Mr Ahmad Deedat has been acclaimed as a hero and the defender of faith by many Muslims. However, there are some who see him as the opposite.
The following are extracts from a magazine called THE MUSLIM DIGEST, produced in South Africa. In introducing that particular issue of the magazine, the Editor wrote:
Let us read then the extracts from THE MUSLIM DIGEST, they are what the 'Ulama of Islam has said about Ahmad Deedat. FROM HERE ON ALL THE FOLLOWING ARE EXTRACTS FROM THE MUSLIM DIGEST:
DEEDAT'S GURU NO. 1
"Mr Ahmed Deedat, the head of Islamic Propagation Centre, has openly admitted that he is no man of letters as far as secular knowledge is concerned, and in so far as Islamic knowledge is concerned, from his own admission, he has gleaned it from those who have inspired him, including individuals such as JOSEPH PERDU, the BAHAI, who in the 1950's came to South Africa to undermine the faith of the Muslims, and who was thoroughly exposed by us to leave South Africa during that period. The exposure of Perdu is contained in a number of pamphlets brought out by us, and also in several issues of the Muslim Digest.
We quote Ahmed Deedat on the influence of Joseph Perdu, the Bahaee, from his own (Deedat's ) explanation published in the columns of the INDIAN VIEWS in its issue of November 6, 1957. said Deedat:
It is a psychological fact that if one obtains religious knowledge from a dubious source, the danger always exists that a dubious influence could be left on one's mind that could later be dangerous to one's faith, and that of others, particularly if one is engaged in Islamic Propagation work. We of the Muslim Digest subscribed to this view then and we reiterate this view now.
Deedat then appeared to be in an unholy alliance with Dr Mall of the Arabic Study Circle who (Dr Mall) continued to organise Joseph Perdu's lectures among Muslim's in Durban even after Joseph Pedru told Advocate Bawa in the presence of Dr Mall and Pr Wahhajur Rasul that "there was nothing in the Qur'an to show that Prophet Mohammad was the LAST PROPHET." Dr Mall remained silent all the time when Perdu said this.
Mr Perdu, in his attempt to sow the seeds of Bahaism among Muslim intellectuals first, further told Advocate Bawa that "ISLAM IS NO MORE" ... ISLAM CAME FOR ONLY A THOUSAND (1000) YEARS". Subsequently Advocate I.M. Bawa issued a Pamphlet against Joseph Perdu and we reproduce the relevant part of Advocate Bawa's pamphlet for the benefit of our readers." (M.D. p.49-50)
DEEDAT'S GURU NO. 2
DEEDAT'S GREAT 'SERVANT OF ISLAM' RASHAD KHALIFA NOW SAYS:
TWO FALSE VERSES UNVEILED IN QUR'AN!
RASHAD KHALIFA, inventor of the spurious theory of Number 19, [By the use of numerology it claims that there is an arithmetic pattern based on the number 19 running through the Qur'an] cleverly camouflaged his hypocrisy and sinister designs by wearing the mask of a sincere Muslim. Having beguiled the Muslim community into believing his new-fangled theory of number 19, he is now gradually unmasking himself and revealing his true identity. The first glimpse of Rashad Khalifa's hypocrisy came into light when he declared in his bulletin, MUSLIM PERSPECTIVE, of March, 1985, that:
"THE COMPUTER EXPOSES AN HISTORICAL CRIME; TAMPERING WITH THE WORD OF GOD; TWO FALSE VERSES UNVEILED IN QUR'AN; AN INVITATION TO ALL MUSLIMS TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE BEFORE REMOVING THE FALSEHOOD."
In the April 1985 issue of Rashad Khalifa's MUSLIM PERSPECTIVE, a bold sub-heading tells the Muslim world: "MORE EVIDENCE CONFIRMS THE FALSEHOOD OF THE LAST TWO VERSES OF SURAH 9."
We accept his invitation to "examine the evidence". Before doing so, however, we wish to remove another mask and expose the face of his partner in this insidious crime against the Holy Qur'an. the man who became instrumental in disseminating the nefarious idea of Rashad Khalifa is none other than the recipient of the King Faisal Award from the Saudi Arabian Government for his "outstanding services" to Islam - MR AHMAD DEEDAT.
