AM's BJ Connection (PI version-1)

Read other ARTICLES and BLOGS by the author. He is frequently banned on chowQ because he posts rebuttals to anti-Islam atheists, counters their anti-Pakistan propaganda effieciently, shows them how the American ‘wet dream’ is drying up globally, opposes their sponsored 'favourite' writers’ debauched views and satirizes them

********************************

For the reading pleasure of my Q-admirers at Chowq, I reproduce the PUNJAB POLICE INVESTIGATION-1 (to be followed by part-2) of an important book.

They asked for it repeatedly; now they have it!

********************************

Punjab Intelligence Version
Secret Report of the Punjab CID about the Origin, Growth and Development
of The Ahmadiyya Movement Upto the year 1938
Source: National Documentation Center, Islamabad, Pakistan.

MIRZA FAMILY AND THE MUTINY OF 1857

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian, District Gurdaspur, the founder of the Ahmadiyya sect was born in 1839. He was descended from a Moghal family of Samarkand, which emigrated the Punjab in 1530 and settled in the Gurdaspur district. For several generations the family held offices of respectability under the imperial Government and it was only when the Sikhs became powerful the it fell into poverty.

MIRZA GHULAM AHMAD’S CLAIMS AND MUSLIM REACTION.

During the reign of Ranjit Singh, however, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed’s father, Ghulam Murtaza, was received back into favour and with his brothers, performed efficient services in the Maharaja’s army on the Kashmir frontier and at other places. On the annexation of the Punjab by the British, jagirs of the family were resumed but a pension of Rs.700 was granted to Ghulam Murtaza and his brothers and they retained their proprietary rights in Qadian and the neighboring village. The family did excellent services during the mutiny of 1857.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed first came to notice in 1876 when he claimed to receive revelations direct from God. In 1883 he published revelation referring to himself as a messenger and Prophet. In 1891 he declared himself to be the Promised Mehdi or Messiah of the Muslim faith, a claim which led to the issue of fatwas in 1876-1891 condemning him as an infidel by leading ‘ulemas’. Being a skilled theologian and dialectician, however, he soon won over a large number of people to his tenets, though he was of course condemned by all orthodox Muhammadans as an impostor and heretic. The beliefs of the Ahmadis are briefly summarized in Mirza’s decalogue which he called the ten conditions of `Baiat’ (initiation). In them sympathy with all persons, Muslim or non-muslims is enjoined, and it is asserted that the conquest of the world to Islam is to be effected by peace and not by war. Mirza’s speeches and writings and his proselytizing zeal naturally led to some ill-feeling, yet, so far as is known, there is not a single incident on record in which his followers have been denied the use of mosques of Muhammadan praying-grounds or have in any way been molested, except in one case at Cuttack where some convert to Ahmadiyyaism wished to change the form of worship in the principal mosque in the town - a course to which the rest of the Muhammadan population naturally objected.

PROPHESIES ABOUT LEKHRAM AND ABDULLAH ATHIM (1891-97)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed proved to be a greater danger communally than religiously, owing to his prophecies foretelling the deaths of his opponents. In 1886 and again in 1893 he issued notices prophesying the death of Pandit LekhRam by violence. This "Prophecy" was fulfilled by the murder of (Pandit Lekh Ram on March the 6th, 1897. Ghulam Ahmed’s prophecy naturally aroused suspicion against him of complicity in the murder. Government shared the suspicion and a search warrant was issued for the search of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed’s house at Qadian. Nothing incriminating, however, was found.

Pandit Lekh Ram’s history is not without interest. He was at one time employed in the North – West Frontier Province Police, but owing to immorality and neglect of duty was reduced in rank and eventually resigned In 1884. He subsequently became a prominent Arya Samaj preacher.

The immediate reactions of Lekh Ram’s murder on Hindu-Muhammadan relations were considerable. The first result was reconciliation between the two sects into which, the Arya Samaj had split. The orthodox Hindus and Sikhs sympathized with the Arya Samaj, who, however, somewhat alienated Sikh sympathy by comparing Lekh Ram to Guru Gobind Singh. The situation at the time was further complicated by the fact that five or six murders of Hindus by Muhammadans had recently occurred and appeared to have been more or less due to fanaticism. Agitation, however, was chiefly confined to the educated classes in Lahore, Amritsar, Ludhiana, Hoshiarpur, Ferozepore and Peshawar and especially noticeable among the student class. Ill feeling was stirred up by the Arya Community but no outbreak occurred as a result and the situation gradually returned to normal. A proposal to put Mirza Ghulam Ahmed on security under section 107, C.P.C., was considered but did not materialize.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed’s prophecies about this time began to attract wider attention. He prophesied the death of Christian opponent Abdullah Athem, who died within the period foretold by Mirza. In 1897 Dr. Clark, a C.M.S.(Church Missionary Society of London) missionary, brought a case against him under section 107, C.P.C., alleging that he had deputed a man to murder him. Mirza Ghulam Ahmed was discharged but at the same time he was warned by the trying magistrate to desist from publishing inflammatory and provocative pamphlets, and was told that unless he adopted a moderate tone he could not fail but bring himself within the reach of the law.

