Refutation: How Can One Love All & Hate None?

Allegation: In various places Almighty Allah and His Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) have shown displeasure towards various acts such as shirk, adultery, riba, etc. How can Ahmadis, therefore, adopt the Motto ”Love for all, Hatred for none?


Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (‘alayhi al-salam) has written:

“I want to make it clear to Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Aryas, that I have no enemy. I love all men as a merciful mother loves her children. Nay more. I am enemy only of false beliefs, beliefs subversive of truth. To sympathise with all humans is my duty and to preach against falsehood, disloyalty to God, tyranny, evil conduct, injustice, immorality is my mission.


While the motto, or slogan, ”Love for all, Hatred for none” was formally adopted by Hadrat Khalifat al-Masih III (radi Allahu ‘anhu), and not Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (‘alayhi al-salam), it is in complete harmony with the Qur’an and Islam. The above statement puts forward an important spiritual and legal maxim of Islam; namely, that a Muslim must love all men while at the same time hating any act which goes against the guidance of Almighty Allah. This is a just position which, at its very heart, seeks to illiminate immorality and not people. Compare this to many of today’s scholars who create immorality through killing people over all kinds of issues – all in the name of Islam. The fact that such an honest and absolutely just position is here adopted, is yet another clear indicator of the truth of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (‘alayhi al-salam). The reason that he drew such a conclusion is due to his spiritual station and close proximity to Almighty Allah as indicated in the second half of the above quote which reads:

My motive for this height of sympathy is that I have discovered a gold mine, have had access to an unlimited supply of precious stones. In the mine I have found a bright and priceless jewel. So priceless that if I divide it between all of my fellow men, every one of them will become richer than the richest among them in gold and silver. What is this jewel? It is the true God. To reach Him is to know Him, to become really aware of Him, to have true faith in Him, to be united with Him in true love. To receive true blessings from Him in return. Having found such a priceless treasure it will be cruel on my part if I let not my fellow-men know about it. Could I let them go hungry while I have plenty. No, it will not be so, while I can help. My heart burns over their want and hunger. My soul becomes depressed over their dark and straitened existence. I want to see their homes filled with riches divine. I want to see them full with faith and truth. Full to capacity.” (Arbain No. 1, pg. 2-3)

Subhan Allah, this almost poetic verse informs those with searching eyes as to the spiritual station of the Imam of the Age (‘alayhi al-salam). Our Imam has here shown us that it is in the love of Almighty Allah that even the greatest of sinners can find over-flowing hope and forgiveness. This was the love, nay, remains the love, which our Imam (‘alayhi al-salam) was so eager and passionate about unveiling to the whole world; the same love which the Holy Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) used in order to transform the ignorant into the righteous. It is my belief that this very appreciation of Almighty Allah’s love is one of the great distinguishing characteristics of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the Imam al-Mahdi (‘alayhi al-salam).

Jazak Allah Khayr al-Jazaa’


41 thoughts on “Refutation: How Can One Love All & Hate None?

  1. It may appear that this discussion was rather off-topic, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that it is all about Khilafah inasmuch as questioning the validity of a slogan proposed by a Khalifa amounts to questioning the competence of the Khalifa himself. One aspect should not be divorced from the other.

    You will notice that I wrote about the “Khilafah al Raashidah” being lost, and not Khilafah as such, which of course remained in one form or another, right down to the time of the Imam al-Mahdi (a.s.). So, there is nothing contradictory between this, and what you quoted from the Promised Messiah (a.s.).

    There is certainly a difference between the Khilafah al-Raashidah, referring to Khulafaa coming in succession after a Prophet appears, and Khulafaa appearing as Saints/Mujaddideen here and there sporadically all over the Islamic world.

    If not, why did the Prophet Muhammad al-Mustafa (s.a.) declare as recorded by Imam Ahmad (r.h.):
    “There will be Prophethood for as long as Allah wills it to be, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be Khilafah on the Prophetic method and it will be for as long as Allah wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be biting Kingship for as long as Allah Wills, then He will remove it when He wills, then there will be oppressive kingship for as long as Allah wills, then he will remove it when He wills, and then there will be Khilafah upon the Prophetic method”?

    Clearly, whatever Khilafah was to come between the first “Khilafah 3ala minhaaj al-nubuwwah” and the second “Khilafah 3ala minhaaj al-nubuwwah” was going to be a Khilafah of some other nature. So different, in fact, that the Prophet (s.a.) does not even mention it.

    This in itself shows the graveness of attacking a decision made by a Khalifa who is “3ala minhaaj al-nubuwwah”. Any questions on a slogan proposed by a Khalifa of this category will have to be done with the utmost respect and care, as it will be tantamount to questioning the validity of the Nubuwwah on which it is based.

    I re-iterate, therefore, that any reminder of the background of this slogan and the implications of questioning it, will be on-topic, although they may superficially appear to be a digression.

    Perhaps a new post on different types of Khilafah based on the comments here could be created on this blog.

    I thoroughly concur with our respected Moderator, on the benefit of meeting our blessed Khalifa (may Allah strengthen his hand) to ask him such questions in person. The answer he will give will certainly put the questioner’s mind to rest, Insha Allah.

