In the Name of Allah, The Most Gracious, Ever Merciful.
Love for All, Hatred for None.
AN INTRODUCTION
Louis J. Hammann Ph.D.
Professor of Religion
Gettysburg College
May 15 1985
The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam Inc.
2141 Leroy Place, N. W. Washington DC 20008
FOREWORD
This booklet contains an
address delivered by Professor Louis J. Hammann, at the Annual Conference
of the American Academy of Religions held at Canton Upper State New York
and at the seminar at the University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia.
Professor Hammann is a distinguished scholar in comparative
study of religions; at present a professor of Religion at the Gettysburg
College. He holds Academic Degrees from Yale, Pennsylvania State and Temple
Universities. A Quaker associated with Friend's Meeting in Gettysburg
College. He is also affiliated with the United Church of Christ.
In the quest of knowledge about Ahmadiyyat he visited
Qadian and Rabwah in 1983, the International Headquarter of Ahmadiyya
Movement in Islam. He made a careful study of Ahmadiyyat and its founder
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
He has studied very deeply and explained intricate
questions in a very clear and lucid manner. It shows a wonderful God-
given capability. It is the most impressive work ever written by an impartial
observer of Ahmadiyyat.
Sheikh
Mubarak Ahmed
Amir
and Missionary Incharge,USA
Washington,
DC
July
10 1985
Ahmadiyyat
is, what we might call, a messianic sect of Islam. In order to avoid what
I might call the "cold bath syndrome" I will make some brief
prefatory remarks. Such a preface may avoid the shock and confusion of
a plunge into the unfamiliar world of nineteenth century Islam.
Ahmadiyyat
is a missionary movement that has gathered 10 million adherents from
Indonesia and Malaysia to Pakistan and central and west Africa and
in the Americas. Presently the institutional structure is focused
in central Pakistan, in the town of Rabwah. The current head of the
Movement is the fourth since the death of the Promised Messiah. He
is Mirza Tahir Ahmad, one of the grandsons of the founder. Early in
1985, Hazur, as he is affectionately called, moved to London, when
the pressures against the Community in Pakistan began to mount.
The
legal basis for the government's tactics was first of all a constitutional
amendment promulgated in the year 1974, declaring Ahmadis "non-Muslims."
More recently, in April, 1984, the government established an ordinance
declaring that: the Ahmadis will, under pain of punishment, be barred,
directly or indirectly, from referring to themselves as Muslims or
calling their place of worship a mosque or using the Azan the Muslim
call to prayer as their call for the same purpose. Nor can the Ahmadis
propagate by word of mouth or writing or visible representation their
religion with a view to converting others. They are also barred from
using the nomenclature or appellations associated with the Holy Prophet
or his family for a member of the Ahmadi community or anyone else.
John Esposito has edited a book entitled, Voices of Resurgent Islam. This and other
current books aim at exhibiting Islam as a religion newly energized
and as a religion that no longer deserves, if it ever did, the stereotypical
image of the violent, irrational desert marauder. In place of such
simplifications we must try to understand that Islam is at least as
complicated a phenomenon as Christianity. The dust-covered simplifications
of the religion rooted in the Holy Quran are simply not appropriate.
But how shall we change our minds as observers and scholars and teachers
whose profession it is to understand the various religious experiences
that engage the human community. We must attend to the history of
religious traditions, but we should also familiarize ourselves with
their current reality.
Ahmadiyyat is, if these are our motives, worthy
of scrutiny. Through it we may come closer to Islam as an historic
phenomenon and as a contemporary reality. Ahmadiyyat
has the advantage of being well-documented. Its followers are
also willing and able to present the Movement as a personal experience
and as an historic cause. They are also persuaded by the Quranic injunction that there is no compulsion in religion.
In Ahmadiyyat we can appreciate Muslim piety and sense the viability
of Islam as a powerful force in the modern world.
The
middle of the 19th century was, as we all know, a time of great intellectual
and religious ferment. The natural and social sciences were cooking
on the front burners. And on the back burners the caldrons of the
great religious traditions were coming to a boil.
Such
metaphors aside, the 19th century transition to the wonders and horrors
of the 20th century, was marked by movements of renewal and fulfillment
in religious communities around the world. The surge of apocalyptic
visions and the historic programs of restoration in western Christianity
are well known. What may not be as well known is the fact that the
world of Islam also saw movements in which Quranic and other scriptural
prophecies were brought to fulfillment.
The
conviction was widespread that the historical career of humanity was
approaching a threshold. This approach, of course, was not capricious.
However one may justify the conviction that a threshold event was
in the making, whether by historical analysis or by exegesis of prophetic
visions, it must, back then, have seemed inevitable.