DEATH OF MIRZA 1897 – May 1908

Down to his death in May 1908, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed continued to propagate his faith with remarkably little opposition from orthodox Muhammadans. There was of course occasions when his teachings were actively resented, as for example, at Amritsar in November 1905, when the Police had to escort him from a public meeting to save him from an assault. Orthodox opinion was aroused against him on that occasion by his eating and drinking on the platform from which he was speaking during the Holy Month of ‘Ramzan’. When not carried away by his proselytizing zeal and extravagances in debate, then he often made use of language, which did not really reflect his true opinions or even his teachings. Mirza’s general outlook on other religions appears to have been tolerant, if at times somewhat inconsistent. Thus, while he prophesied the speedy death of his enemies he declared that Muhammadans must allow the members of all other religions to live in peace; and likewise while condemning the whole Christian religion as false and anti-Christ, he nevertheless believed in Christ as a mighty prophet of God, not himself divine, but a divine messenger, who died (according to the old tale believed by Muhammadans and Hindus) in Kashmir. Speaking at a public meeting in Lahore in September 1904, he remarked that he did not consider all non-Muslim faiths false, and added that it had been revealed to him that Ram Chandra and Krishna were true men of God and that he had no patience with those who spoke ill of them. He considered Baba Nanak as a true worshipper of God.

LOYALITY TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

His attitude towards Government was throughout one of loyalty. In 1895 he published a pamphlet explaining his attitude towards the British Government in which he denounced ‘jehad’ and enjoined loyalty and goodwill towards Government.

HAKIM’S NURUDDIN, THE SUCCESSOR (1908 – 1914)

On his death in 1908 he was succeeded by Hakim Nur-ud-Din in opposition to instructions left by him that Ahmadiyya affairs should be controlled by an Anjuman. Nur-ud-Din was born at Bhera in 1841. His father was a well-to-do person, having a printing press of his own in Lahore. His family claimed descent from Omar, the 2nd Khalifa (of Rasoolullah saaw). Nur-ud-Dkin from his boyhood showed a tendency towards religion. At the age of 12 he began to study Arabic with the help of his elder brother, and while still young came to Lahore with his father for further study in Islamic theology, logic and philosophy. He later devoted much of his time to the study of Medicine and afterwards went to Rampur, Bhopal, Rohilkhand and Delhi for a higher course in Arabic and theology. He went to Mecca and Medina and passed a good deal of his time with the `Ulemas’ of the country.

On his return he was considered to be the foremost and most learned `moulvi’. For sometime he worked as a teacher in a school at Pind Dadan Khan, but finding this work unsuited to his taste he left it and went to his home at Bhera where he began to practice as a physician. The efficacy of his treatment and his reputation for learning won for him the situation of ‘Shahi Hakim’ in the Kashmir State, which position he occupied for about 10 years. In or about 1881, Nur-ud-Din came in contact with Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian. He soon imbibed the doctrines and beliefs professed by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed and entirely abandoned himself to religious matters and particularly to the tenets and doctrines of the Ahmadiyya faith. Nur-ud-Din wrote several books of which `Faz-ul-Kitab’ is the most noteworthy. It is a commentary on Christianity and was written under special instructions from Mirza Ghulam Ahmed.

Nur-ud-Din commanded great respect among the Ahmadiyya sect and was considered to be the chief pillar of their faith. It was for this reason that on the death of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed the leading men of the Ahmadiyya sect elected him as their Khalifa, which position he held till his death on the 13th March. 1914. During his Khilifat, Nur-ud-Din spent most of his time in Qadian and confined his sole attention to the propagation of the Ahmadiyya tenets and doctrines, a duty which he performed with great zeal and fervour.