  2. @Khadim:
    I have not come across this reference to a decline in the actual Khilafah after 300 years. I have heard Hadrat Khalifat-ul-Masih IV (r.h.) speak of gradual decline in the quality of belief of Ahmadi Muslims, which is a natural process to be expected. So I infer from this that they will gradually follow their Khulafaa less and less. This does not mean that the Khilafah itself will decline in its quality, but rather that the decline will be in the quality of the followers.

    It reminds me of the sharp reply given by Seyyiduna ‘Ali (r.a.) to a man who once asked him why he had not managed to accomplish things that the previous Khulafaa had achieved. Seyyiduna ‘Ali (r.a.) replied: Because they had people like me to assist them. Whereas I have people like you to assist me.

    To keep on topic, may I add that we may surmise from all this that it is quite possible that after several hundred years, the understanding of the slogan “Love for all, Hatred for none” will gradually change among Ahmadis.

  3. I agree with you brother. People are very welcome to keep whatever opinions they wish. However, if they have an issue in their heart which cannot be settled then they should approach our beloved Hudur (ayyadahu Allahu ta’ala bi-nasrihi al-‘aziz) and raise the matter with him. This is the honest and courageous thing to do. I am certain that they would have no further doubts in their hearts and minds after meeting our beloved Hudur (ayyadahu Allahu bi-nasrihi al-‘aziz). A great blessing of this Jama’at, and it should not be taken for granted, is that anyone, from a child to an elderly person, can very simply arrange a meeting with the Khalifah of the time.

    May Almighty Allah continue to allow sincere Ahmadi Muslims to serve the Khalifah of the time, Amin.

  4. Jazak Allah for your comments. Please forgive me if I have upset you. The reality is that I have a view and you have a view.

    I did not allow your second comment because you took a statement of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih II (radi Allahu ‘anhu) and used it, let’s say unknowingly (husn al-zann), to infer infidelity upon others. That I cannot allow and I will not. Your own personal Ijtihad should not infer kufr on others. Such inferences should generate a sense of fear in you also my brother / sister.

  5. Please fear God. The reality is that you did not allow for my second post to appear on this forum, whereas it contained nothing except the truth. It shows that you have taken on the color of those who oppose us; therefore most of your efforts will produce no beneficial effect.

    I was not describing my own understanding of the matter. I was only calling your attention towards the teaching of our Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) per his writings, which are very clear. When Ahmadis do things like you and others, (e.g. peace4allnations) have done here, you cause more humiliation for him in the eyes of his opponents. So again, I say to you, please fear God.


  6. This response/discourse was somewhat of a digression and there are some points that can be discussed either off-line or through other discussions. However, we should be careful in our assertions lest in our zeal we inadvertently overlook true Islamic teachings and also the writings of Hazrat Messiah Maud (as). One such inaccuracy is in the penultimate paragraph in which you state that the people didnt protect the Khilafat and the entire system was taken away.

    Please remember that Spiritual Khilafat in the Islamic Ummah was promised by Allah to the Holy Prophet (saw) till Qiyamma. So we should never state that it was eradicated. To this effect, Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) said the following in Malfoozat – Volume 5, (New Edition) Page 551, Stated on 1st May 1908:

    “The advent of Khilafat has been ordained by the Almighty up till the Day of Judgment. This special honor and superiority has been bestowed on Islam that for its support and reformation, Reformers (Mujadids) have been sent in every century, and will continue so into the future. Look! The Almighty has given the Holy Prophet a resemblance to Prophet Moses – this is proven from the usage of the word ‘Kama’. Prophet Jesus was the final Khalifa to the Shariat of Prophet Moses, as Jesus (AS) himself states that he is the last stone. Similarly, Khulafa have been always sent for the service and support of the Holy Prophet’s shariat, and this will continue till the Day of Judgment”.

    There are plenty more in the writings of Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) that further elaborate this point. I realize this too can turn into a big discussion as there are many fine points here and some ahadith that can be referred to but I at least wanted to set the record straight on this particular point.



  7. I fully agree with your sentiments above regarding those who consider their own ‘wisdom’ to be greater than that of the Khalifa of the time. I do not wish to repeat what has already been said, except for reiterating your point: “If any Ahmadi trusts his/her own judgment more than a Khalifa’s, then that is a matter of great alarm. The very foundation of Khilafah would then be under attack”.

    I do however have a question! I have spent some time trying to locate the relevant youtube link so as to paste it here, but I wasn’t able to find it. I do not want to misquote so I will try and keep it simple. Hadhrat Khalifat-ul-Masih IV once commented that approaching/after 300 years of Khilafat of the Promised Messiah (as), there will be “of course” some sort of decline in Khilafat. Please correct me if I have misunderstood this. Assuming I have not, then my question is why would this be the case? A man-made institution would naturally decline, but how could Khilafat-e-Ahmadiyya decline if it is as we believe – divinely guided. ?

  8. Your argumet is not consistent. The reality is that you do not feel that it conforms while many people are able to rationalise the two views perfectly well and do not understand this statement to mean what you suggest they do. It appears to me that you seek to impose your own understanding of the texts on others.