We cannot and need not here resolve the dilemma,
whether it was historical process, divine intervention or a secret
cooperation of the two modalities that was bringing the world to a
crisis. Apparently the conviction was widespread in traditional religious
circles that the new age of intellectual, social and political transformation
was accompanied by a decline in moral and spiritual values.
The Moloch of the new age of industry and science
was demanding of humans that they sacrifice their transcendent relations
to the immanent deities of prosperity and nationality. As the visions
that guided the human person in community were being secularized,
the religious impulse on many fronts tried to resist. Inter-human
communication and commerce were usurping the place of a willful communion
with God. Not only was the world changing but changing was changing.
Trends, long in the making, were moving civilization and culture irresistably
toward a critical moment beyond which choices of conservation and
preservation would not be effective. As the new age dawned, would
the sun shine on a godless world that had sacrificed devotion and
piety to the new immanent deities of material progress and rational
process? There were many who could entertain no such prospect.
I
think, however, that it was not such a negative propensity that moved
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to his oracles. It is equally doubtful that Hazrat
Ahmad was driven merely by critical judgment of worldly events to
make his declaration that he was the Mahdi of the age. That is, he
was neither a popular sayer of doom moved by a personal depression
nor was he imagining apocalypse in the manner of journalists (or even
historians) who note current trends on the opinion pages of our newspapers.
From within his own perspective and from that of the Movement he founded,
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was responding to
revelation. He was by most accounts a man of deep personal piety.
His oracles and utterances seem the expressions of a soul in touch
with contemporary events and trends, but more the expressions of a
soul in communion with a living God.
In
the scholarly mood, we are more likely to look for the circumstantial
basis of a person's behavior. And for the last 100 years or more the
scholar may also seek out the psychological roots of religious experience.
But there is also the claim made from within the orbit of a particular
religious movement that may correspond to neither bias.
What Hazrat Ahmad thought of himself and what
his followers thought of him is quite clear. His estimate of the low
estate of Muslim piety and belief was not simply an appraisal of current
conditions by a sensitive observer. His claims to being a prophet
in these latter days seen not to have been mere psychological quirks.
Rather he felt or knew in the recesses of his mind that he "enjoy(ed)
a perfect nearness to God Almighty." There is no gainsaying the
revelatory foundation of this self-knowledge. Such confidence in the
authenticity of the revelation has always been the basis of the strength
of Ahmadiyyat and at the same time the occasion for the hostility
exhibited toward the Movement by the mullahs of orthodox Islam.
But
perhaps we should go back to the beginnings of the Ahmadiyya Movement
in Islam in order to get some sense of the original dynamic that has
provided over the last 100 years the peculiar incentive for the 10
million who belong to this enclave of Dar al Islam.
The
founder of Ahmadiyyat was born in a small town in the Punjab in 1835.
Qadian is no more than 30 or 40 miles to the east of Amritsar, the
site of the Sikh's golden temple in mid 1984 was the focus of world
attention. There, in an area where recent and ancient religious traditions
live in a tenuous alliance, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was born. Andrew Jackson
was president of the United States. Joseph Smith had, just two years
before, founded the Church of the Latter-day Saints. Louis Philippe
was the constitutional monarch of France. Two years after Ahmad's
birth, the 18-year-old Victoria became Queen of Great Britain. Chopin
was at the height of his career. And just one year before, Friedrich
Schleiermacher had died.
It
was not, however, until his 41st year (1876) that Hazrat Ahmad began
to receive the revelations that would lead him eventually to the conviction
that in his person the advent of the Mahdi was fulfilled. "Thereafter,"
as Zafrulla Khan says, "it was revealed to him that he was also
the Promised Messiah and was indeed the Prophet whose advent had been
foretold in the principal religions of the world." He was "Champion
of God in the mantles of all the Prophets. "
From
the time of his declaration that he was the Promised Messiah to the
time of his death on May 26, 1908, his prophetic activity did not
abate. He presided over a movement whose adherents reached into the
thousands. During the early years of the Ahmadiyyat Movement Ahmad
himself was frequently led into contests with other religious leaders
and messianic claimants that left his inspired self-confidence in
tact. His adversaries and challengers ranged from leaders of the Arya
Samaj to Christian clergy in India and in the U. S. Through all the
personal conflict that was thrust upon him as claimant of prophetic
fulfillment, he was continually the agent of revelatory injunctions
whose purpose was the promotion of the cause of Islam in the new age
that was coming forth.
