Galileo of Islam: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - Part II

...[I]t is not difficult to understand how the politically motivated discrimination against Ahmadis eventually trickled down into society at large, morphing a previously liberal mindset into a wary and judgmental one.

Ahmadiyya Times | News Staff | Research
Source & Credit: Chowk.com | July 7, 2010
By Zainab Mahmood | Part 2

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, referred to as ‘Indian messiah’ by the Dictionary of universal biography as opposed to the pseudo-messiahs of jewish and European descent’ enjoys countless favouring opinions regarding his veracity the world over. But where there are admirers and believers there are critics and detractors. The former are driven by a search for truth, while the latter be they orthodox clerics or political leaders are driven by a need to usurp power by defamation of another.

One of the earliest pressures from religious parties upon a barely mature Pakistan to deal with the “ahmadi issue” was felt in 1953, when civil strife broke out in Punjab sparked by the same majlis-e-ahrar-e-pakistan, who had vehemently opposed the vision of the muslim league prior to partition. An unsympathetic Chief Minister Daultana did little to appease the situation despite police intelligence reports concerning security threats for Ahmadis. Strong evidence later revealed that Daultana, who used the anti-ahmadi campaigns to distract from the economic problems plaguing his province and as a tool to weaken prime minister Nazimuddin at the centre, was held solely responsible by the court of law and “singled out for condemnation, citing his duplicity as well as his dishonesty”.


In the 1960’s Ayub Khan’s proposition of muslim family law ordinance, which would have spearheaded a revolutionary change regarding reasonable and minimal inclusion of Islamic injunctions in the penal code, failed. Bhutto upon coming to power, despite his “liberal” reputation, handed blatant victory to the orthodox parties and declared Ahmadis as non-muslims in 1974. It is believed that Bhutto’s persistent concessions towards the religious parties were his way of wooing the Saudi kingdom whose support he desperately needed for his future political plans related to nuclear proliferation and anti-Indian policies . Therefore the allegation that he may have utilised the ahmadi issue to gain popularity amongst the religious parties, within Pakistan and outside, holds a great deal of sway with rational political observers.

Antonio Gualtieri, a venerated religious professor, in analysing the negative attention given to the ahmadi issue by religious parties in Pakistan, surmises that it is not so much the clash of beliefs that scholars and freethinkers had with Ahmad but more a problem of conformity, the Ahmadis just did not fit into the mullah-prescribed definition of muslims accepted by the state. Gualtieri also goes on to condemn the antagonism of agenda-driven governments, particularly General Zia Ul Haq’s, towards the community. Bitter lessons from 1954 prevented Zia from halting the agitation against the community and rumours being spread about his possible collusion with the community were the final nail in the coffin and 1983 saw further amendments in the penal code, disallowing Ahmadis to embody or practise Islamic rites and doctrines. Gualtieri also cites Zia’s psychological need to elevate the status of the mullah and prove he was a dependable loyal soldier for their cause by granting them free license to impose their version of Islam upon the nation, which is evident in his message to Khatam-e-nabuat Conference in 1985, “In the past few years government of Pakistan has taken stringent administrative and legal measures to prevent the ahmadis from masquerading as muslims and from practising Islamic rites. We will persevere in our efforts to ensure that the cancer of the ahmadi faith is exterminated”.

Stanley Tambiah in his studies on the ethnonationalist conflicts in south asia further corobates this view, “accusation of ahmedi heterodoxy was a convenient and combustible issue that could be exploited by religiopolitical groups wanting to muster strength quickly” against the backdrop of a state-tolerated Islamic revival in Pakistan under Zia and consequently Bhutto’s terms. Therefore it is not difficult to understand how the politically motivated discrimination against Ahmadis eventually trickled down into society at large, morphing a previously liberal mindset into a wary and judgemental one.
The same people who sat with their ahmadi peers sharing ideas on politics, intellect and religion were now intolerant and fearful, condemning their neighbours and friends into obscurity like the untouchables or lepers of the land.

Fast-forward to present day and Pakistan’s martial law regime, interim governments and the Sharif and Bhutto musical-chairs at the helm of the country have come and gone without any decisive action to control or disband the militant threat of the religious parties who have taken on the task of exterminating the non-muslims from Pakistan. Religious conferences attended by thousands are held all over the country open preaching hate against the ahmadis and declaring war on them, urging all loyal muslims to “take back our streets, our land, our businesses from these kafirs”. Living under the sword of death, Ahmadis are not only in danger in Pakistan but will remain under threat as long as religious extremism is allowed to multiply in conducive environments around the world, be they internet preachers who inspired Jihad-Jane in the United States or the Brixton mosque in London where young boys turn into shoe-bombers to eradicate the kafirs.

Sociologist and historian, Ayesha Jalal rightly observes, “Pakistan, painfully carved out of the Indian subcontinent has been remarkable more for the tensions between its dominant and subordinate regions than for the purported unities of a common religion”. Countless others lament the irony that belies the persecution of minorities Pakistan, which was established to safeguard and empower the minority muslim population in India. The enormity of our government’s folly regarding the inappropriate inclusion of Islamic codes in a democratic constitution, unleashing the worst kinds of persecution against its own citizens, are eerily reminiscent of the historical crusades and modern-day genocides. We might want to rethink if Pakistan, with its 25 years of military and quasi-military rule, 6 different constitutions, prejudicial amendments, ethnic, provincial and religious conflicts, wants to go down in history as a democratic republic endeavouring to define and embody a laudable ideology or an apartheidist breeding ground for contemptible human rights violations and religion-inspired terrorism.



Read original post here: Galileo of Islam: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - Part II