Ahmad Deedat's fascination and preoccupation with the theory of No. 19 became an obsession; and despite rational criticisms and rebuttal of the theory by prominent writers throughout the Muslim world, he (Ahmad Deedat) has remained its steadfast champion and an ardent supporter of his mentor, Rashad Khalifa, whom he calls "that great servant of Islam".
"HIS MASTER'S VOICE"
Mr Ahmad Deedat wrote a tract in 1979 entitled AL-QUR'AN: THE ULTIMATE MIRACLE, in which he slavishly echoed Rashad Khalifa's ideas. In fact Ahmad Deedat effectively became "His Master's Voice". He (Ahmad Deedat) says in his tract:
This tract of Deedat is freely distributed from Deedat's headquarters in Durban, South Africa. In October 1985 he published its First Reproduction in U.K. (20 000 copies) for free distribution. Ahmad Deedat thus became an accomplice of Rashad Khalifa by aiding and abetting him in his avowed aim to attack the integrity of the Holy Qur'an." (M.D. p.25-26)
"And now Rashad Khalifa, Deedat's GURU number 2, says in his recent bulletin called, " MUSLIM PERSPECTIVE " that the last two verses in the Qur'an in Sura nine are false, and should not form part of the Qur'an! - Muslim perspective - April, 1985. Muslims all over the world are labelling Rashad Khalifa as a Murtad, some say he is a Kafer, others say, he is a Munafiq, still others say he is not a Muslim, and is outside the pale of Islam. Now if Ahmed Deedat has derived his Islamic knowledge from such a dubious authority as Khalifa, then it stands to reason that Deedat has no first hand knowledge of ISLAM at all and that his ( Deedat's ) knowledge of Islam is not only shallow and second hand, but DANGEROUS.
Rashad Khalifa has openly committed KUFR and it must follow therefore that Deedat is pedaling Rashad Khalifa's KUFR to unsuspecting Muslims through his lectures on Rashad Khalifa's theories and booklets, of which there is no doubt." (M.D. p.53)
"MUHAMMAD SAMIULLAIL head of the Islamic Research Bureau of Karachi had this to say about Rashad Khalifa, who is Deedat's GURU number 2:
Hadith is dismissed as conjectures and forgery. According to him "Hadith is more than inventions by the enemies of the prophet, aimed at repelling the people from god's way and from the Qur'an" ( P.347 Rashad Khalifa's Qur'an translation ) - MUSLIM DIGEST, March/APRIL 1982.
Sheikh M.S Dien, Imam of Masjid us Salaam in Athlone, Cape Town, had this to say about Rashad Khalifa, who is Deedat's GURU number 2:
"MAJLIS" ON DEEDAT'S ISLAMIC KNOWLEDGE
"THE MAJLIS NEWSPAPER published from Port Elisabeth by Maulavi Sadak Desai condemns Deedat in no uncertain terms regarding Deedat's Islamic knowledge, by saying:
Mr Deedat is dabbling in matters about which he has no knowledge and possesses no ability and no qualification, and has brought himself under the purview of Rasulullah's (Sallallahu alaihu wasallam) warning.
"He who speaks a lie on me should prepare his abode in the fire"
It is about people of Mr Deedat's calibre that Sayyidina Umar said:
"Verily, the people of opinion are the enemies of the Sunnah."
All Muslims should beware of the un-Islamic and baatil propagation of those who hold no status in Islamic knowledge. The modernists in propagating the Kufr and Baatil and trifling with Imman. Their end shall be disaster. ("Majlis", vol.4, no.6 - Port Elizabeth) (M.D. p.54)
DEEDAT AND THE AFRIKAANS TRANSLATION OF THE QUR'AN
"MR. Deedat's representation on behalf of Islam itself is also in doubt, as his beliefs on Jesus (a.s.) from Islamic point of view, are shrouded in ambiguity. When cornered, Mr. Deedat says that he believes as the Muslims believe, but the latest black and white proof is that despite having revised Mr. Amin Baker's Afrikaans translation of the Qur'an, Mr. Deedat's Propagation Centre left the Qadiani interpretation on Nabi Isa (Jesus) intact, when it printed a new edition of this Qur'an translation recently and sold them throughout the country. Deedat's new edition of this Qur'an states that Nabi Isa (Jesus) is dead. (M. D., p.140-141)
DEEDAT MAKES A SOMERSAULT OVER TV ?
