Muslims
scholars representing various Muslim organizations and parties from all
parts of East and West Pakistan held a conference in Karachi to discuss
government suggestions and recommendations for the new constitution
presented to parliament. The meeting ended with many suggestions and
reforms one of which was
...
we demand that the government should consider all those who believe in
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a religious leader a minority equal to many
non-Muslim minorities in the country and give them one seat in Punjab's
parliament.
Other
suggestions were so reasonable and clear that enemies were unable to
attack them, and when some invective writers did, their influence was
null among the educated.
A
great number of educated Pakistanis were not convinced that the
suggestion which demanded the separation of Qadiyanis was reasonable and
necessary. But here, I am going to explain quite clearly why all Muslim scholars agreed to stand by this suggestion.
Being
an independent non-Muslim minority is a natural and reasonable result
of all that Qadiyanis chose for themselves. They caused and urged
everything that result in making them a non-Muslim community. The first
of which is their fabrication of the meaning of
the Last of Allah's apostles
by which they differed from all Muslims who believe in Mohammad (peace be upon him) as the Last Apostle and that there will be no apostles after him until the day of judgment takes place.
This
is the meaning which the Apostle's companions understood and derived
from the following verse
"Mohammad is not the father of any of your men,
but the Apostle of Allah and the Last Apostle" (Sura Al-Ahzab verse
40).
The Apostle's companions fought all those who pretended being
apostles after the death of Mohammad (peace be upon him). And this was
the meaning which Muslims understood from all the sources, and thus they
did not and do not accept any one who pretends to be an apostle.
Qadiyanis
only, and for the first time in the history of Muslims, interpreted the
Quranic phrase "The Last of the Apostles" (*Malfuzal Ahmadiya by
M.Manzur Ilahi pp.290*) to mean that Mohammad is the Apostle's stamp
which certifies and signs other Apostle's Messages. What we have said
can be proven by the texts quoted here from Qadiyanis books and essays.
Here are three quotations.
--"The
promised Christ (peace be upon him) said in his interpretation of
`Khatamu Nabiyeen': what is meant is that no Prophet's message can be
authorized and certified except by Mohammad's stamp. As every document
is not accepted unless affirmed or confirmed by stamp and signature, so
every message that is not confirmed by Mohammad's stamp is not true.
(Malfuzal Ahmadiya edited by M.Manzur Ilahi pp.290)
--"We
do not deny that Mohammad (peace be upon him) was the seal of prophets,
but what the majority of people understand contradicts the greatness of
the prophet (peace be upon him) since it leads to the conviction that
the prophet had bereft his nation from Allah's greatest favor -
prophets. What is meant by this phrase is that the prophet is the seal
which confirms messages after his, so there will be no prophet if not
affirmed by the holy prophet Mohammad. In this meaning only we do
believe". (Al-Fadl, 22 Sept 1939)
--"The
seal is the stamp, and if the holy prophet is the stamp, how can he be a
stamp and no prophets to be confirmed". (Al-Fadl, 22 Sept 1923)
The
differences between all Muslim and Qadiyanis are not limited to the
explanation or the fabrication of one word "Khatem", but differences
went to extremes since Qadiyanism claimed openly and frankly that not
only one prophet is likely to appear after Mohammad (peace be upon him)
but thousands of prophets. This is to be found in Qadiyani texts, some
of which are the following "The rise of many new prophets is as clear fact as the sun in midday". (The Reality Of Qadiyanism by Mirza Bashir
Mahmud pp.228)
--"Muslims
falsely claim that the sources of Allah ran out and no more prophets
will appear. They do not justly estimate God. As for me, I say that not
only one prophet may appear but thousands". (Anwar Khilafat by Mirza
Bashir Mahmud pp. 62)
--"If
a man sharpened swords close by my neck threateningly asking me to say
that no prophet will appear after Mohammad(peace be upon him) I would
say to him, you are a liar, it is right, there must be prophets after
him". (Ibid. pp.65)
After
Ghulam Ahmad had opened the way of messages and prophets, he pretended
he was a prophet. Qadiyanis believed his pretense and accepted it
completely. We quote here some of their declarations and sayings to
witness to their deviations and fabrications as well as can be.
