The view from Lahore

Ahmadiyya is a Muslim movement founded in British India over a century ago by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. The movement was condemned as heretical by "official" Islam, since it seemed to elevate Ahmad to a position identical to, or even superior to, the prophet Muhammad. The Ahmadis are otherwise mostly known for the idea that Jesus survived the crucifixion, travelled to India in search of the lost tribes of Israel, and is buried in Kashmir. After Ahmad's death, the movement split in two branches, usually known as Qadiani Ahmadiyya and Lahore Ahmadiyya. The Qadianis are the "radicals", while the supporters of the Lahore branch are the "moderates".

I admit that I've only read about half of this book, and just skimmed the other half. But yes, Muhammad Ali's "Split in the Ahmadiyya Movement" gives a good overview of the theological differences between the two branches. It's written from a Lahore Ahmadiyya perspective.

The author argues that Ahmad wasn't a full prophet in the same sense as Muhammad, but rather a partial prophet and a religious reformer. He attempts to prove that such partial prophets and reformers can arise even after Muhammad. Thus, Ali wants to square Ahmad's prophetic role with the orthodox Muslim notion that Muhammad was the last and most superior prophet. A large portion of the book is devoted to showing that a prophecy in the Koran attributed to Jesus about a future prophet named Ahmad is a reference to Muhammad. Apparently, the more radical Qadian branch was using this prophecy as proof that Jesus was referring to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad! The author's interpretation is, of course, the traditional one.

Since Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was accused of elevating himself above Muhammad, Ali must also attempt to prove that this was not the case, and that Ahmad's positions were in keeping with orthodox Islam. Ali accuses the Qadianis of regarding all other Muslims as unbelievers, while his own position is that they are not. Yet, Ali still refers to Ahmad as "The Promised Messiah and Mahdi", although I suppose he gives these terms a more moderate interpretation than the standard ones. In orthodox Islam, claiming to be the Mahdi is tantamount to a Christian claiming to be the Second Coming! Of course, the attempts by the Lahoris to harmonize the message of Ahmadiyya with that of orthodox Sunni Islam has largely fallen on deaf ears. Both Ahmadiyya branches have been officially declared non-Muslims in Pakistan.

The book is well-written and relatively easy to read. Anyone interested in the Ahmadiyya split probably has to go through it, so I give it four stars.