"In what was construed by Muslims as a somersault in his views on Muslim women attending mosques after the "MAJLIS" attack on Deedat, in wanting to correct his views on a subject over TV, Mr. Deedat landed himself into further hot water, as the following letter to the Muslim Digest at the time shows:
"I am sure that thousands of Muslim women must have seen the TV program recently when Mr Ahmed Deedat of Durban spoke about Muslim women not being encouraged to pray in the mosque with men. I think most Muslim women will be disappointed with Mr Deedat's poor showing of Muslim women on the TV programme, and personally I am utterly disgusted at the uncouth manner in which Mr Deedat explained why women are not encouraged to come and pray in the mosque.
Firstly, we Muslim women do not pray WITH the men in the mosques, and Mr Deedat Knows that there are separate halls, galleries, etc attached to the mosques, for Muslim women where prayer facilities are provided.
This is why I think I will be expressing the utter disgust of all Muslim womanhood when Mr Deedat gave as reason for Muslim women not being encouraged to come and pray in the mosque, is that at the time of ablution (WUZU) women have to lift their legs (and Mr Deedat even lifted his leg to demonstrate!) in the presence of men when they are making WUZU. Mr Editor, Mr Deedat knows that women don't make ablution (wuzu) WITH the men in any mosque. In fact, in nearly all cases, when Muslim women go to pray in mosques where separate faculties exist for prayer, they make WUZU at home and come.
Mr Deedat should be ashamed of himself for insulting and disgracing Muslim womanhood in front of the public on TV, especially as he claims to be a preacher of Islam. Please print this Mr Editor without fail.
From all the foregoing it will be seen that Deedat has no real knowledge about ISLAM at all. His religious knowledge is found wanting. What he preaches and writes about Islam is most dangerous and Muslims are asked to take note of this and reject his so called no. 19 Computer theory of the Qur'an reject his controversial lectures, reject his first GURU Joseph Perdu and reject his second GURU Rashad Khalifa too, who now says the last two verses of the Qur'an are false and should not have been included in the Holy Qur'an by those who compiled it, implying in other words, that Caliph Omar and Caliph Uthman should not have included the last 2 verses of Sura 9 in the Qur'an. In other words it means that the various Qur'an translations that Deedat advertisers and sells left, right and centre, are no more the LAST Testament, and the Qur'an is no more the ULTIMATE MIRACLE!" (M.D., p.54-55)
[After all that, no wonder the Muslim digest else where went on to say]
...Deedat is only a "pretender" to the "ISLAMIC THRONE". Deedat realy represents nobody, but himself. He does not represent the Muslims of the world; he does not represent the Muslim of South Africa; he does not represent the Muslims of Natal; he does not represent the Muslims of Durban; he does not represent the Muslims of his own little town of Verulam either where he resides, and in fact that the Trustees of the Verulam Muslim MOSQUE have even banned Deedat from making a speech or lecture in the only Muslim Mosque in his own home town of VERULAM. (M. D., p.140)
(PLEASE NOTE THIS ARTICLE WAS REPRODUCED BY THE MUSLIM DIGEST JULY TO OCT. 1986)
"Deedat has embarrassed the faithful followers of Islam, hurt, distressed and pained relatives and friends, violated basic principles, infuriated Christians and Hindus and insists on continuing his religious crusade that does more harm than good to the cause of Islam that he claims he espouses.
The Church's attitude was correct and so was the attitude of its leaders for, in the process of denigrating Christianity, Deedat insulted Islam and Prophet Muhammed (s.a.w.) himself, for while quoting the Qur'anic verse of how one should go about propagating Islam - that is, "with wisdom and beautiful preaching," Deedat has, time and again, flouted these lofty principles, with there being neither "wisdom" nor "beauty" in his preaching methods. In fact, of late, his method of propagating Islam has even begun to stink to high heaven itself!