  9. Salaam,

    I am aware of the passage from Arbain. In no way does it contradict the 6 or 7 statements from Nur-ul-Quran.

    The question is, what is the slogan saying? That we love all people like they are our brothers and sisters, or that we love all people like they are our children? The slogan is too vague, open to wide interpretation, yet it expects some kind of action. For this reason alone it is opposed to the Sunnah of our beloved Holy Prophet (s.a.w.).

    If you say you love all human beings, what action should you take? Mere hinting and making vague statements but at the same time expecting action is against the Sunnah. And I have already stated that Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) said:

    “In reality, when a person loves anyone utterly, it is, as it were, that he eats or drinks him, and acquires the color of his beloved’s morals and conduct…”

    (for English translation, see Essence of Islam volume 3, page 36-42)

    If it the slogan is referring to the parent-child relationship, then do you think it is appropriate to proclaim to all people that we love them like they are our children? I think that is what Amir Tahir’s earlier post tried to explain and it is good to read that post again. Instead, you found an apparent contradiction in the writings of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) and left it open to interpretation without resolving it.

    In reality, the slogan has an implication that we love others like brothers and sisters (which is forbidden by Islam as elucidated by Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud) even if you say it doesn’t mean that.

    Let us compare the two quotes:

    “He cannot love them”


    “I love all men as a merciful mother loves her children. Nay more.”

    Which one expects action? Clearly the first. The second requires pondering over the rank and status of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) and nowhere has he ever said or written that we should love the non-believers. Yet this slogan clearly says that we have “Love for all”.

    Here is a question for you: why do many a politician like to talk about the slogan in their speeches at Jalsa Salana?. Do you think they believe the slogan means what you believe it means?

    Peace on those who follow the true guidance.

  10. Assalamu Alaikkum Aamir Tahir sb,

    Both my responses were to “Anonymous” who said the slogan is against Islamic teaching as well as the teaching of the Promised Messiah(AS) (both being the same I may add). Hence I was asking his opinion on the quotes from Arbain. Regarding your comment about putting the term “love” in context, that is exactly what I mentioned in both my comments. If one does that one may be able to see that instead of being against the teachings of Islam, the slogan is exactly in accordance with the teachings.

  11. I dont believe that the contributer “Anonymous” is a Non-Ahmadi. He is more likely to be from Lahori section of our brothers. Some tell-tell signs in that post point to that conclusion. Of course he is welcome to share his views and it is really interesting as well.

  12. I feel an important point has been missed here. Nobody here disagrees with the fact that Allah Subhaanahu wa Ta’ala’s Word, the Holy Qur’an, takes precedence over everything, followed by the Sunnah and Hadith.

    The point is: the very validity of the slogan “Love for all, Hatred for none” is being questioned with apparent disregard to its origin.

    This in itself bears several extremely worrying implications.

    Firstly, that The third Caliph of the Promised Messiah (a.s.), Hadrat al-Haafidh Mirza Nasir Ahmad (r.h.) “coined” a slogan which went against the teachings of the Holy Qur’an and the writings of the Promised Messiah (a.s.).

    Secondly, that the error of the Third Khalifa (r.h.) was grave enough for it to not only be highlighted but that it is quite appropriate, nay, necessary, that suggestions be made on how to rectify it.

    Thirdly, that ordinary Ahmadis have, somehow understood the Qur’anic teachings on love and sympathy, and the interpretation thereof by the Promised Messiah (a.s.), better than a Khalifa, a Haafidh-al-Qur’an to boot, who had spent years and years of his life studying Islam in all its details.

    Fourthly, that apart from the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.), everyone is prone to error in their understanding of Islam, even the Khulafa who have been representing the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.), and who are representing him today.

    The very premise of the objection raised has been shown to be invalid by our respected moderator. The slogan is our starting point, our default setting, in that we march out into the world with no pre-conceptions against anyone, and with nothing but love for the whole of mankind in our hearts. We do not fill our hearts with hatred against people before we even go out to address them.

    It has also been explained that the love mentioned in the slogan is not a blanket term, and is synonymous with sympathy, compassion, and the kind of love a mother has for her children whether they be good or bad.

    It has moreover been pointed out that shunning wrongdoers is actually an act of love and compassion towards them, in that perchance they may reform themselves. The slogan “Love for all, Hatred for none” includes such punitive measures, which are always taken for the good of the wrongdoers out of love (understand: compassion) for them.

    It has also been clarified that “Love for all, Hatred for none” does not mean that believers can make friends with wrongdoers. The “enmity and hatred” that we are supposed to have for evil-doers is in the sense that we will never ever follow their way of life, nor will we ever follow their religion. It is not directed against them as human beings. We will never go out and tell them: “We hate you.”

    In one word, this slogan does not contravene in any way the rulings of the Qur’an, nor does it contradict the writings of the Promised Messiah (a.s.).

    Had this been a mere academic discussion, there would have been no harm at all in exchanging opinions here. However, as I have pointed out, this topic is NOT a mere academic exercise. It is an attack on the respect due to a leader of Islam who has divine sanction. It is an attack on the understanding of a Khalifa. I am not saying that it is proof of pride and arrogance on the part of whoever questioned the Khalifa’s judgment, but it can certainly be feared that there are at least a handful of individuals within our Jama’at who have the arrogance to think they know better than the one chosen out of the entire Ummah to represent the Holy Prophet (s.a.), and who think that questioning a Khalifa’s decisions is a benign matter that can be brought up daily over a cup of tea.