--"The
promised Christ declared his claim to a Message and to be a prophet, as
he wrote `I am a prophet and an apostle' (Al-Badr 5 Mar 1908), or as he
also wrote `I am a prophet according to Allah's orders. If I deny this I
am sinful. And If Allah calls me thus how can I deny it. I will stand
by this claim until my death' (Letter to Akhbar Am by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
written three days before his death and published on his date of death
i.e., 26 May 1908).
--"The
characteristics Islam gives of the promised Christ means that is truly a
prophet". (The Reality Of The Message by Mirza Bashir pp.174)
An
essential element in all the persons who pretend to be prophets is to
charge those who do not believe in him with disbelief and refection of
faith. This is exactly what Qadiyanis do in their congregational
speeches and publications against Muslims who deny their pretense.
I
quote the following from their speeches:
--"All
Muslims who do not swear fealty to Ghulam Ahmad are disbelievers, even
if they have not heard his name". (Ayina Sadakat by Mirza Bashir Eddin
pp. 35)
--"Every
man who believes in Moses but not in Jesus Christ, in Mohammad but not
in Ghulam Ahmad is not only a disbeliever, but in the deepest levels of
rejection of faith". (Word Of Demarcation by Bashir Ahmad pp 110).
--"Since
we believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet, and all non-Ahmadis
disbelieve in him, we consider non-Ahmadis disbelievers according to the
Quranic verse which says that in one prophet is a rejection of the
whole prophets".(Mirza Bashir Ahmad's article in Al-Fadl, 26 May 1922).
Qadiyanis
not only say they are anti-Muslim in Ghulam Ahmad's message, but say
that there are nothing to connect them with Muslims since their God,
Islam, Quran prayer and fasting are unlike the Muslims.
Qadiyani
caliph's speech published in Al-Fadl on 21 Aug 1927, under the title of
`Advice for Students' explains to his followers the differences between
Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis. He says "... Since the promised Christ said
that their Islam, their God, and their pilgrimage are unlike ours, we
always differ from them in every thing".
In
Jul 30, 1931, Al-Fadl published another speech by the Qadiyani caliph
in which he mentioned a dispute that ensued between two groups of
Qadiyanis. One reasoned that since differences between Qadiyanis and
Muslims are known, and the promised Christ has clarified them there is
no need to establish independent Qadiyani schools: we can learn all
undisputed matters in Muslim schools. The other group disagreed. While
they were still arguing, the promised Christ himself entered and
listened to their dispute. Then, he gave his judgment saying: "It is
wrong to say that we differ from Muslims only in the matter of Christ's
death. We disagree with them in the wholeness of God, in the prophet,
(peace be upon him), in the Quran, in prayer, in pilgrimage and in
Al-Zakat. In short, he explained to them that we disagree quite
completely with Muslims concerning all religious matters".
Qadiyanis
themselves broke relations with Muslims in accordance with the great
gap they had dug between them and Muslims. They organized themselves
independently, as if they were a non-Muslim minority as affirmed by
their own writings.
--"The
promised Christ made it clear that Ahmadis should not be led in prayer
by a Muslim. Many letters come questioning this matter. My answer to
them all is that no matter how many times you repeat the question, I
will answer that it is not right, not right, not right to be led in
prayer by a non-Ahmadiyan". (Anwar Khilafat by Mirza Bashir Mahmud pp.
89)
--"We
must neither believe in non-Ahmadiyan Islam, nor be led by them in
prayer, because in our opinion they are disbelievers in one of Allah's
prophets". (Ibid. pp. 90)
--"If
a non-Ahmadi's son died why ,we do not pray for him though he does not
disbelieve in Ghulam Ahmad as the promised Christ! I myself ask those
who have questioned me why we do not pray for the son of a Hindu or a
Christian when they die....The non-Ahmadi's son is one of the
non-Ahmadis and for this reason prayer for them is not right". (Ibid.
pp.93)
--"The
promised Christ was loathsome of an Ahmadiyan who wanted to let his
daughter a non-Ahmadiyan. The man asked him many times, but the promised
Christ ordered him not to do so. Then the man allowed his daughter
marriage after the death of the promised Christ, so the caliph drove him
away from his religious position and did not accept his penitence
though the man repeated it many times until six years elapsed". (Ibid.
