Muhammad Iqbal on Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Svend White
To prove that Allama Muhammad Iqbal rejected Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a
false prophet, Kavosh Soltani wrote:
> [...]
> FOUNDER'S OWN ARGUMENT, quite worthy of a mediaeval theologian,
> is that the spirituality of the Holy prophet of Islam must be
> regarded as imperfect if it is not creative of another
> Prophet. He claims HIS OWN PROPHETHOOD to be an evidence of
> the Prophet-rearing power of the spirituality of the Holy
> prophet of Isalm..." (caps are mine)
> [From: Islam and Ahmadism; by Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, P. 10]
>
> It seems to me that he confirms the fact that Mirza Ghulam
> had claimed prophethood...
As usual on this subject, things are not so simple, so neat. No, if
this this quotation "confirms" anybody's guilt, it is mine and Allama
Iqbal's, not Hazrat Mirza's. Mine for being lazy in the original
posting and oversimplifying Iqbal's case and Iqbal's for being
shockingly inconsistent during the last few years of his life (1933-38).
Anyway, here are some facts about Iqbal's actions and beliefs during the
lifetime of Hazrat Mirza (i.e., when he knew the man firsthand):
1. According to evidence presented at the Munir Court Enquiry in
1953-54, Iqbal had been a member of the Ahmadiyyah Movement, taking
bayat with in Hazrat Mirza in 1897. [1]
2. Iqbal's elder brother, Shaikh Ata Muhammad, also joined the
movement in the time of Hazrat Mirza.
3. In the 1890s, Iqbal wrote a poem defending Hazrat Mirza from the
attacks of Saad-ullah of Ludiana (a virulent opponent).
4. In 1900, Iqbal wrote an article in English in INDIAN ANTIQUARY
praising Hazrat Mirza as "the profoundest theologian among modern
Indian Muslims" (for the whole quote, see
http://www.erols.com/svend/tributes.htm).
During the time of Maulana Noor-ud-Din (the first head of the Ahmadiyyah
Movement after the Founder's death in 1908), Iqbal did two things which
showed that he continued to have immense respect for Ahmadiyyah:
1. He sent his own son, Aftab Iqbal, to be educated in Qadian at the
Ahmadiyyah Movement's Taleem-ul-Islam High School.
2. In 1910, Iqbal delivered a speech at the famous Muslim University
of Aligarh, stating: "In the Punjab a true model of Islamic life has
arisen in the form of that community which is known as the Qadiani
sect." [2]
3. In 1913, Iqbal and many other prominent Sunni Muslim leaders gave
a speech at a celebration in the Ahmadiyya Buildings in Lahore over
the success of Lahori Ahmadi missionary Khawaja Kamal-ud-Din in
propagating Islam in England (including converting Lord Headley).
IQBAL AFTER THE SPLIT IN 1914
While Iqbal was greatly disturbed by the un-Islamic doctrines espoused
by Mahmud Ahmad after his takeover of the Ahmadiyyah Movement in 1914,
but he remained on cordial terms with the Lahore jamaat's leaders,
such as Maulana Muhammad Ali, Mirza Yaqub Baig, and Sayyid Muhammad
Husain Shah. MAKATIB IQBAL, a compilation of his letters, confirms
"the love and sincerity between [Iqbal and Shah]". [3]
In 1927, Iqbal attended and addressed the Lahore Ahmadiyyah's annual
jalsah, which was also attended by Lord Headley.
In 1932, Iqbal responded to a inquiry from a Chaudhary Muhammad Ahsan
concerning the Lahore Ahmadiyyah Movement, writing: "As to the
Ahmadiyyah Movement, there are many persons in the Lahore Jamaat whom I
consider to be Muslims who have a high sense of honour, and I
sympathise with their efforts to propagate Islam....But indeed, the
passion for the propagation of Islam that is to be found in most
members of this movement is worthy of praise." [4]
So let's review for a moment. At the time of Hazrat Mirza's death in
1908, the Allama had been a close associate and vocal admirer of Hazrat
Mirza (and, it appears, even a member of the Ahmadiyyah Movement) for
over ***15 years***. In other words, there is no evidence of Iqbal ever
having any misgivings about Hazrat Mirza during the latter's lifetime.
If Hazrat Mirza suddenly went bonkers in the 1890s, as Soltani wants us
to believe, Iqbal sure didn't notice.
Even after Hazrat Mirza's death--i.e., after he could've had any
personal influence over Iqbal--the Allama continued to hold the
Ahmadiyyah Movement in the highest esteem, actively participating with
the movement's propagation efforts. It's hard to imagine that he would
work so closely with them (e.g., overseeing joint Ahmadi-Sunni efforts
to found the Woking mosque in England) if he considered them kafirs, as
some now claim.
Also, the Allama praised the scholarship of Maulana Muhammad Ali, Hazrat
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's most prominent and well-known disciple, writing in
1936 that he found the recently-published masterpiece THE RELIGION OF
ISLAM as "an extremely useful work...almost indispensable to the
students of Islam." He then added: "One cannot help but admire your
energy and power of sustained work."