    This is a very dangerous attitude, and I am calling upon everyone to sit down calmly and re-evaluate the implications of such an exercise.

    If any Ahmadi trusts his/her own judgment more than a Khalifa’s, then that is a matter of great alarm. The very foundation of Khilafah would then be under attack.

    The pledge of allegiance, the Bai’ah, means SELLING ONESELF to the person accepted by the Ummah as their Khalifa. Such a leader can NEVER issue an order which is Ghair ma3roof, which is against what is recognised as beneficial and reasonable. It is only out of sheer humility that such leaders take a pledge from us to obey them in all Ma3roof (recognised as beneficial and reasonable) matters, reminding us that they do not proclaim themselves to be 100% free from error; and let us not forget that even the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.) himself was commanded by Allah to include this clause in the Bai’ah he took from women:

    [60:13] O Prophet! when believing women come to thee, taking the oath of allegiance at thy hands that they will not associate anything with Allah, and that they will not steal, and will not commit adultery, nor kill their children, nor bring forth a scandalous charge which they themselves have deliberately forged, nor disobey thee in what is Ma3roof (right), then accept their allegiance and ask Allah to forgive them. Verily, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.

    Even so, we know for a fact that it was impossible for the Prophet (s.a.) to ever give an order which was not Ma3roof. The same applies to his Khulafaa al-Raashidden, the same applies to his Khaatam- al-Khulafaa, the Promised Messiah (a.s.), and the same applies to his Khulafaa. ALL of them will continue to take the same pledge from us, namely, that we promise to obey them in all Ma3roof commandments. And it so happens that all of their commandments are Ma3roof. This is the protective support that Allah SWT gives to those whom He appoints as leaders of His Ummah.


    [4:60] O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority among you. And if you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger if you are believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most commendable in the end.

    And when anything has already been decided, it is not permissible for believers to still have a choice to accept it or reject it thereafter:

    [33:37] And it behoves not a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that there should be a choice for them in the matter concerning them. And whoso disobeys Allah and His Messenger, surely strays away in manifest error.

    Anyone who believes that the Khulafa do not enjoy the same right to obedience in what they decide based entirely upon Allah’s Word and the Holy Prophet (s.a.)’s sunnah, is gravely mistaken. The Khilafah is “3ala minhaaj al-Nubuwwah”, it is on the SAME style as prophethood. Moreover, Allah SWT would NEVER have commanded us to sell ourselves to a person who could potentially jeopardise our deen. Allah would NEVER have allowed Muslims to sell themselves to Khulafaa in the same spirit as they sold themselves to the Holy Prophet (s.a.) through the Bai’ah, had this been potentially dangerous for them in any way.

    When a Khalifa issues a commandment, the attitude of the believers, if they feel they cannot understand it, is to obey it, and to refer the matter back to Allah and His Messenger, on the unshakable premise that the Khalifa MUST have understood it better than the believers ever could. They will then be helped by Allah to discover that the commandments of the Khulafaa are indeed based on Qur’anic teachings and the Sunnah.

    Anyone who puts his/her full, unquestioning trust in their Khalifa’s commandment will never go astray, nor will his/her deen ever be jeopardised in any way.

    Anyone who has doubts on the understanding of a Khalifa, and gives more credence to his/her own understanding of Islam, has in effect let go of the rope of Allah and has severed his/her pledge of selling himself/herself to the Khalifa sanctioned by Allah to lead the entire Ummah.

    Those who have disobedience in their souls will often, in their defence, cite the ways in which Muslims used to speak out and challenge their Khalifa during the time of the Khulafaa al-Raashideen. Such forthright attitudes towards the Khalifa eventually led the whole institution of Khilafah to be belittled by ordinary Muslims to such a degree that people ended up not protecting their Khulafaa adequately enough for them to be safe from assassination. Then, due to this ungratefulness of the Muslims, Allah SWT removed the entire system of the Khilafah al-Raashidah. We Ahmadi Muslims have, al-hamdu lillah, learnt from these mistakes of the past and we will not allow this to happen again, Insha Allah.

    I strongly advise all brothers and sisters to read the book “Conditions of Bai‘at & Responsibilities of an Ahmadi” by our beloved Khalifa, Hadrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad (may Allah strengthen his hand), and in particular the final part, Condition number 10, which is of relevance here, with respect to Ma3roof and Ghair Ma3roof.

  13. Agree with the Moderator that everyone is entitled to their own opinions as long as they remain respectful and objective. It’s a bit perturbing to see some folks have a go at this Anonymous person just because he is quoting Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) and reiterating that the order we must always remember is as follows: ; Holy Quran – Shariat – Holy Prophet (SAW) and the Promised Messiah (AS). Anything or anyone that deviates from this order, either deliberately or inadvertently is in manifest error.