pp. 93-94)
--"The
promised Christ did not allow any transaction with Muslims, except
those permitted to be so with Christians and Jews. He distinguished us
from Muslims in prayer, prohibited intermarriage with them, and prayer
for their dead, so what is left to connect us with them? Interactions
between people depend on two things and have two forms; a religious and a
worldly transactions. The greatest means of religious transactions is
to pray together and to intermarry. These two kinds are prohibited in
our religion, and if you say that we are allowed to marry Muslim girls, I
say that this applies to Christians, too. And if you question me why it
is right to greet non-Ahmadis, my answer will be that according to a
true prophet's Hadith, he returned the greetings of Jews". (Word Of
Demarcation published in Rioy av Religinter, pp. 69)
Not
only did Qadiyanis broke relations and transactions with Muslims in
their speeches and writings, but they did so in practice as hundreds of
thousands of Muslims had reported. They made an independent nation of
themselves refusing to pray or intermarry with Muslims.
The
problem being so, it is unreasonable that Qadiyanis remain a part of
the Muslim community. It is not necessary that their independence should
be legally enacted, since this had been a fact during the last fifty
years.
By
their attitude, Qadiyanis have proved what was difficult to prove
before this time concerning the wisdom and practical benefits of the
cessation of Allah's messages. In the past, one used to wonder why
Allah's revelation and inspiration and Apostles cease to come.
Nowadays,
experience has proven the great wisdom and beautiful benefits of this
good favor from Allah. The belief that Mohammad was the last prophet
united all monotheists in following only one prophet, and thus endowed
them with what strengthened and ensured their unity and interactions.
The renewal of a doctrine by many prophets separate the nation into many
communities. If we expel Qadiyanis, none will dare to rise among us and
pretend a new message to destroy our unity and solidarity. But if we
overlook Qadiyanism, we will help and encourage many pretenders to rise
and feign, and thus we participate in harming Muslim solidarity. And if
we neglect this danger, our example will be followed by our sons, and
thus the destruction will not stop and our society will face a new kind
of danger everyday; dangers which split the Muslim nation.
This
is our true argument on which we base our demands of making Qadiyanis a
minority which has the rights of any non-Muslims minority. In fact, the
argument that reaches home is with us and no other reasonable argument
can be brought against our demand. Those who oppose our demand want to
divert people from it with pretexts and objections that have nothing to
do with the matter under question. They say, for instance, that various
Muslim groups are still charging each other with disbelief and, if we go
on separating group after another, the nation will vanish. Moreover,
they say there are independent Muslim sects, as Qadiyanism, though they
do not differ with Muslims in doctrines. Thus, they ask us whether we
still intend to break relations with them or whether we chose to treat
Qadiyanis a such out of hatred and wrath.
Many
others were deceived by Qadiyanis' call to Islam. "Qadiyanis are
defending Islam against Christian and Aryan attacks, and spreading it
all over the world, so it is right to treat them as you do", they used
to say. But we are going to discuss each of these points to answer any
possible question.
1.
It is lamentable true that Muslims' various groups are still charging
each other with disbelief, but it is wrong to make this a pretext for
Qadiyanism as a true Muslim sect; that is because:
- a)
It is unreasonable to give examples of bad charges and judge that any
charge is unacceptable, and that charging anyone with disbelief is not
right. In fact, it is as wrong to charge people with disbelief for
trivial differences as to accept clear and certified deviations from the
fundamental principles of Islam. Those who conclude from false charges
against some scholars that all kinds of charges are not right are
requested to answer whether a Muslim remains a believer if he pretends
to be God or a prophet, or if he deviates from Islam's fundamental
doctrines.
- b)
Muslim groups and sects whose charges against each other are being
utilized held a conference in Karachi and agreed on the fundamental
principles of the Muslim state. They agreed on the same principles
because each considers the other a Muslim group or sect. None of them
charged the other of being out of pale, though there were minor
differences among them. Thus, to think that separating Qadiyanism from
the Muslim nation will be a cause for separating many others is an
illusion.
- c)
The Muslim nation's charge of Qadiyanis with disbelief is unlike any
charge against others. Qadiyanis falsely pretended the existence of a
new prophet who considers those who believe in him a separate nation and
those who do not as disbelievers. Thus, all Qadiyanis agree on charging
Muslims with rejection of faith, and Muslims have judged Qadiyanis as
disbelievers, too.
- Hence,
it becomes quite clear that this is a fundamental difference which
cannot be considered trivial and minor differences, as among various
Muslim sects.
2.
