From: shahid@vast.unsw.edu.au (Shahid Masud (Supr. Rigby))
Subject: Mawdudi & Qadiyanis (III)
Organization: Universtity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 09:20:56 GMT

Dear Readers,
Assalamoalikum,
This is the third part of the article  titled "The Problem Of
Qadiyanism" by Syed Abu'l Ala' Mawdudi. Insha'Allah it will  clear lot
of doubts about Qadiyanism. I will post the last part as soon as I finish
typing.
Jazak'Allah,
Wassalam,
Shahid Masud


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  "THE PROBLEM OF QADIYANISM" (Part III)
		   =========================
		   (Syed Abu'l Ala' Mawdudi)

--"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 favour (the favour of British occupation) and be aware that
Allah had not brought the British into this country except for your
welfare and interests. If catastrophies befall the British you will not
escape   their dice 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 belssing, 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 Merza  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 fanatism 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 Ahmadiyans is
closely related to the British throne.

All true Ahmadiyans who believe in  Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a holy prohet
sent by Allah to people do believe, without any little bit of flattery,
that the British Government is Allah's favour 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 Msulims 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 pupulated it is.
Now if we add Bristish 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 whethter 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 administritive 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 responisble 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 decieve,
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
decietful 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. 

Infact, 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 defence of Islam.  He says "I have been publishing
books in English, Arabi, Persian and Urdu, out of my own enthusiams 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 favours of this generous
government or they will be sinners of disloyality by Allah's laws".
(Tiryak Al Kuloub 28 Oct 1902 pp.307)

In  this same petition to the  Bristish 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 continuos effort to convince people
with the above mentioned teachings cannot possible 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, adultry with his daughter,  lies, and
bloodshed, I feared lest  these writings irritate Muslims who are quicly
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 abhorance 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 loyality to the British; the first is my father's influence, the
second is the great favours 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 favour "My religion which I
delcare 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".

------------------- E N D     P A R T    III ------------------