All
of his human energies were, as his followers believe, focused on that
single cause that in this renaissance of Islam the spiritual fulfillment
of all the world's religions was accomplished. But he was not the
neutral conveyor of this message. His personal role was not incidentally
submerged in the realization of God's plan. Rather, his personal destiny
was to personify the processes of divine history, not merely to announce
their fulfillment. Among many statements by Hazrat Ahmad that evidence
this certainty on his part are the following: . . .
it was made quite clear to me through Divine revelation that the Messiah,
whose advent among the Muslims had been promised from the beginning,
and the Mahdi whose advent had been Divinely decreed at the time of the decline of Islam and
the spread of error, and who was to be guided directly by God, and
who was to invite people to partake of the heavenly banquet, and whose
coming had been foretold by the Holy Prophet, peace be on him,
thirteen hundred years in advance, was myself. Divine revelation to this effect was vouchsafed to me so clearly
and so continuously that it left no room for doubt. It was replete
with grand prophecies that
were fulfilled clearly as bright day. Its frequency and number and
miraculous power compelled me to affirm that it comprehended the words
of the One God without an associate, Whose Word is the Holy Quran.
In order to win the pleasure of Allah, I hereby inform you all of
the important fact that Almighty God has, at the beginning of this
14th century, appointed me from Himself for the revival and support
of the true faith of Islam.
The author has been informed that he is the
Reformer of the age and that his spiritual excellences bear a resemblance
to the spiritual excellences of Jesus, son of Mary, and that the two
are closely related to each other and resemble each other.
And
finally:
The question remains who is the Imam of the
age today who must, under Divine Command, be obeyed by all Muslims,
the pious, the recipients of revelation and dreams. I have no hesitation
in affirming that I am the Imam of the age.
He
was very precise, however, in delineating his own mission: "But I am a Messenger and a Prophet without a new law in the sense that God reveals to me that which is
hidden, and because of the inner grace that has been bestowed upon
me on account of my obedience to the Holy Prophet, and because of
having received his name. "
He
insisted many times that the Seal of Prophethood was fully safeguarded.
He was to Muhammad (the law-bearing prophet who brought a Book) as
Jesus was to Moses (whose ancient law the messiah had come not to
abrogate but only to fulfill). It is important, then, in order to
appreciate the integrity of Ahmadiyyat, to note what Ahmad was not
claiming. His enemies, however, were usually not willing to be
so discriminating. In their views, his claims compromised the established
views concerning the finality of the Prophet Mohammad. It may seem
too fine a line, but Ahmad claimed only to be the inspired interpreter
of the Quranic message and the conveyor of the message of rebirth
and renewal of the one true religion: "For mankind there is no book in the world except the Quran, and
for all children of Adam, there is no Messenger and intercessor but
Muhammad, the chosen one, peace be on him. " Ahmad is a prophet,
not the Prophet; the Quran, the
Book, not a book among many; Islam, the original religion whose
recovery Ahmad sponsors.
Still
many Muslims took offense, the reasons, no doubt, the natural conservatism
of the faithful, and, a likely consequence of that, the will to misunderstand
the finely tuned rhetoric of his oracles. Christians also found reasons
to be offended. The great Christian paradox seemed to work in the
Punjab just as it has worked on many other occasions in even more
fertile soil: the expectation of the second coming of Christ fuels
the fires of evangelism, while the possible realization of the return
threatens to dampen the fires of faith. One apparently feels more
energized waiting for a guest to arrive than actually talking with
the guest once he has come into your living room. So with Hazrat Ahmad.
But we may understand his critics, given the way the claim was elaborated.
For
not only did he affirm that he had "a special resemblance to
Jesus" but, on the negative side, that he had been sent . . .
so that I should demolish the doctrine of the cross. I have been sent,
he goes on, to break the cross and slaughter the swine.
The
"shirk" of the Christians led them to put a strange interpretation
on the crucifixion. The presumed execution of Jesus had been construed
as a redemptive self-sacrifice - in effect God paying himself a ransom
for his creation held captive by the principalities and powers of
this world. To ordinary Muslims the notion may be unintelligible;
to Ahmadis it became anathema indeed. In place of this anti-theological
fantasy, Ahmad proposed a more likely scenario - more likely, because
there seemed to be verifiable evidence for the alternative.
In
the state of Kashmir, in the capital city of Srinagar, a tomb was
discovered, sheltering the mortal remains of an ancient prophet known as Yus Asaf. When this presumptive legend
converges with Biblical prophecy and a careful reading of the Gospels,
the traditional post-crucifixion story is radically changed. In order
to fulfill the prophecy that the messiah must preach to the "lost
sheep of the house of Israel," Jesus, recovered from the trauma
of the cross, migrated eastward to the home of those stray sheep Afghans
and the tribal peoples of the northern tier of India-Pakistan where
nomads live even today whose culture, religion and racial characteristics
make a Semitic origin an entirely reasonable inference. There "Yus
Asaf married, continued his prophetic vocation, became a parent,
and at the age of 120 years died.