    As for the quote aboosalik is referring to, there is another one that has also been mentioned twice from the same book and it is as follows: “Hence a believer can show friendship and sympathy and goodwishes and kindness to the Christians, the Jews, and the Hindus, but cannot love them. This is a subtle difference, and one should remember it well”.

    So instead of asking (or alleging) anyone is denying any quote, it would be better to understand the context and go from there. The way to reconcile these two quotes being discussed is to focus on the words ‘subtle difference’ and that’s why I put forth my thinking on the parent-child relationship context.

    Also, I believe it is counter-productive to insinuate that non-Ahmadis are infiltrating this group just because we differ on some points. The same way no non-Ahmadi Muslim has any right to call us as non-Muslims than the same applies to us. No one has the right to say or imply that any Ahmadi Muslim is an impostor because that would be resorting to calumny. Only Allah knows fully what is in our hearts.


  14. Anonymous, could you please tell me what you think of following words of Hadhrat Masih Maud (AS)?

    “I want to make it clear to Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Aryas, that I have no enemy. I love all men as a merciful mother loves her children. Nay more. I am enemy only of false beliefs, beliefs subversive of truth. To sympathise with all humans is my duty and to preach against falsehood, disloyalty to God, tyranny, evil conduct, injustice, immorality is my mission.” (Arbain No. 1, page. 2)

    He has used the word Mohabbat here as well as the quotes your provided from Noorul Quran and the he has clearly contextualised the usage in both instance. I dont see what the issue is here. Or are you denying the quote above?

  15. People are welcome to their opinions. You should not care about what they do or do not insinuate – that is neither here nor there. If you feel that it is your duty to bring up this point then you have fulfilled your duty and that is all that man can ask of his conscience. If you still feel strongly about it then you should arrange a mulaqat with our beloved Hudur (ayyadahu Allahu ta’ala bi-nasrihi al-‘aziz) and raise the matter.

    With regards to your argument, I am still unconvinced. The way I have understood this slogan, again, is not that it infers one should love all and in all instances – it infers a starting point and not the conclusion. It is a subtle statement. Ultimately, if you do not feel that it is suitable for you then you need not use it – uttering this statement is not fard.

  16. This is not a small matter. The principle underlying this matter is such that if anyone says anything against the Shariah, no matter who that person is, it is an obligation on the part of a Muslim to at the very least despise it in their heart of hearts. Only the Prophets of God are saved from speaking or intiating anything against the Shariah and such protection is not given to anybody else.

    Our duty is to follow the Quran and Sunnah and furthermore, as Ahmadis, to abide by the teachings and wisdom granted to us through the advent of Imam Mahdi and Masih-e-Maud (a.s.).

    This is the reason why I spoke up. This slogan is clearly against the teachings of Islam in light of the writings of Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.).

    It is very much frightful if you consider my calling your attention to this matter as being non-Ahmadi or pretending to be an Ahmadi. Do you wish to take on the color of our opponents, who label us non-Muslim, by calling one of your own as a fake? May God have mercy.

  17. I fail to understand why the cultists have stopped debating about religious beleifs of Ahmadi Muslism and are instead diverting attentions towards small matters. I cannot understand how can someone say that our motto ”Lover for All Hatred for None” is wrong or goes agianst the teachings of Islam. The motto is a great message to the world in short words that we are simply Muslims and that we love mankind and do not hate based on people’s religion, race, gender etc.
    Also i want to add something that i hope is not too harsh but i have had a bad experiance with some non ahmadi muslims pretending to be ahmadis on internet and then trying to start some sort of ahmadi vs ahmadi debates. When an Ahmadi Muslim speaks you can always recognise from thier good adaab.

  18. Assalamu Alaikkum,

    I think the allegation that we cant love “non muslims”, hence this motto is wrong really comes from the lack of understanding about the concept of love. If one starts to mix it then God only help us. As Masih Maud(AS) mentioned the key is to use the right moral quality at the right time that too in a balanced way. At times even punishments can be an act of compassion (See Philosophy…)

    Regarding the Noorul Quran quotes I skimmed through the original portion as I don’t think there is an English translation available yet. Hadhrat Masih Maud(AS) is in fact responding to an allegation that Muslims should not live anyone else except Muslims (the allegation coming mainly from Christians). He explains that the true love which is for Allah and Godly people can not be shown for Falsehood and those who follow falsehood. In its truest form that love causes you to acquire the lover’s attributes. He then explains how one should be kind and compassionate to non believers

    However in another place Hadhrat MAsih Maud(AS) says

    “I want to make it clear to Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Aryas, that I have no enemy. I love all men as a merciful mother loves her children. Nay more. I am enemy only of false beliefs, beliefs subversive of truth. To sympathise with all humans is my duty and to preach against falsehood, disloyalty to God, tyranny, evil conduct, injustice, immorality is my mission.” (Arbain No. 1, page. 2)

    So his writing itself has explained the type of love which is reserved for Allah, righteous and Godly people and the love for all mankind in general (based on compassion, kindness and sympathy). May Allah enable us understand the teaching of Imam in the correct way

  19. Again, I see your point of view, yet still disagree with it. You choose to take this statement literally, while it was not intended to be taken as such and has not been framed in a literal sense by the respected people in the Jama’at who are charged with the authority to do so. Compassion is reactive while love is pro-active. True love does not come after knowledge of someone or thing, but before.