No doubt there are some sects other than Qadiyani who have withstood
Muslims and broken their relationship with them, and organized their
sects independently, but the wrong these have done is quite different
from that done by Qadiyanis in many respects.
a)
These sects have completely separated themselves from the Muslim nation
to the extent that they have become like slag lying by the road which
is neither harmful nor harmed. Their existence is bearable. Qadiyanis
mix with Muslims, pretending to believe in their doctrines, discuss them
with others, and to argue in the name of Islam, seeding, in fact, to
split members off the Muslim community and win them to their side. A
great tumult, disgraceful disunity, and oppressive occupations befell
Muslims from Qadiyanis agency to foreign countries. For this and many
other reasons we cannot abide with them.
b)
The sects that have differences with the Muslim community are judged by
Islamic jurisprudence. It decides whether their private beliefs drive
them out of pale. And even if we suppose that they are not followers of
Islam, their beliefs will not endanger Muslims and will not cause any
social, economic, and political problems. But Qadiyanis' fabrication do
endanger the faith of hundreds of thousands of Muslims and cause a
social problem in every Muslim family that is influenced by them to the
extent that husband forsakes his wife, and father abandons his son, and
an enmity rises between two brothers. Moreover, other non-Qadiyani sects
do not have any political trends that can be considered a danger to our
national life. Qadiyanis do have some dangerous political tendencies
that cannot be overlooked.
Qadiyanis
were quite certain that, in an independent free Muslim society, a
pretended message could not grow up or achieve its aims. They know that
the Muslim nation abhors such pretenses as these which disperse Muslims,
destroy Islamic laws, and split Muslim society.
Being
aware of the attitude of the prophet's companions towards pretenders of
holy messages, and of the fact that whenever Muslims take power in any
country they will never admit new and false pretenses, Qadiyanis chose
to connect themselves with disbeliever government because under no other
shelter they can destroy Islam by feigning it.
They
have made the Muslim nation their prey since they call to their
doctrines, in the name of Islam. They know so well that it is in their
interest to support foreign occupation because it suffocates Muslims and
helps them achieve gains and destroy Islam. An independent and free
Muslim nation is a hateful unfruitful land which they abhor greatly.
We
can quote many texts taken from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's assertions and
from his followers' declarations, but it suffices us to quote some and
without commentary.
--"The
English Government has bountifully rewarded, helped, and favored us to
the extent that if we leave this country neither Mecca, nor Istanbul
would shelter us. So how came you to doubt its goodness". (Ahmadiyan
Talks, vol 1 pp.146)
--"I
am unable to perform what I wish in Mecca, Medina, Domascus, Persia,
Kabul or Rome except under this government's protection for whose glory
and victory I do pray God". (Conveying the Message by Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad, vol VI pp. 69)
--"Oh,
just think a little which land all over the world will shelter you, if
you leave this country. Mention one government that will welcome and
shelter you. All Muslim countries detest you and wish to kill you
because, in their opinion, you are disbelievers. So estimate well the
heavenly favor (the favor of British occupation) and be aware that Allah
had not brought the British into this country except for your welfare
and interests. If catastrophes befall the British, you will not escape
their dire effect and if you demand a proof of what I say, go and find
shelter under any other regime and when you do this you will see what
happens to you. The British are Allah's mercy and blessing, and a
citadel for your protection. Estimate the British well and love them
dearly because they are a thousand times better than Muslims who oppose
you. It is sufficient to convince you with only one thing: the British
do not wish to humiliate or slaughter you". (Ghulam Ahmad's valuable
advice in conveying the message vol 1, pp. 123)
--"It
is well known to all those who study the history of nations how the
Persian government maltreated Mirza Ali Mohammad Bab, the founder of
Babism and his followers. It destroyed Babism for nothing else than
religious disputes. It is as well known how the Turkish government
ill-treated Bhah'Allah, the founder of Baha'ism and his followers
between 1863-1893. It imprisoned them in Istanbul first, then in
Edranovel and Acca. We also not know any other three countries which
demonstrated religious fanaticism and narrowness and which do not cope
with the age of civilization and culture. Our knowledge of these three
countries leads us to the conviction that the freedom of Ahmadis is
closely related to the British throne.
All
true Ahmadis who believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a holy prophet sent
by Allah to people do believe, without any little bit of flattery, that
the British Government is Allah's favor and the shade of His mercy. They
also believe that the life of the British Government is theirs". (Al
Fadl 13 Sept 1914)
These
above mentioned assertions quite clearly certify to the fact that this
gang of pretenders are aware of the benefits of disbelievers' occupation
of Muslim counties because under the protection of occupation they can
achieve their aims. If Muslim got power into their hands, these
pretenders will be crashed because free Muslims will not abide with
those who destroy their religion and split their society.
