In everyday life, we meet people who believe in such things as woman’s good or bad, witchcraft and superstitions. For example, some say that number 13 is unworthy. Similarly, some believe that some important matters, such as starting in Germany, should be avoided, if possible, on Tuesday and things like that. Would you kindly guide us on these matters? So you have answered the question, they are not realities, that’s all. You have answered it yourself, by saying they are not realities, this is why you call them superstitions. What would you call it? You would call it a cult. That’s again one and the same thing. What? Let them? Don’t interfere with them. Do you believe? The question which you don’t believe, and I don’t believe either, why do you discuss that? Meaningless.
So as Ahmadis I say, leave that alone then. Please go to the microphone, because when it is recorded, people would not know what we are talking between us. Yesterday I discussed this matter with a friend of mine. I see. And he had strong feelings. Now the point is, this is the point to which I wanted you to come. The question should have been differently framed. The question should have been framed in a manner, that although we don’t believe, but those who believe present this evidence in favour of this. So in view of that evidence, what should be our attitude? Then we will examine the evidence, and then this would be a valid question. But when you don’t ask this in this form, then I have nothing to offer as answer.
So if you discuss this matter with a Hindu friend, who believed in this witchcraft, the answer would be different in every situation. A particular Hindu may believe in a certain form of witchcraft, and another Hindu may believe in another form of witchcraft. An Indian may believe in one form, and an African, or many Africans may believe in many other various forms. So unless I hear a particular case described, I can’t opine on that. So if you could not satisfy your Hindu friend, and you thought his evidence was overwhelming against you, then you can always come to me for help. Tell me now, what was it which found you in a difficult situation? He gave me a long story. Somebody got ill, and they called the Panditji, and Panditji cured him, and all this. He told me a story.
As far as the story was concerned, after that I had no time to discuss with him. But then I went with my one Hindu, I think he was Hindu, and one Sikh friend. His name is Mr. Harpal Singh. And I started the same subject with them, in a way. And they also said that there is a mention of witchcraft and all this. And they started discussing that too. But I told them, I am 63 now, and during my whole life period, I have never seen any witchcraft or anything. That is an example that we don’t believe. And they are not being positive at all. No, but that is not an evidence of negation of witchcraft. You have not seen many things. That is witchcraft. Which have an existence.
You are not seeing a thing, there is no proof against something. And moreover, in logic they say, the lack of evidence is not a proof against the existence of something. There has to be a positive proof of negation of something. Otherwise, just lack of knowledge is no proof. Mr. Prasad, once my friend, Mr. Naseer Dar, had given one instance, very interesting instance, during his service. He had to find out some witchcraft and all this. And then ultimately he found out something which was not real. That may be. But maybe because he came across something unreal. That doesn’t show that the real cannot happen. There is no evidence whatsoever.
If he happened to have come across something which was unreal, how can you claim that because of this, there cannot be any reality in existence? That is a wrong conclusion. You know, all these things are so much, such a jumble of so many things, you want me to contradict them all in just one sweep of hand. That’s not possible. That would be unreal of me to do that. I don’t know by which witchcraft, what is meant by one particular person, and there may be some reality in some claims, and that reality would still not contradict with the general concept of things as we have. So, in generalizations I can’t reject something in total. Unless somebody provides something positive, and I have the chance and means to examine that claim, I can’t reject, nor should you do that.
Why should you go on rejecting something unnecessarily, unless it comes into clash with your principal views, fundamental views, and then the onus is on your shoulders to prove that claim to be wrong. But in these generalities I simply can’t find anything. Q. But I want to get guidance, you know. K. This is the guidance. This is the guidance. No, what I am telling you, what I am trying to teach you is this, that don’t be hasty in rejecting any claim. If you have not means enough to investigate and find an evidence, the best attitude you can adopt is that we don’t know, and we don’t believe, that’s all. Ask for the evidence from the other party. A tale is no evidence.
So the best attitude you can adopt is that of agnosticism. You say, I have not enough evidence, you are telling the tale, it’s not satisfying, it’s not convincing to me, so next time choose someone else for telling this tale. That would be reasonable. But to go into debate without knowing the basic facts and rejecting things, that is an irrational approach. The best attitude you can take is this, that so far whenever an investigation was made, no evidence was found by neutral investigators of the existence of the so far claimed witchcraft. That is the correct position. But some things are called witchcraft or were labelled witchcraft earlier, yet the Holy Quran gives us evidence that they did produce certain things, and that witchcraft was something like mesmerism.
Because the incident of Moses that we read in the Holy Quran, and his competition with the witch doctors of that time, the magicians of that time, is recorded in the Holy Quran. And the Holy Quran does not reject their claim to be a sort of magician. It describes the nature of their magic. It says saharu ayunannase, they influenced the eyes of the people. Now saharu ayunannase has been explained variously. Some scholars tend to believe that by that means a trick was played upon the eyes of the people. So any clever device adopted to deceive the eye, even if it had no relationship with mesmerism, could be conceivable. Any trick like ordinary magicians do adopt, that may have been mentioned.
But saharu ayunannase may also mean that they influenced the eye through some mental power. And the present day investigation by scientists tends to prove, although no final round proof has been established, but so far the consensus of opinion among the scientists who are investigating into this, is this, that the brain has definitely a certain power, which can influence other brains, which can influence the vision, the hearing and other perceptions. So my personal inclination is to believe that the Holy Quran wants to convey to us that they did play a sort of magic, they did work a sort of magic, but that magic was in the region of mesmerism, not actual change in realities of things. This is why I don’t… Pardon? That is saharu ayunannase, exactly.
Yes, I know that, but you come and speak of this on the microphone. Questioner asks a question inaudible Mesmerize him, yes. As he was putting attention on the Promised Messiah, he saw in his old age that some lions were coming, and he thought… The two lions standing on each side of the Promised Messiah who were ready to pounce upon him. And then he ran away like madman, you know, crying and shouting, and he was trembling when people caught hold of him, and then he explained that he had come with the intention of making the Promised Messiah dance while he was delivering the sermon.
So everybody who believed in him as a prophet, as a messenger of God, he would immediately abandon him and say, look here, what sort of prophet he is, he is delivering a sermon and also dancing. So it kicked back on him. It kicked back on him. Yes. And he admitted that, because he declared himself that he is the pious man and he has the special guidance from God, because the Promised Messiah… But it’s not because of his evidence that we believe in that.
No, what I read was that later on he had a communication with the Promised Messiah and he admitted that he is really, you know… No, that incident is only significant to the extent that some enemy admitted his defeat and frustration. Yes. And that enemy was a sort of mesmerist, that was his magic, and when he tried to work that magic on the Promised Messiah, it bounced back on him. While normally this does not happen. If there is a strong-minded person and you want to influence him through mesmerism, either he begins to be influenced or he resists that influence and nothing happens.
But for that to bounce back on you in a different form of which you are not conceiving, that is a sign that some supernatural phenomena was taking place at that time. It was not an ordinary mesmerism. So this is exactly what is mentioned in that incident of Moses versus the magicians of the time. Moses had no idea of that mesmerism or that magic which was being played during those days. Being himself an innocent person of all these things.
So whatever was taking place on behalf of Moses was not by his own inner being or his own mental power, but by the power which was behind him. So these two incidents are quite similar in this respect. Not that is why, but there is one other reason. He had certain attributes, certain qualities.