IN RESPONSE TO DEEDAT'S OBJECTIONABLE VIDEO TAPE ON HINDUISM
Pamphlet headed: 'WAS KAABA A HINDU TEMPLE? IS ALLAH A HINDU GOD?' Distributed
Mr Deedat's arrogance and the method of his preaching in attacking other religions knows no bounds. His recent attack on the Hindu religion prompted Hindus to react and make counter allegations against ISLAM, the KAABA and against ALLAH HIMSELF, for which Mr Deedat should be held responsible.
A 13-page pamphlet headed:
"WAS KAABA A HINDU TEMPLE?" -- "IS ALLAH A HINDU GOD?"
was very widely distributed in the Gujerati, Tamil, Telegu and the Hindustani sections of the Hindu Community recently. The author of this 13-page pamphlet is Mr P.N. Oak, M.A. LL.B., of Delhi, India. Among other things, the author had this to say:
"This discovery changes the entire complexion of ancient history and to a great extent, the history of ancient India. For one thing we may have to revise our concepts about the king who had the largest empire in history. It could be that the expanse of King Vikramaditya's empire was larger than that of all others."
"...The region of King Vikramaditya's empire extended from Bali Island in the South East Pacific to the Baltic Northern Europe, and from Korea to Kaaba. The only difference was that while Indian rulers identified themselves with the local population and established welfare states, Moghuls and others, who ruled conquered lands, perpetrated untold atrocities over the vanquished..."
"The text of the crucial Vikramaditya inscription, found inscribed on a gold dish hung inside the Kaaba shrine in Mecca, is found recorded on page 315 of a volume known as "Sayar-ul-Okul" treasured in the Makhtab-e-sultania (library) in Istanbul, Turkey."
"Rendered in free English the inscription says "Fortunate are those who were born (and lived) during King Vikrama's reign. He was a noble, generous, dutiful ruler, devoted to the welfare of his subjects."
Mr P.N. Oak, the author of the pamphlet, then goes on to quote the Arabic and reproduces the same in Roman script and quotes (page 315 "Sayar-ul-Okul"). [something seems to be missing here but that is how it is in the original in the Muslim Digest] The title "Sayar-ul-Okul" signifies MEMORABLE WORDS, says Mr Oak.
Mr Oak further says:
"...The first modern edition of "Sayar-ul-Okul" was printed and published in Berlin in A.D. 1864. A subsequent is the one published in Beirut in A.D. 1932."
"...The book also contains an elaborate description of the ancient shrine of Mecca, the town and the annual fair known as OKAJ which used to be held every year around the Kaaba temple in Mecca. This should convince readers that the annual Hajj of the Muslims to the Kaaba is not an Islamic speciality, but a mere continuation of an earlier pre-Islamic congregation."
"...Mecca, therefore followed the Varanasi (Benares) tradition of providing a venue for important discussions among the learned while the masses congregated there for spiritual bliss. The principal shrines at both Varanasi in India and at Mecca in Arbasthan (Arabia) were Shiva temples, even to this day the ancient Mahadova emblems. It is the Shankara stone which Muslim pilgrims reverently touch and kiss in the Kaaba."
"...The main shrine in Mecca, which houses the Shiva emblem, is known as the Kaaba. It is clothed in a black shroud. That custom also originates from the days when it was thought necessary to discourage its recapture (by enemies) by camouflaging it."
"...Muslim pilgrims visiting the Kaaba temple go around it seven times. In no other Mosque does this circumambulation prevail. Hindus invariably circumambulate around their deities. This is yet another proof that the Kaaba shrine is a pre-Islamic Indian Shiva temple where the Hindu practise of circumambulation is still meticulously observed."
"...Another Hindu tradition still associated with the Kaaba is that of the sacred stream Ganga. According to Hindu tradition Ganga is also as inseparable from the Shiva emblem as the crescent moon. Wherever there is a Shiva emblem, Ganga must co-exist. True to that association a sacred foundation exists near the Kaaba. Its water is held sacred because it had been traditionally regarded as Ganga since pre-Islamic times."