More
dangerous still is Qadiyanis tendencies to establish an independent
state in Pakistan. One year after the rise of Pakistan, the Qadiyani
caliph made a speech in Ku'ta in Jul 23, 1948, published in Al Fadl, in
Aug 13, 1948. He said "British Plukhistan is allotted to you. (Now part
of Pakistani Plukhistan). Its population is five or six hundred thousand
inhabitants. Though less populated than other districts, it has a great
importance. As individuals are valuable in our world, this district is
as valuable as any part of Pakistan. An example from the American
constitution will clarify its importance. Each state has an equal number
of representatives no matter how big or populated it is. Now if we add
British Plukhistan to Blukhistan district, the inhabitants will number a
million. I think you realize the difficulty of converting the people of
a big district. But don't you see that we can convert the people of a
small district? If we take care we will spread Ahmadiyan banners over it
all. Our doctrine will not succeed unless its roots are deep in the
ground. Thus work and spread your doctrines and make them solidly
rooted. Establish it in a place first and then if we succeed in
converting people we will be proud of our district. As for converting
people it is not an easy matter".
After
all this talk, I wish to ask those who want us to abide with Qadiyanis
and their deeds and who cling to the pretext that there are many sects
in Islam whether there are such dangerous tendencies and policies as
those of Qadiyanis. Does any sect find Islam harmful, and anti Islamic
system beneficial? Is any sect going to abhor Muslims and prepare to
establish an independent state in the heart of an Islamic regime? It
appears that there is no sect that behaves as Qadiyanism and thus we ask
why they want us to treat Qadiyanism as other sects?
This
minor sect faces with another problem, it demands independence from us.
Is it not right that we should expel it out of pale?
It
has been said that necessity drives man to demand anything. The
truthfulness of his demand depends on the acuteness of his necessity.
Qadiyanis' existence among the Muslim majority harms Muslims greatly,
for this the majority demands the legal separation of this harmful
minority from its community. Qadiyanis are, in practice, independent
from the Muslim majority and utilize their independence to organize
their sect and destroy Islam's principles according to a pre-plotted
methods. They also hide behind Islam and throw the seeds of split and
differences among Muslims. By their cunning method of pretending Islam,
they gain more administrative positions and employments. This harms the
community and thus what pretext remains for any to let the minority
persecute the majority or to refuse our demand of legal separation of
Qadiyanis from the Muslim nation.
The
majority did not create cause for separation, but the minority did when
they established independent societies and broke social and religious
relations with Muslims. This refusal to be legally separated from
Muslims makes Qadiyanis utterly responsible for their refusal.
Allah
had endowed you, readers, with mind and insight so look how they refuse
to accept the results of their deeds. If they want to deceive, harm,
and mar the unity of Muslims, how do you let the majority, while you are
its representatives, fall a prey to the cunning of this deceitful
minority.
Let
us deal with the last problem which claims that since Qadiyanis defend
Islam and spread it, it is not right to treat them as we do.
In
fact, this is a groundless argument which tempted some newly educated
people. We ask them to study and contemplate what we are going to quote
from the writings from Ghulam Ahmad himself which will strip the aims of
this pretender's defense of Islam. He says "I have been publishing
books in English, Arabic, Persian and Urdu, out of my own enthusiasm to
convince Muslims that their duty is to be faithful to the British
Government that they should leave the notion of the holy strive and shun
waiting for the Mehdi who sheds blood and all other trivial illusions
which cannot be verified by the Quran. If they still adhere to these
mistakes they must not, at least, deny the favors of this generous
government or they will be sinners of disloyalty by Allah's laws".
