Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad ‘Message of Peace’ more relevant today than ever
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.
Two or three days before his death, in 1908, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib wrote his last book ‘Message of Peace’. HMGA had foreseen Hindu-Muslim tension based on religion. To prevent escalation and bloodshed between the followers of these two religions he wrote his book and gave practical suggestions to avoid mayhem. HMGA made one such suggestion that out of respect for Hindus religious feelings, Muslims should stop slaughtering and eating meat of Hindus deity Cow, and Hindus should stop disrespecting and making vituperative attacks on Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS.
Of course no one among Muslims cared for HMGA suggestion. Last 100 years history is witness to what followed. Hindu-Muslims riots, extreme was in 1947 at time of independence from British rule, then wars between India and Pakistan. In India there have been continuous riots against Muslims. Riots took place in State of Gujrat when Narendra Modi was its Chief Minister. And riots and killing of Muslims taking place in India, on cow slaughter and consumption of its meat by Muslims, when Narendra Modi is Prime Minister of India.
The way new laws are enacted in India in recent days, slaughter of cow and eating of its meat by Muslims will become a serious crime. Muslims will be prevented from eating cow meat. On other hand Hindus will make more bold vituperative attacks on Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS.
I wish Muslims in India had listened to HMGA, and today situation could have been prevented.
Once again it is proved that Muslims who do not listen to appointees of Allah SWT learn through hard way.
Message of Peace by HMGA: http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/mess-pc.htm
Link to news on cow slaughter in India: http://www.firstpost.com/tag/cow-slaughter
From Zahid Aziz:
Rashid mentions the riots at partition of India. When they started, the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore published an English translation of 'Message of Peace' in 1947, and appealed for inter-communal harmony, as you can see at this link.
Note in this booklet the following words:
"Hindus and Muslims are two communities about whom it is impossible to imagine that either of them can, at any time, turn the other out of the country." (p. 4 in edition cited by Rashid)
He was obviously shown by Allah the tragic scenes at partition; hence the urgent tone one finds in this book.
From Roshnara Musthafa:
It is an oversimplification to say that the situation in India today is because of the muslim habit of eating cow meat. ("I wish Muslims in India had listened to HMGA, and today situation could have been prevented.")
If it was not cow meat, it would have been something else. India is the largest exporter of beef and the owners of these businesses are hindus. There is no outcry about this from those who oppose cow slaughter. Hence, the issue is a hatred for muslims and the political need to galvanize people's emotions with hatred for something. If not cow meat, it could have been a host of other things! It is the ideology of RSS that is the reason behind the situation in India. Any ideology that instils the notion of special privileges and rights will only breed intolerance. But there is hope for India as we see that many intellectuals are rising up to the occassion and speaking out against intolerance.
From ikram:
@ Roshnara Musthafa: The issue of “Cow slaughter” is only an example to draw attention to the whole book itself. The book was left incomplete due to death of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib. Yet, you might find a complete solution, if not a blueprint, for peace between Hindus and Muslims.
From Rashid Jahangiri:
@Roshnara Musthafa:
I agree many intellectuals in India are rising up to the occasion and speaking out against intolerance, but there is more than enough number of Indians who are uneducated, and religious fanatics, just like in Pakistan, who with their sheer force of numbers are in position of making life hell for Muslims. Following article in NY Times gives a preview of what to expect in coming days in India:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/world/asia/hindu-mob-kills-another-indian-muslim-accused-of-harming-cows.html?ref=world&_r=0
From Mohammed Iqbal:
Ahmadies are now highlighting the opinion on the slaughter of cow in the "Message of Peace" due to the unfortunate happenings in India. But this is hopefully a passing phase and there are already signs that the present government with its fascist tendencies are losing public support.Mirza Sahib made a very good suggestion to Hindus that Muslims shall give up eating cow meat in exchange for their refraining from abusing the Prophet. Seems none of the paties were in a mood to comply with this suggestion. Raj Pal's book "Rangila Rasool" was a testimony to this. Ahmadies too didn't follow some suggestions he made in the book MOP. He disapproved seperatist politics in that. He wondered why the Muslims created a seperate political party called Muslim League when their demands and that of the Congress were one and the same. He in no uncertain terms described it as a mistake. Yet we find a few years later both factions of Ahmadies in the company of Muslim League. Ahmadiyya writings even now reflect bias against India. In an article called "Shastri's predictions turned out wrong", you have even wrote the this: "the Indian war-lords headed by Mr. Shastri were so certain of the easy and rapid capture of Lahore" Mr Shastri was a very simple, humble and honest prime minister esecially when compared to his predecesors and successors and he and all of India's rulers were democratically elected.Indian army was and is a highly professional one whch never overthrew an elected government. In view of the above facts how unfortunate was your description of them as warlords. What did Pakistan give Ahmadies in exchange for this? The status of heretics. The council of Islamic Ideology is examining whether Ahmadies are just kafirs or Murtads who are wajib ul Qatl! Had Ahmadies upheld the idea of composite nationalism as done by Maulana Azad years later, this predicament could have been avoided. May Allah save Ahmadies and Pakistan.