"...It might come as a stunning revelation to many that the word "ALLAH" itself is Sanskrit. In Sanskrit Allah, Akka and Amba are synonyms. They signify a goddess or mother. The term Allah forms part of Sanskrit chants invoking goddess Durga, also known as Bhavani, Chandi and Mahishasuramardini. The Islamic word Allah for God is therefore, not an innovation but the ancient Sanskrit appellation retained and continued by Islam. Allah means mother or goddess and mother goddess."
"...Vaidik descriptions about the moon, the different solar constellations and the creation of the universe have been incorporated from the Vedas in Koran, part 1, chapter 2, stanzas 113, 114, 115 and 158, 189; Chapter 10, stanzas 4 to 7."
"...Recital of the Namaz five times a day owes its origin to the Vaidik injunction of Panchamayajnya which was part of the daily Vaidik ritual prescribed for all individuals."
"...The Islamic term "Eed-ul-Fitr" derives from the "Eed of Pitors", that is, worship of forefathers, in Sanskrit tradition. In India Hindus commemorate their ancestors during the Pitri-Paksha, that is, the fortnight reserved for their remembrance. The very same is the significance of Eed-ul-Fitr (worship of forefathers)."
All the foregoing, from a historical and Islamic point of view, is questionable and highly objectionable, and is only a part of the contents of the 13-page pamphlet distributed in the Hindu community recently, directly as a result of Mr Deedat's objectionable lecture on video tape on Hinduism. The aim of the writer and distributors of the pamphlet is clear to all Muslims, and the blame for it all must rest squarely on the shoulders of Mr Ahmed Deedat. - (Editor, MUSLIM DIGEST).
This is a letter written to Mr. Deedat published in the Muslim Digest:
"Your thesis, forceful as it may be, is an anti-thesis of the view held by the majority of the Muslims, in particular the Ahl-Hadith followers. Their view is opposed to your thesis. They believe that Jesus was never put on the cross and was "taken up". Your arguments very ably axed by the Ahl-Hadith's fundamental belief about Jesus. They were present in the hall. Amazing as it may be, your every blow to their fundamental belief made them clap with joy! So much so that they even shouted "Allah-o-Akbar, not knowing that their own fundamental belief was systematically and logically being elimenated! As they clapped and cheered I remembered the Qur'anic verse: Deaf, Dumb, Blind Q.2:18" (The MUSLIM DIGEST, Durban, South Africa, 1986, p.35.)
TRANSVAAL IN THE 1970'S - THE SYMPOSIUM THAT LEAD TO GREAT HUMILIATION FOR MUSLIMS AND DEEDAT
In the Transvaal a symposium was organised at Benoni by Deedat's friends in which Mr John Gilchrist of the Christian faith opposed Deedat. Mr Adam Peerbhai who was present at the symposium had this to say, which we reproduce from the MUSLIM DIGEST:-
AT THE SENSATIONAL UPSET in Benoni, Transvaal, the huge audience was asked by Mr John Gilchrist, at the conclusion of Mr Ahmad Deedat's lecture on "WAS CHRIST CRUCIFIED" (which in reality was a half-Qadiani theory and Un-Islamic) [Mr Deedat believes that Jesus was crucified but did not die on the cross, he only fainted], a simple question:
IS MR DEEDAT RIGHT IN HIS EXPLANATION OF CRUCIFIXION?
The audience, without reflection, in a loud roar, said:
So, the Benoni lawyer, Mr John Gilchrist pointed to the verse of the Holy Koran which states:
This is how Mr. John Gilchrist trapped the Muslim audience:
"I ask any Muslim to stand up here tonight and to tell me that the Qur'an does not say that Christ was never put on a cross, that in fact it was someone else, am I not right? Does the Qur'an not say that God took Jesus up to Himself? Does the Qur'an not say that God protected him? Does the Qur'an not say that God made someone else look like him? Does the Qur'an not say that God put that man on the cross? What do you believe? Mr Deedat or the Qur'an ? (Loud answer: "the Qur'an")."
