw). 

Sort it out!!

Anyhow, I have pleaded with him to re-email me my post so that I can at least put it ‘on my personal site’(!), so lets hope he does so as it was quite long but fairly thorough, in the interests of just down-right freedom of speech and clarity and openness – I cannot simplify it enough.

(No wonder the West regards Muslims as a problem – they cannot grasp/practice basic concepts which are essential for a healthy and cohesive civilisation!!)

View his blog here.