From Roshnara Musthafa:
Cow worship is a topic dealt with widely in the Quran. At one place in Al-Baqarah, Allah says that "He made their hearts absorb the love of the calf because of their disbelief" (2:93) Worship of the cow is a sign of a deeper malaise as also is preventing others from living as their conscience tells them. Most intellectuals speaking out in India focus on those deeper problems. Do Muslims in India fulfill their obligations to their faith by appeasing the RSS sanghis, or do they take the bold stand that many intellectuals in India are taking to call for an environment where human beings have the necessary freedom to become educated and enlightened, and free from the grips of power mongers? Of course, eating beef when it is banned is not advisable, and certainly, we have to restraint our anger and tendency to provoke anger. But I do not think that blaming Muslims help (most of whom in India are just as uneducated as the hindus perpetrating the violence). We should not forget the root of the problems in our haste to create narratives that fit our positions.
I have deep admiration for the work of HMGA and the vision he showed in denouncing war and political islam, as well as many other reforms he focused upon. But I fail to see a solution laid out in his book "Message of Peace". He sees conflict as inevitable (as he thinks it stems basically from religious differences and not political situations) and asks us to do what we can to mitigate conflict. There is guidance, surely, in his words. It is interesting to note here that Mahtma Gandhi was against ban on cow slaughter and such coercion, he felt, did not suit the followers of any true religion!
http://thewire.in/2015/10/02/what-mahatma-gandhi-said-to-those-who-wanted-beef-banned-in-india-12170/
From Abid Aziz:
@ Iqbal. You mentioned in your post that HMGA considered the creation of Muslim league as a mistake. Could you please provide the relevant reference.
From Zahid Aziz:
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad lived in a very different time when there was no prospect of independence of India or campaign for it by Congress or Muslim League. The Muslim League pledged loyalty to the British government right at its foundation (see this link), and had limited aims, but it does appear that Hazrat Mirza sahib was cautious about recommending the pursuit of political aims by Muslims. He was after all the Muslim Messiah, and not seeker after power and rule.
It cannot be denied that the 'Message of Peace' wishes to see Hindu-Muslim reconciliation. But then Mr Jinnah was also supporter of Hindu-Muslim unity in his early years.
Interestingly, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din's letter to the Muslim League conference at Lucknow in 1913, which he sent from England, was published in the Review of Religions, May 1913 (see link.)
The situation changed after the First World War with the prospect of some form of independence arising, and Muslim groups did have to decide which solution they would support. LAM writings show that they hoped that Pakistan would set an example of true Islamic rule of a liberal and enlightened nature.
These are a few facts and thoughts, rather than a properly-reasoned analysis!
It may be worth quoting the following from the Message of Peace:
"It is not my object here to deal with the proposition that the causes of the disunity between Hindus and Muslims, which is daily increasing, are not limited merely to religious differences, but extend to political aspirations and affairs as well. Hindus, for instance, have always been desirous of having a share in the government of the country, of having at least their opinion consulted on important political matters, of bringing their grievances to the notice of the rulers, and of being admitted, like the British, to high posts of administration. Muslims made the mistake of keeping aloof from the Hindus in their endeavours to attain this object. They thought that as their numbers were smaller than those of the Hindus, only the latter would gain from any outcome of these efforts, and not the Muslims. Not only did they hold aloof from the Hindus, they even opposed them and acted as a hindrance in their way. This added to the ill-feeling, and I accept that these causes aggravated the original enmity between the two. I cannot believe, however, that these are the real causes of mutual hatred, and I do not agree with those who hold that ill-feeling between Hindus and Muslims is not due to religious differences, but really to political rivalry.
Everybody can understand why Muslims shrink from joining the Hindus in claiming their lawful rights, why they keep aloof from the Congress till now, and why, at last feeling that the Hindus were right, they followed their example, not however by joining the Congress, but by starting a separate, parallel association of their own, the All-India Muslim League?
Brethren, the cause of this is to be found in religion alone, and nothing else…."
(From the English translation, pages 14-15)
From Rashid Jahangiri:
Custodian of India's Ajmer Sharif Dargah is reading from HMGA book:
"The way we can respect another religion is by ensuring none of our acts hurt anyone's religions beliefs," the diwaan said. "They (Hindus) revere cows as holy creatures so it is our responsibility [as Muslims] to give up eating beef".
"I appeal to the lawmakers to make a policy and ban cow slaughter so as to maintain peace and harmony in the country," the custodian said,…"
See link to story in Dawn.
From Roshnara musthafa:
In the constitutional debates when india was being born, the ban on cow slaughter was discussed at length and it was opined that a complete ban on cow slaughter would create a burden on the state and undue economic hardship on the people ( imagine the burden of feeding and caring for cows past their milking age and bullocks too old to do work) and even create oppression. These opinions are very true as we see from the effect of such a ban in Uttar Pradesh, the story of the poorly run goshalas where cows are very poorly taken care of, the farmers distressed by their inability to sell older cattle, and the lynching on the basis of mere suspicion. Islam frees us from undue reverence to anything or anybody and saves us from intellectual atrophy, as happens when we offer a blanket advise to avoid eating beef. It is certainly an intellectually easier position to take than to have a healthy debate like those early parliamentarians did while creating a new democratic nation, now at the verge of collapse by the harmful mixing of religion and politics! Here is a link to the constitutional position on cow slaughter in India:
https://www.thequint.com/opinion/2017/04/20/constitution-take-on-cow-slaughter-beef-ban-consumption-arvind-datar