And thus the huge Muslim audience was struck to silence and to defeat, which the Muslim's did not readily accept. So the Muslim audience at one moment in their frenzy roared that Mr Deedat was right, and the next when the truth was pointed out to them from the Qur'an, then they answered that the Qur'an was right, which in fact shows in what a humiliating position they were put through the crucifixion arguments put forward by Mr Deedat." - Muslim Digest", March 1977.
IF ONLY ADVICE WAS HEEDED
If only Mr Deedat had heeded the warnings given to him on his un-Islamic method of propagating Islam, neither he nor the Muslim community would have suffered such a humiliating defeat. Incidentally, perhaps with wounded pride at the end of this humiliating defeat, Mr Deedat perhaps in frustration, made certain defamatory statements against Mr John Gilchrist that led to a court action by Mr Gilchrist, after Deedat refused to make an apology. Deedat lost the subsequent court action and paid damages and costs totalling to R2,138-00.
(HERE ENDS THE EXTRACTS FROM MUSLIM DIGEST)
Ahmad Deedat stated in his lectures and books that Jesus was placed on the cross but did not die on it: He only fainted. Every one knows how difficult it is to change the religious beliefs of one person, especially if these beliefs are deeply rooted and have been handed down, generation after generation. For 16 centuries Muslims have denied that Jesus was placed on the cross. It is a known fact that because of the untiring efforts of Ahmad Deedat, millions of Muslims now believe that Jesus was placed on the cross. Thus because of the efforts of the one man, Ahmad Deedat, millions of Muslims have changed their traditional views as to what happened to Jesus.
This instantaneous change in the view of millions of Muslims is a phenomenon that deserves closer investigation. It is either that Ahmad Deedat possesses a stronger logic and appeal than the Islamic tradition that says that someone else was crucified instead of Jesus and that Jesus was lifted up alive to heaven, or that this Islamic tradition is so flimsy, in spite of its antiquity, that it was neither well established nor deeply rooted in the minds of Muslims. This tradition was simply an unsatisfactory explanation on to which they clung. The minute these millions were offered another explanation, they quickly accepted it without much reflection.
There is no doubt that between those who believe that someone else died instead of Jesus on the cross and those who believe Ahmad Deedat's version of what happened to Jesus, other millions are standing on neutral ground, confused as to what to believe. These are more ready to accept the truth of the crucifixion than they were before Ahmad Deedat's thinking became widely known.
Ahmad Deedat deserves to be congratulated, because he, single handed, has shifted the traditional Muslim position a very, very long way towards the Christian position. For now millions of Muslims at least believe that Jesus was placed on the cross. And what a beautiful picture Mr Deedat has painted of Christ to the millions of Muslims, for according to Deedat, Jesus was at least lifted up on the cross, after being insulted by the Jews, suffered and bled because of his faithfulness to God. May God bless you Mr Deedat!
Mr. Deedat has achieved what thousands of missionaries have failed to achieve. What remains now for the gap between the Muslim and the Christian to be closed is for the Christian to convince his Muslim friend that Jesus was not only placed on the cross but did die there also.
History will prove that Ahmad Deedat deserves a higher recognition from Christian leaders for his services to Christianity than the one he received from king Faisal for his services to Islam.
It is written in the Psalms that God the most high "is more able" than any one. He is able to turn defeat into victory, disasters into wonders, and the falsifications of people like those of Ahmad Deedat into evidence for His truth.
God indeed works in mysterious ways. According to the Bible, He can "Out of the eater bring something to eat, And out of the strong bring something sweet."
Or in the language of the Qur'an: "They schemed and God schemed, and God is the best of schemers." (The Qur'an 3:54)
The above was NOT written by John Gilchrist but was sent to us by somebody else for anonymous display on this Ahmed Deedat Rebuttal Site. Nevertheless, John Gilchrist is the main person who has responded with rebuttals to nearly all literature published by Ahmed Deedat. A good number of these rebuttals can be found on this same page as well.
Answering Islam Home Page