Now this was more than a year after Iqbal began attacking "Ahmadiyyah"!
But the story gets stranger. Not only had Iqbal remained on good terms
with the Lahore Ahmadiyyah Movement ever since the Founder's death in
1908, but he actually worked on the Kashmir Committee in 1931 chaired by
none other than the leader of the Qadiani jamaat, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad!
This committee was formed by the Muslims of Punjab to campaign against
the persecution of Muslims in Kashmir under the Hindu Maharaja.
It is, to put it mildly, difficult to understand how Iqbal and the other
Sunni Muslims on the committee could have allowed Mahmud Ahmad to not
only participate but actually LEAD the committee if they didn't perceive
Qadianis as Muslims!
This was only a few year before the his anti-Ahmadiyyah statements
selectively quoted by Soltani and others.
Finally, if Iqbal really believed that Hazrat Mirza was guilty of these
charges, then why didn't he or his followers ever deny the following 2
accounts of Iqbal's own behavior which contradict these claims:
1) In his "Dr. Iqbal's Statement Re: the Qadianis", Muhammad Ali
cites a conversation he had with Iqbal in 1934 (!) when the Allama
recounted his own experiences in the company of Hazrat Mirza in 1904,
when Hazrat Mirza stately very clearly to Mian Sir Fazl-i-Husain that
he did not consider non-Ahmadi Muslims to be kafirs. This anecdote was
related to Muhammad Ali by IQBAL.
Neither Iqbal nor his followers ever denied this very public
statement by Muhammad Ali.
2) Similarly, the prominent Lahori Ahmadi Maulana Yaqub Khan
published an account of his meeting with a close associate of Iqbal by
the name of Maulana Sayyid Nazir Niazi. Maulana Niazi said that Iqbal
had made it clear to him in a conversation in 1935 that his recent
anti-Ahmadiyyah statements were "not about the Lahore Jamaat or Mirza
sahib's person...[but about] the picture of Ahmadiyyat being presented
to the world today in the form of Qadiani teachings." [5]
These public statements were never repudiated by Iqbal (who lived for
another 2 1/2 years) or his various disciples (some of whom lived for
another 30 years).
One last historical problem with Soltani and company's scenario (of
Iqbal finally breaking free from Hazrat Mirza' malevolent influence) is
the fact that his last statement, as recorded in the diary of his
disciple Maulana Sayyid Nazir Niazi, on Hazrat Mirza, made in a time of
illness shortly before his death, *praised* Hazrat Mirza! [6] Again,
this was years after his supposed awakening from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's
spell.
Now, I don't claim to have a simple explanation for all this. It is
hard to understand how Iqbal could make these statements, given his long
history of support and praise for Hazrat Mirza.
It seems to me that we have 2 possibilities:
1. Decades after the death of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (which means
that Iqbal knew ***ALL*** of Hazrat Mirza's writings for decades;
Iqbal presumably didn't suddenly discover Hazrat Mirza's teachings
in the 1930s), Iqbal had a complete change of heart, abandonning a
life-long friend and teacher, as well as a Movement (the Lahore
jamaat) with which he'd worked for decades.
This theory appeals to many mullahs' paranoia and sense of
drama--Iqbal suddenly "snaps out" of the evil spell of Mirza
Qadiani [sic]--but it calls into question Iqbal's judgement. If
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the self-evident impostor that Soltani
and the gang claim,then Iqbal, a world-renowned Islamic scholar,
MUST have been a weak-willed, gullible dupe.
I am NOT saying this, I am merely pointing out that this is the
inevitable conclusion of Soltani's scenario, given Iqbal's long
history of support for Hazrat Mirza.
2. The other possible explanation (and one preferred by me) is
simple: Iqbal weakened and caved in to mullah pressure to
disavow Hazrat Mirza at the end of his life, never really losing
his respect for Hazrat Mirza.
Obviously, this is not entirely complimentary to Iqbal,
either, but it at least makes some sense from a psychological
standpoint. This way, Iqbal's life and actions retain a basic
logic (vs. the "schizo" theory peddled by Soltani and friends).
Most importantly, this explanation doesn't ask us to assume the
absurd, that a great scholar such as Iqbal could be a gullible and
weak-minded (not to mention ignorant of the basics of Islam) person
who couldn't see the plain truth until almost 3 decades after
Hazrat Mirza's death.
It is also explains the otherwise greatly perplexing fact that
Iqbal's last recorded statement (unless Soltani is going to claim
that Maulana Sayyid Nazir Niazi was a Qadiani "mole" inside
Iqbal's circle of disciples!) on Hazrat Mirza was so positive.
Finally, it fits the general tone of Iqbal's oddly vague
statements against "Ahmadiyyah". There are very few statements
were Iqbal directly refers to Hazrat Mirza; they tend to rail at
"Ahmadiyyah" or Qadian, which leads me to suspect that Iqbal was
trying to keep things
ambiguous, satisfying the mullahs while keeping his criticisms of
Hazrat Mirza to a minimum.
