Mubahala, the Islamic practice in which two opposing parties invoke God’s curse on one another to determine who is truthful, is a fascinating and rare phenomenon in the history of Islam. One of the most notable instances of this practice occurred in Kodiyathoor, a small village in Kozhikode in 1989. This structured Mubahala event, which drew a large crowd, has largely remained unknown outside the region—until now. A young research scholar from Kerala, Soofiya Mahmood, has recently brought this unprecedented event into the international academic spotlight through her presentation at a conference on “Islam in South Asia and Southeast Asia” held in March 2024 at the University of Chicago.
Soofiya, a history research scholar from MES Kalladi College, Mannarkkad, said while Mubahala is a lawful practice in Islam, it has remained largely unpractised in its entirety. She said that the practice, which for long was rarely invoked, derives its sanctity from the injunction revealed in verse 3:61 of the Holy Quran which was revealed to Prophet Mohammed saying that should “anyone argue with you (O Prophet) over this after the knowledge that has come to you, say (to him), Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women, and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then (let us) pray earnestly and invoke the curse of Allah upon the liars”. In a Mubahala ‘prayer duel’, two groups seek to demonstrate the correctness of their claim via an appeal to God for intervention and invoking the ‘curse of God’ on the liar.
The only prophetic precedent for Mubahala is the challenge made by Prophet Muhammad to a Christian delegation from the town of Najran in 632 CE, which revolved around the status of Jesus. Although the Muslim and Christian delegations had agreed to confront one another for Mubahala in Medina, the event was ultimately aborted when the Christian group chose to withdraw.
Soofiya said while there have been many challenges for Mubahala throughout Islamic history, none have matched the scale and structured nature of the event held in Kodiyathoor. It was primarily the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam that raised Mubahala challenges, and the sect even had a publication named Mubahala.
Interestingly, it was a Mubahala challenge from Mirza Tahir Ahmad, the fourth leader of the Ahmadiyya community originally based in Pakistan before migrating to the UK, that led to this event in the remote village of Kodiyathoor. This challenge emerged in the context of alleged violence and persecution against Ahmadiyyas in Pakistan, and the proclamation of Ordinance XX in 1984 by President Zia Ul Haq, which forbade Ahmadiyyas from identifying as Muslims.
“The Mubahala challenge issued by Mirza Tahir Ahmad was directed at General Zia Ul Haq, organizations like Rabithathul Alamil Islamiya, and religious leaders supporting anti-Ahmadiyyas protests in Pakistan,” Soofiya explained. It also specifically challenged scholars who produced anti-Ahmadiyya literature.
She said the resonance of the Mubahala challenge in Kodiyathoor can be attributed to the influence of the Ahmadiyya sect in the area. The Anjuman Isha’at e Islam, formed by various Muslim organizations in 1981, aimed to counter this influence. A local Urdu teacher and scholar, PP Abdurahiman, also published a book that pointed out contradictions in key Ahmadiyya texts, which led to vigorous campaigns between the two factions.
Ahmadiyya Khalifa Mirza Tahir Ahmad wrote a letter to the office bearers of Anjuman Isha’at e Islam in 1988, informing them they too would be included in the Mubahala. While the Ahmadiyyas wanted to include all allegations made against them, Isha’at took the view that the only point they wanted to focus was on the fundamental Islamic belief that Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet, as opposed to the Ahmadiyya belief that new, non-law-bearing prophets could come, with their founder Mirza Ghulam Ahmad being one,” Soofiya said.
Prior to the Mubahala, Isha’at published an article asserting that their participation was a matter of Muslim pride and necessary to resist intrusions into Islamic beliefs. Ultimately, it was decided that 40 representatives from each side would participate, and their names, addresses, and ages were documented in a notice that announced the event.
On May 28, 1989, the Mubahala took place in a coconut grove in Kodiyathoor, attracting thousands of spectators. Before the event commenced, representatives from both sides stood on stage, reading their respective prayers. The Ahmadiyya prayer said that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was the promised Messiah and Mahdi and a non-law-bearing prophet who followed Prophet Mohammed and invoked severe punishment for those who rejected this assertion. Their prayer concluded with an earnest appeal for divine retribution if their claims were false. The Isha’at, on the other hand, asserted that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was not a prophet appointed by Allah. Following their individual prayers, both sides offered a joint supplication, asking Allah to bless the truthful and curse the liars. Remarkably, the event concluded in just half an hour.
“Though everyone waited anxiously for the result within six months of the Mubahala, no major incidents or any untoward or disastrous things happened to anyone. The Ahmadiyya community claimed victory, saying their influence had grown during that year. Isha’at on the other hand, said they participated as it was a matter of Muslim pride and the result was in the hands of Allah. Also, they added that no one from the area joined the Ahmadiyya group as claimed and so it was a victory for them,” Soofiya said.
Meanwhile, a third section of the Muslim community dismissed it as a farce, while those aligned with the AP section argued that Isha’at should not have participated in such a challenge. “For the Ahmaddiya section, Mubahala was a tool to prove their Muslimness and to mount a defence against the ideological attacks which had put them in a defensive position in an area where they had influence. For Isha’aat, it was a matter of pride to proclaim that they would not allow any intrusion into the Islamic belief system,” Soofiya said.
According to her, historically, Mubahala can be viewed as a practice of resolving extreme disagreement and opposition on fundamental religious issues without bloodshed. “Though it can be termed as violence using words as the prayer is done for the destruction of the opponent if they are false, still the issue is brought to an end without resorting to actual violence,” she said.
Facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Email
Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author’s own.
END OF ARTICLE