    I do not personally see an issue here.

  20. It doesn’t matter to me if other people admire the slogan. What I admire is the plain truth.

    It also doesn’t matter to me who made the slogan, because everyone will have to answer for their own beliefs and actions on the Day of Judgement. Certainly Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) has frowned upon such a statement as evident in his book Nur-ul-Quran, and that is enough for me.

    Your saying “Only a person who preaches hatred can find fault with “Love for all, Hatred for none”” is unfair to say the least because to have compassion for non-believers (and not loving them) is obviously not the same as hatred. Actually, not to love them and instead, to be compassionate with them, is a commandment of Allah the Almighty.

    Your reference to the different turban styles is irrelevant to the discussion.

  21. Thanks for opening up this discourse, I find it useful and informative. As for Hazrat Messiah Maud’s (as) statement , I’d like to offer my two cents.

    While he says I have love for all mankind he qualifies that by invoking the parent-child relationship. That got me thinking. Since I too am a parent and love my children, for me to say I love all children the way I love my own children would not be true. While I have always loved kids, after having my own, the love one feels as being their parent is unparalleled and cannot be applied to other people’s children. Now since Almighty Allah is the Creator of all people and things, obviously He can and does love all of His creation. And since Prophets are the next step, I believe that they do have a higher threshold of love than us mere mortals. And by this I mean that since their mission reflects preaching the truth and spreading love of the Almighty, their remit is a lot larger and their capacity far exceeds ours. Therefore, for us to apply the same ‘love for all’ logic as a sweeping generalization seems incorrect.

    Another thing to think about is that there are caveats to even the love Prophet’s exhibited in their lifetimes. So no one should claim that the Holy Prophet (saw) and Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) categorically loved everyone. One that comes to mind is the the lady Hinda that the Holy Prophet (saw) did not want to communicate with after Fathe Mecca since she ordered the assassination of his beloved Uncle, Hazrat Hamza. Obviously there are other examples as well of the Holy Prophet (saw) expressing his displeasure at certain people and in some cases taking extreme action against them (eliminations being one of them). Similarly, you probably know the incident of when Pandit Lekh Ram tried to say salaam to Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) and Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) not only refused to answer him but even to acknowledge him. In fact, he was enraged that how dare this person speak to him when he is guilty of (God forbid) cursing his beloved Holy Prophet (saw). As with the case of the Holy Prophet (saw), there are some cases of extreme actions being taken by Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) as well.

    It’s also worth keeping in mind that one of the accusations the Christians leveled against Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) was that their Messiah, Hazrat Jesus (as) was all about preaching love and forgiveness and compared to that this current era Messiah, Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) had actually initiated and succeeded in prayer duels in which opponents were terminated. To this the response was that Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) prayer success rate was a lot higher than Hazrat Isa (as), case in point, he ended up on the Cross and cried out as to why he was being forsaken. And contrast that to Hazrat Messiah Maud (as) and he was vindicated and exonerated in his trials. Obviously there is more to this and objective wasn’t to (God Forbid) belittle the status of Hazrat Isa (as) but to make a point and a point of distinction as well. When challenged and attacked, love or ‘mohabat’ wasn’t the weapon of choice, but rational arguments and prayers were.

    May the Almighty help us all stay on the true path.

  22. And the whole purpose of this attack is..? Are you trying to show that the 3rd Khalifa, Hadrat Mirza Nasir Ahmad (r.h.) was (Na3udhu billah) wrong and went against the Promised Messiah (a.s.) when he launched the beautiful slogan that is so admired by others, “Love for all, Hatred for none”? Do you think he didn’t understand that the kind of love the Promised Messiah (a.s.) was speaking about in the passage you quoted was in a particular sense, and was not the kind of love meant in the slogan? So he didn’t understand the Promised Messiah (a.s.) but you and your like-minded friends do?

    I have seen such attacks come from people who also criticise the Khulafa for deciding to wear the Punjabi style of turban, which they (those people) by contorted arguments attempt to show as being “not required by Islam” and therefore “cultish”. Those very same people then go on to state that they themselves do not care to observe the Islamic requirement of keeping their bodies covered in public! As always, they look for the straw in the eye of their brother and fail to see the beam in their own.

    Only a person who preaches hatred can find fault with “Love for all, Hatred for none”. Love is of many kinds, and it would be very naive to think that the love proclaimed in this slogan refers to ALL the types of love that exist.

    One must learn to view things within their context and to concentrate on fostering positivity in the world instead of remaining bogged down in an unending blame-game.

  23. Regarding a comment made above:
    “what about this verse (58:22 or 23)?
    لا تجد قوما يؤمنون بالله واليوم الآخر يوادون من حاد الله ورسوله
    yuwaadoon = i think comes from the root wud which is love right? ”

    يوادون Yuwaaddoona is from the verb واد Waadda which means: “To make friends with”. Believers are expressly told not to be two-faced and start making friends with people who have shown their enmity to Allah and/or to any of His messengers.

    The “Love for all, Hatred for none” slogan is an announcement we make to the world, in that we tell them that we preach love for all human beings, and we do not preach hatred towards any of them.