[By the way, this confusing vagueness is perfectly illustrated
in the quoatations of Iqbal's writing reprinted in, ironically
enough, Maudoodi's THE QADIANI PROBLEM. At no point in the
excerpts in Maudoodi's book does Iqbal name names. Odd restraint for
a newly converted anti-Ahmadi crusader, no?
I'm sure Soltani will want us to take these statements at face value
even though they do not gibe with all the other facts. "My" theory
cannot be proven, but at least it doesn't ask us to abandon any
semblance of logic and consistency when examening Iqbal's life.
Regardless of one's conclusion, the fact remains that Iqbal was a
devoted admirer of Hazrat Mirza WHEN HE KNEW HIM FIRSTHAND, and didn't
have this supposed change of heart until almost ***3 decades*** after
the man's death. Whatever caused these strange changes, it couldn't
have been an action or statement of Hazrat Mirza as Iqbal had known it
all for a long time!
Regarding Soltani's other "rebuttals", I note briefly that I never
claimed that Maudoodi exonerated Hazrat Mirza! This seems like yet
another attempt by him to muddy the waters of the debate. I merely
pointed out that Maudoodi never attacked Lahoris (if he did, please
bring it to my attention), but Soltani somehow missed this little
detail.
As for Iqbal's stands on the Lahoris, the above quoatations and
historical facts reveal that, even if we accept the theory that he
suddenly turned on Hazrat Mirza after so many years of admiration, he
*remained* an admirer of Maulana Muhammad Ali and the efforts of the
Lahore Ahmadiyyah Movement.
BTW, I notice that Soltani hasn't even tried to deny the validity of the
tributes I posted from other respected Islamic leaders and scholars
(Maulana Azad, Hazrat Khwaja Ghulam Farid of Chachran, ...) at
http://www.erols.com/svend/tributes.
I see that instead of actually talking about *history*, about facts,
Soltani continues to rely on isolated quotes (usually taken out of
context) without any discussion of their actual significance in their
authors' writings and lives. The quote at the beginning of this message
is a case in point: Here Soltani reproduces a highly atypical quotation
from the end of Iqbal's long, eventful life without any substantive
commentary whatsoever.
This is a far cry from rigorous historical debate about Ahmadiyyah, but
then I guess I must take whatever I can get when dealing with the
anti-Ahmadi mullahs and their lackeys.
As I think my message has shown, such lazy argumentation *may* work for
most of these amateurish anti-Ahmadi websites' visitors, but it won't
convince intelligent, critical Muslims, especially ones who know the
basic historical facts of the issue.
But perhaps I'm missing the point! I imagine that this is probably not
the audience that practioners of the "Dr. Rashid ahistorical method"
like Soltani target. Being practical people, they probably save their
energies and concentrate on less demanding audiences like the
already-converted hatemongers, the uncritical, and the uninformed.
Call me an idealist, but my guess is that it would be easier to sell ham
in a synagogue than convince intelligent Muslims of Hazrat Mirza's
"heresy" using these slipshod arguments. At least the Qadianis know the
basic facts...
Wasalaam.
s v e n d
1. "After 5 years, in 1897, Sir Muhammad Iqbal tookt he pledge of Mirza
Sahib" (NAWA-E WAQT daily newspaper, Lahore, 15 November 1953).
2. Speech now recorded in the book MILLAT BAIZA PER AYK IMRANI NAZAR,
pp. 84-85. It should be noted that, before the Split in 1914, the term
"Qadiani" applied to the whole Ahmadiyyah Movement, as led by Maulana
Noor-ud-Deen, not the subsequent organization founded by Mahmud Ahmad.
3. Page 159: "Whenever Dr. Muhammad Husain Shah paid a visit to Iqbal,
the Allama would stand up to greet him, and show him the same respect
when seeing him off. The love and sincerity between them can be gauged
from this."
4. MAKATIB IQBAL, Part II, P. 230, Letter no. 87.
5. PAIGHAM SULH, 19 November 1935.
6. "Mirza sahib said that everything was possible through prayer. You
just persevere in prayer and what you want to happen shall
happen...Mirza sahib...prayed about every matter, and he received
requests for prayer on every matter. Beside other things such as the
propagation of Islam, debates with other religions, and the stress on
the truth of Islam, this was another factor which attracted the hearts
towards Mirza sahib" (IQBAL KAY HUZOOR NASHISTAIN AUR GOFTGOOAIN, vol.
i, p. 360).
--
****Svend|A|White**************>
****4401|W|Street|NW***********>
****Washington|DC|20007********>
****+1|202|338|6498************>
****sv...@erols.com************>
*****http://www.erols.com/svend>
"Hated by Fools and Fools to Hate.
Be that ever my Motto and my Fate."
- - - Jonathan Swift