(Tiryak Al Kuloub 28 Oct 1902 pp.307)
In
this same petition to the British Government he writes, "It is time I
proudly say to my charitable government that this is my twenty year
service to you. No Muslim family in British India can do as mine did. It
is quite clear that twenty-year-long continuous effort to convince
people with the above mentioned teachings cannot possibly be the work of
a hypocrite. It is the work of a man who feels faithfulness and
sincerity towards this government. I confess that I discuss religious
matters with other priests, but with honest intentions. I have published
many arguments about Christianity, but I also confess that when some
missionaries wrote invective against Islam like the impolite wording of
the mischievous argument in Nur Afshan in which the missionary charged
our prophet with robbery, lust, adultery with his daughter, lies, and
bloodshed, I feared lest these writings irritate Muslims who are quickly
angered, so I found it a good policy to write against these books in
order to extinguish the fire of Muslims' wrath and lessen the consequent
general abhorrence and to deaden the anger of people who may react and
cause disturbances that threaten the national security. It is clear that
I only wrote against these invective books, because I found that
writing was the only way to extinguish the flame of wrath among Muslim
enthusiasts". (pp. 308-309) Then he goes on to say "All I wrote against
missionaries was motivated by a wish to control Muslims with wisdom and
entertain them and deaden their monstrous rebellious minds. I declare I
am the most faithful and the most helpful Muslim to the British
Government. There are three causes which brought me up to this first
rate loyalty to the British; the first is my father's influence, the
second is the great favors of this government, Allah's revelation". (pp.
309-310)
Mirza
also wrote the same in the annex of his book Shahadatu'l Quran entitled
a request worthy of the government's favor, "My religion which I
declare once and again is that Islam is divided into two parts. The
first is to obey God, the second is to obey the government which ensures
the nation's security, shelters us, and protects us from oppressors.
This government that we should all obey is the British government".
We
also find in his Conveying The Message, vol. VII, a petition to his
majesty the district ruler in which he assured the ruler of his family's
sincerity to the British Government. He reported the letters Mirza
Ghulam Murat Khan had received from Lahore's ruler and Punjabi financial
advisor, as well as other British rulers who witnessed to his great
services which denote his sincerity, faithfulness, loyalty, and love to
the British, and enumerated the most important members of his family who
served the British. Then he said ,"The most important work to which I
was and still am devoted to is to divert the hearts of Muslims from
Islam towards sincerity, love, loyalty and truthful gratitude to the
British government, and to get rid of wrong illusions such as the holy
war and other silly beliefs which impair sincere relations with the
British (pp. 10).
I
did not only concentrate on filling the hearts of Indian Muslims with
sincere obedience to the British, but also wrote many books in Arabic,
Persian and Urdu in which I clarified to the inhabitants of Muslim
countries how we spend the days of our life in security, happiness,
prosperity, and freedom under the British Government's sheltering care".
(pp. 10) Then, he gave a long list of his books which certify to his
sincere love and great loyalty to the British. Then, he wrote, "The
government should verify whether those thousands of Muslims who call me a
disbeliever, swear at me and at my followers, and harm us because I
wrote thousands of declarations which were full of my grateful thanks to
the government dictated by myself and out of my conscience, heart, and
utter conviction and published them in all the Arab countries. Are not
these matters clear? I assert that my sect has a first-rate loyalty to
the British government and that it is the most sincere, faithful and
loyal Muslim sect, because it declares its readiness to sacrifice
everything for the British. The principles of the British do not, in any
sense, endanger ours". Then he wrote, "I am certain that so long as my
followers increase, those who believe in the holy war against occupation
decrease. Belief in me is a denial of the existence of a holy war".
(pp. 17)
Disregarding
whether this language and these expressions are worthy of a prophet, we
wish to attract the reader's attention to the fact that these are the
aims of the founder of this religion and these are the purposes for
which he exerted himself, "defended Islam", and "spread its teachings".
Is this service to "Islam" still worthy of thanks and respect after all
that we have seen of its stimuli and aims? And if it is still difficult
for some people to know the reality of this service to Islam, we ask
them to contemplate what we are going to quote from Qadiyanis'
confessions.
--
"We came across a book by an Italian engineer who held an important
position in Afghanistan. The book was once published and by mere chance
only that we got this rare copy. In it, the author says that Sahib Zadeh
Abdullatif, a Qadiyani, was killed in Afghanistan, because he was
urging people to shun 'the holy war'. The government feared lest his
call weakens the passion for freedom in the hearts of Afghanis and thus
enslave them to the British. We deduce from this fact that Afghanistani
regime did not kill that Qadiyani, except because he called people to
shun 'the holy war'. (Mirza Bashir's speech on a Friday Al-Fadl 6 Aug
1935).