    That does not mean that we will start entertaining warm friendships with all manner of criminals, nor does it mean that we will not outspokenly condemn wrongdoers for their crimes.

    It is simply the primary attitude we have for the world. Our “default setting” is to love every creature God has made and to have no prejudice against any of them.

    It is interesting that Allah has no attribute “the Hater”. In fact, nowhere can we find “Allah hates” in the Qur’an. Hatred is usually associated with disbelievers in the Qur’an. The most we find is: “It is enormous (in the eyes of) Allah” or “Allah does not love”. This means that when someone behaves in a way that Allah disapproves of, He withholds His expressions and manifestations of love from that person, without actually hating the person.

    This is why the most we Ahmadi Muslims do in the face of odious behaviour is to turn away from and and shun the wrongdoer and to cease being friendly with him or her, but without hating him or her.

    This is is stark contrast to certain Muslim groups, who at the very inset address the world with hatred already present in their speeches. From Day One, they reveal their hatred towards some of God’s creatures, and recommend it and preach it actively at their gatherings.

    Through “Love for all, Hatred for none”, we show that we do not come forward already carrying hatred in our hearts towards anyone.

  24. I agree with you that this slogan can engender misunderstandings and may be taken literally by some people.

    You said:

    “The above statement puts forward an important spiritual and legal maxim of Islam; namely, that a Muslim must love all men”;

    whereas Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) said:

    “Hence a believer can show friendship and sympathy and goodwishes and kindness to the Christians, the Jews, and the Hindus, but cannot love them. This is a subtle difference, and one should remember it well”

    as I quoted earlier. Please note the words “but cannot love them” as against your understanding of the slogan as you have said “must love all men”.

    Furthermore, in the same book, Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) says that the Arabic word “Muhabbat” (same word used in the slogan) also has the connotation of “becoming full” meaning that you lose your being with the one whom you love. So when you say “Muhabbat sabh kay liye” than what else can you mean?

    The difference between love and compassion is a subtle difference and Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) said that you must remember this fact. The matter is simple: you cannot love the non-believers. Actually, as explained by Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.), the Quranic teaching is that you are prohibited from exhibiting love for them. Instead, you are to have compassion for them.

    If you really want a slogan, then it should have been “Compassion for all, Hatred for none”.


  25. Brother / Sister, I think that you have taken the slogan far too literally and not looked at the spirit behind it. Explanations have been given above to rectify such a misunderstanding. Love for man, or the desire for man’s betterment, cannot be compared to love for Almighty Allah.

  26. Salaam fellow Ahmadis,

    The slogan “Love for All, Hatred for None” is against the teachings of Islam as explained by Hadhrat Masih-e-Maud (a.s.) in his book “Nur-ul-Quran”. He has explained it very clearly as follows:

    “In reality, when a person loves anyone utterly, it is, as it were, that he eats or drinks him, and acquires the color of his beloved’s morals and conduct…”

    “Now when this is the reality of love, how can a true Book which emanates from God permit that you should give to Satan the love that should be given to God, and also as much love to the heirs of Satan as you should give to the followers of the Beneficient.”

    “A true lover perishes in his beloved.”

    “The difference between compassion and love is that the one who loves sees all the words and deeds of his beloved with appreciation and desires strongly that these conditions may appear in him as well.”

    “So the Quranic teaching gives us this instruction that we should love the virtuous and pious and righteous people and should be compassionate towards the infidels and fornicators.”

    “Hence a believer can show friendship and sympathy and goodwishes and kindness to the Christians, the Jews, and the Hindus, but cannot love them. This is a subtle difference, and one should remember it well.”

    (Nur ul Quran, English Translation, page 106-111).

    Peace on those who follow the true guidance.

  27. @muslim first

    Well then, that’s what we’ve got to work on, not to let our displeasure of actions of others as a means of hating them, as summarized by brother Ibne Khalid below, i.e. follow the best practical example.

    Above when you said “the ayah i quoted was clear imo” I wondered why would we need tafsir if the verses are so clear to those who don’t give a deep thought to them. I am not saying that you haven’t, and I don’t think I have either.

  28. The Holy Prophet (saw) was the practical implementation of the commands of the Quran. If our master (saw) never hated any people but instead always prayed for their guidance out of his love for mankind then that is how we should also behave…he forgave even those who brutally murdered his own family. What more evidence do we need? Hate is not an attribute that can be associated to Rasoolullah (saw).

  29. well yea, the actions of the person are what makes you not love them, not the people themselves. i’m confused, do you interpret allah’s saying ‘qawm al-fasiqin’ to mean ‘fisq’? and ‘man hada allaha wa rasulahu’ to ‘just opposing allah and his messenger?’ because allah uses words like ‘qawm’ and ‘man.’

  30. Would the verses (‘ wallahu la uhibbu al-qowma (insert sin here)’- ie ‘surely Allah does not love the people who (insert sin here)’) mean Allah hates the peolpe? If that is the case, would Allah never ever love them?- even if they were to change their actions?
    By the way, i just wanted to know- is there an attribute of God mentioned which would translate as “The Hater”?