His descendents to the 65th generation still
live in the region of his burial. Thus did Hazrat Ahmad "demolish
the doctrine of the cross" and further revise the more traditional
Islamic notion of Jesus, son of Miriam. The facts and the arguments
were arranged by Ahmad in his book Jesus
in India, being and account of Jesus' escape from death on the cross
and of his journey to India.
The
opening lines are worth noting as indications of the book's claims
and motives: I have written this book, so that, by adducing
proofs from established facts, from conclusive historical evidence
of proved value and from ancient documents of non-Muslims, I might
remove the serious misconceptions which are current among Muslims
and among most Christian sects regarding the earlier and the later
life of Jesus (on whom be peace) . Misconceptions, the dangerous implications
of which have not only injured and destroyed the conception of Divine
Unity, but the unwholesome and poisonous influence of which has for
long been noticed in the morals of the Muslims of this country."
So
the message of the founder of Ahmadiyyat involves a serious revision
of the church's theology as well as a refinement of the orthodox understanding
of Jesus in Islam.
There
is yet another challenge to conventional orthodoxy that Ahmad and
his followers raised. The Promised Messiah had forbidden jihad
against the British Government. Some accused him of self-serving
motives, as though the injunction against jihad
in the particular case at hand displayed a general cowardice and
lack of enthusiasm for Islam. As was usually the case, however, the
real motives were different and grounded on revelation rather than
political calculations. Hazrat Ahmad explained the prohibition against
jihad in the following way
In short, at the time of the Holy Prophet,
peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, the basis of Islamic Jihad was that God's wrath had been roused
against the tyrants. But living under the rule of a benign government,
as is the Government of our Queen and Empress, it is not Jihad to entertain rebellious designs against it but it is a barbaric
idea which is born of ignorance.
He
further declared, in language constrained by his sense of mission:
The Jihad
of this age is to strive in upholding the word of Islam, to refute
the objections of the opponents, to propagate the excellences of the
Islamic faith, and to proclaim the truth of the Holy Prophet, peace
and blessings of Allah be upon him, throughout the world. This is
Jihad till God Almighty
brings about other conditions in the world. The passions of armed
jihad could thus be diverted
to "Jihad Akbar,"
or a striving against the self, toward a spiritual discipline
that would enable the community to pursue the real cause of God, the
renaissance of Islam.
Well, we could go on. But no time at our command
in a brief essay would be sufficient even for a mere introduction.
Perhaps the motive and energy of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam can
be grasped from one last statement of its founder, the Promised Messiah.
In referring to the pledge of loyalty that his followers entered into
he said:
Be it known to all sincere ones who have
entered into the covenant of Ba'iat that the purpose of the covenant
is that the love of the world should grow cold and love of God and
of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, should fill the heart, and the
soul should be weaned away from the world, so that the journey to
the hereafter should not appear disagreeable.
The
Quran declares, "There is no compulsion in Religion. " For
those who entered into the voluntary covenant with the Prophet's prophet,
Islam remains the religion of the realized future. Still Hazrat Ahmad
protested, "This is not a new voice." The Mahdi did not
presume to displace any prophet from the seat of eminence, rather
his mission was to reestablish true righteousness and purity and that
true understanding of God that was, is, and will be the religion of
Islam.
Whatever
the appearance from outside the Movement, inside the Ahmadiyya Jamaat
the adherents can claim clear consciences both their own and that
of their founder.
One
last word, in order to displace the notion that the name of the Movement
is a tribute to the egotism of the Promised Messiah. Why was it originally
called the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam? In the words of the Promised
Messiah:
The name which is appropriate for this Movement
and which we prefer for ourselves is Muslims of the Ahmadiyya sect.
We have chosen this name because the Holy Prophet, peace be on him,
had two names, Muhammad and Ahmad; Muhammad was his name of glory
and Ahmad was his name of beauty . . . God so arranged the life of
the Holy Prophet, peace be on him, that his Meccan life was a manifestation
of his name Ahmad and the Muslims were taught patience and endurance.
In his life in Medina, his name Muhammad was manifested, and God in
His wisdom decided to chastise his enemies. But there was a prophecy
that the name Ahmad would be manifested again in the latter days and
that a person would appear through whom the qualities of beauty, which
characterize Ahmad, would be manifested, and all fighting would come
to an end. For this reason it has been considered appropriate that
the name of this sect should be Ahmadiyya sect, so that everyone hearing
this name should realize that this sect has come into being for the
spread of peace and security and that it would have nothing to do
with war and fighting.
It
is ironical indeed that a Movement that advocates peace among religious
persons and that, of course, is the meaning of the name of the religion
of Islam should have been deprived of its freedom of worship and belief
and sense of mission in the country of origin as well as elsewhere
in the world of Islam. It is also a further irony of history that
this other religion of
peace should be so divided against itself.
Louis
J. Hammann
Gettysburg
College