--
Afghanistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs issued the following
declaration, "After Mulla Abdulhalim Jihar Asiyanis and Mulla Nur Ali
Hanuti had become Qadiyanis, they began to teach their fabricated
doctrines in the name of reform.....After some time, they were arrested
for another matter and tried. Letters from some foreigners were
confiscated which prove their agency and conspiracy against the
interests of Afghanistan. The letters reveal quite clearly how far they
went in selling themselves up to the enemies of Afghanistan". (Al-Fadl, 3
Mar 1925)
--
"Though I went to Russia to call people to Qadiyanism, I always did and
served the British Government at the same time because our interests
and British Government's are in complete harmony with each other".
(Mohammad Amin, a Qadiyani preacher in his essay published in Al-Fadl 28
Sep 1922)
--"The
world considers us British agents. When a German minister participated
in the opening of Ahmadiyan center in Germany, his government blamed him
and asked him 'why did you participate in a special occasion related to
people who are British agents'". (A speech by Qadiyani's caliph Nov
1934)
--"We
hope that with the increase of British empire, the chances for more
converts from Muslims and non-Muslims will increase". (Opinions
concerning Lord Harding's tour in Iraq published in Al-Fadl, 11 Feb
1910)
--"The
British Government is like paradise to us. Ahmadis are going on well
under the shelter of this paradise. If you leave it, you will see what
frightening shower of poisonous arrows will come down upon you heads. So
why don't you thank this government's favors when you all know what its
interests are united with ours, its desolation means ours, and its
prosperity affects ours. Wherever this government wins a new country to
its domain we win a new field for our doctrines". (Al-Fadl 19 Oct 1915)
--"The
relations between Qadiyanis and the British Government are unlike any
other; that is because our interested demand this. What benefits the
British Government enriches us, and as the British empire increases our
chances for progress increase. if it is harmed - God forbid - we will
not be able to live safely. (Qadiyanis caliph's declaration Al-Fadl 27
Jul 1918)
Thus,
we have clarified the reality of Qadiyanism, uncovering its doctrines,
trends, and deeds. And now we are going to explain the rise of this
sect.
1.
Half a century elapsed and Muslims were still living the worst kind of
life under British occupation. Then suddenly a man pretended he was a
prophet. He claimed that it was insufficient for Muslims to believe in
Muhammad (PBUH), but they should, if they wanted true faith and the
right Islam, believe in him, too. Disbelievers in him are out of the
Islamic pale. Thus, a pretender rises among the unified Muslim nation to
say he is a prophet.
2.
According to his false pretense, this man established a new community
and an independent society which opposed Muslims as Hindus and
Christians do, and disagreed with Muslim beliefs, habits, hopes, and
sufferings.
3.
The founder of this new community felt, since the beginning of his
pretense, that Muslim society cannot bear to be destroyed, so he and his
gang chose to be loyal, sincere, and loving servants of the British
occupation. This was not only a practical policy, but also in awareness
of the fact that his interest are consistent with the victory of the
British, not only in India but also in the other Muslim countries in
order to spread his poison and fabrications.
4.
This sect, according to a conspiracy with the British, disappointed all
Muslims' efforts during the past fifty years to separate it from the
Muslim community. The government continued to insist on the sect being
considered part and parcel of Muslims despite all differences. Muslims
were harmed greatly by these measures, while Qadiyanism won great
benefits.
The
government, despite all scholars' efforts, continued to convince
Muslims that Qadiyanis are one of the sects of Islam to enable Qadiyanis
to spread their doctrines among Muslims. A Muslim will not abstain from
following Qadiyanism, if it is legally considered a Muslim sect, and
this benefits Qadiyanis greatly because they are increasing their
numbers and power. Muslims are harmed because a new community which
opposed them was growing up like cancer in their body.
The
plight of Qadiyanism appeared in Punjab, harmed, and destroyed it; so
it was natural that the most wrathful Muslims against Qadiyanis are the
Punjabis.
This
sect won all the favors of the British Government and the most army,
police, justice, and administrative posts in the country. It is strange
that this sect won all these posts from those assigned to Muslims
because the government considers it one of the Muslim sects and
continues to convince Muslims that these posts are assigned to them
only. Muslims are treated as such in economy, trade, industry, and
agriculture.
Qadiani Problem is a book written by Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi. It was first published in 1953.
The above script is part of this book
| Author : | Abul Ala Maududi |
|---|
| Original title: | Qadiani Problem and its Religious, Political and Social Aspects |
|---|
Posts