  31. Again, you are mixing people with actions. Please read Imam al-Ghazali’s book ”99 Names of Allah” and how he describes the attribute ”Al-Wadud” as the highest attribute of Mercy (al-Rahim, al-Rahman, al-Ghaffar…). We know from the first hadith Qudsi that Almighty Allah’s Mercy supersedes His wrath. We are each born in a state of Fitrah and it is our actions and intentions which determine our piety or unrighteousness. Likewise, our love for our fellow man to become Godly people should always supersede our hate.

    Anyhow, I agree with the position here expressed by Peaceworld.

  32. the ayah i quoted was clear imo. as the first quote you gave said, our bond of islam is the most high and those who oppose it make it very difficult for us to love them.

    Allah is al-wudood. I don’t know if you’d translate that as ‘all-loving’ because there are many places in the quran where allah doesn’t love people. they usually go like ‘ wallahu la uhibbu al-qowma (insert sin here)’. it occurs in many places in the book.

    and i don’t see how this ayah contradicts the other ayaat you brought up.

  33. The five volume commentary states:

    “Obviously, there could be no true or sincere friendship or relationship of Love between the faithful and the disbelievers. The ideas, principles, and religious beliefs of the two being poles apart and the community of the interest which is the ‘sine qua non’ of intimate relationship being non-existent, the verse requires believers not to have intimate, loving and affectionate friendship with disbelievers. The bond of belief transcends all other bonds, even the close ties of blood. The verse seems to have a general application. But it applies to specifically who are at war with Muslims”

    From this I understand that the real love for which we should strive for is the love of Allah the Almighty, the Messengers and the message they bought such that “The bond of belief transcends all other bonds, even the close ties of blood.” This does not mean that love of humanity, the love of the creatures of God should not exist.

    Let me draw a similarity. Our only purpose as Muslims on this planet is to worship Allah, isn’t it? Yet we resort to seemingly worldly things such as working several hours a day, earning an income, spending time with family, friends and children. However, we are commanded to worship Him through these activities as well. This could include praising Him for all that He has provided us, thanking him wholeheartedly in times of joy etc.

    Similarly, when we are asked to love Him and His messengers, we should love all His creatures, THROUGH Him. Today we hear humanists for example, drawing to us the importance of caring for each other, giving first importance to humanity, but a true believers should love the creatures through the Creator bearing stronger heartfelt care. One such example is the willingness, the urge to deliver your faith and belief (that is if you truly believe, which we should) to those who are today ignorant of it or are misled, simply for the love of God and through Him, the betterment of His creatures.

    One method of displaying love of humanity in general is to act with justice, irrespective colour, creed, nation, BELIEF or FAITH. How would you justify the following beautiful verse of the Qur’an? …

    Chapter 5 verse 9 states:

    “O ye who believe! be steadfast in the cause of Allah, bearing witness in equity; and let not a people’s enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice. Be always just, that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah. Surely, Allah is aware of what you do.”

    One divine attribute as presented by brother theartofmisinformation is “The All Loving”. I wonder how you managed to justify His attribute to the verse which you seem to present as ‘encouraging or allowing hate of other creatures.’ Surely if He is All Loving, we as having been created in the image of God (should not be interpreted wrongly) , we should try reflect His attributes. If He is All Knowing, we should try and increase our knowledge till our last breath, if He is The Forgiving, we should try and instill within ourselves the habit of forgiving others and indeed if He is All Loving, we should try and follow as such. Off course we are too far off (infact infinitely) and we will never get there as humans we have our limits. The one and only person who did reach that human limit was Hadhrat Muhammad (saw), the apex of human spiritual evolution.

    As mentioned by another user, I don’t know where, how would you also justify the following biblical commandment “Love thy neighbor”, surely according to you we should not love a disbelieving neighbor or a neighbor who does Shirk. All that Love for All, Hatred for None does is expand “Love thy neighbour” to the corners of the earth.

    I would like to mention another verse:

    Chapter 60 verse 10 states:

    “Allah only forbids you, respecting those who have fought against you on account of your religion, and have driven you out of your homes, and have helped others in driving you out, that you make friends of them, and whosoever makes friends of them — it is these that are the transgressors.”

    Allah doesn’t forbid you to make friends with those who have not fought you for your faith, or driven you out of your home. So tell me would your friendship to non-Muslims be filled with hate?

    I hope my view is clear MuslimFirst and Love for All, Hatred for None!

  34. One attribute of Almighty Allah is ”Al-Wadud” meaning The All Loving. Hate, as you have mentioned, is something one should only entertain if it is directed towards actions or concepts which are contrary to the teachings and guidance of Almighty Allah. Again, there is no need to hate any person, but rather any ”fahish,” ”haram” or ”najis” characteristics of that person or his/her beliefs. For example, when the people of Taif insulted and assaulted the Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) he still maintained his love for them as human beings, as was the case for the enemy in the battle of Badr.

  35. asalamu alaykum

    what about this verse (58:22 or 23)?
    لا تجد قوما يؤمنون بالله واليوم الآخر يوادون من حاد الله ورسوله
    yuwaadoon = i think comes from the root wud which is love right?

    i just checked the translation on and it agrees. in sha allah hate is okay if it’s for the sake of allah.

Join the Discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s