SEPARATIST TENDENCY AND PRO-TURK ELEMENTS (1914)

Some three years before the death of Nur-ud-Din a separatist tendency was noticeable among the educated members of the community who resented the doctrine enunciated by Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud, the son or Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, that any Muhammadan who did not accept the ten conditions of `Baiat’ (initiation) laid down by the late Mirza was `Kafir’. 1 Some of these men, possible to gain popularity among the orthodox Muhammadan public, took part in the pro-Turkish agitation at the time of the Tripolitian and Balkan wars and were actively disloyal. Of these Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, Dr. Mirza Yaqub Beg, M.Sadr-ud-Din and Dr. Muhammad Hussain were the most prominent in the pro-Islamic movements of the time. They attracted, however, very few followers among the Ahmadis.

HAKIM’S DEATH AND SPLIT (1914)

The death of Nur-ud-Din divided the sect into two parties; one party favoured the succession of Muhammad Ali, M.A., editor of the "Review of Religions", and the other party, which commanded a majority, selected Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud, the son of the founder of the sect. Muhammad Ali’s colleagues formed a separate society in Lahore where they founded the Ahmadiyya Anjuman-i-Ishaat-i-Islam and a college of the same name. The "Review of Religions" was also brought to Lahore. The Labore party consists of the mopre educated Ahmadis, who look upon the founder of the sect as an apostle, not in the literal but in the metaphorical sense, and do not ex-communicate non-Ahmedi Muslims. They regard Mirza Ghulam Ahmed as a religious reformer but not as a Prophet. Their views are in sharp distinction to those of the Qadian sect which rejects the doctrine of the finality of prophethood in Muhammad. The mutual animosity between these two sections has often expressed itself in bitter criticism of each other’s religious doctrines. Of the two sections the Qadiani party has been the more bitter. In 1919 it made a direct attack on the Lahore section and declared that its leaders deserved according to Islamic Law to be murdered. To this attack, Muhammad Ali, the president of the Lahore Anjuman, replied at length accusing the Qadianis of spreading false rumours against the Lahore section. There is little doubt that the two sections are bitterly opposed to each other, but their disputes have so far been settled out of court.

FIRST WORLD WAR

From 1914 to 1918 the Ahmadis were politically quiescent. Their activities, such as they were, were mainly confined to public lectures which were not particularly well attended. Their record during the Great Wear was one of continuous loyalty. They subscribed to Government war loans, and towards the end of the war offered a double company of Ahmadis which, however, was never formed owing to the termination of the war. A territorial unit was subsequently raised.

VIEW ON SELF GOVERNMENT

In 1917 the pronouncement of progressive self-government for India stimulated the interest of the Qadian section in politics and the Khalifa was not slow to seize the opportunity to present the opinions of his sect. He at once protested against the proposal to make India self-governing basing his objections largely on the unrestrained religious intolerance prevalent in India. At the same time he declared himself in favour of racial equality, wider education, industrial progress and increased Indianization. Again in 1921 the Qadian branch presented an address to the Secretary of State for India in which it was stated that India did not stand in need of important and far-reaching reforms but demanded the abolition of racial distinctions and wider education. The address stressed the state of religious intolerance in India and asked that so long as religious prejudice retained its sway over the minds of the people, the British element should predominate in India and in the government of the country.

KHILAFAT, HIJRAT, NON-COOPERATION MOVEMENTS 1919

They took no part in the Muhammadan agitation over the Turkish question beyond expressing the opinion that consideration should be paid to the feelings of the Muhammadan world, and admitted frankly that they owned no spiritual allegiance to the Sultan, but recognized, as their temporal sovereign, the Power under whose rule they lived. They were opposed to the ‘hijrat’ movement, maintaining that the Islamic conditions governing the necessity for ‘hijrat’ had not been fulfilled. The Khilafat and non-cooperation movements found them firmly on the side of Government. The Qadiani section published pamphlets on the "Turkish Peace" and "Non-cooperation and Islam" in which non-cooperation, ‘hijrat’ and ‘jehad’ were un-qualifyingly condemned. Throughout the Punjab disturbances of 1919 they remained loyal.

SHUDDHI MOVEMENT (1923)

In 1923, Ahmadis began to come to notice prominently in connection with their campaign to oppose the spread of the ‘Shudhi’ movement. ‘Tabligh’ organizations had existed for many years before, as for example, the `Anjuman-i-Ishaat-i-Ahmadiya’, Lahore, founded in 1906 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmed and the Anjuman-i-Ishaat-i-Islam of Qadian, but had not attracted much attention until opposition to the late Swami Shardhanand’s ‘Shudi’ work gave the Ahmadis an opportunity which they were quick to seize to pose as the champions of Islam and the antagonists of the Arya Samaj. This antagonism which dates from the murder of Pandit Lekh Ram has subsequently become very bitter.

MIRZA MAHMOOD’S VISIT TO EUROPE (1924)

In 1924 Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad visited Europe with a party of 12 secretaries. The party visited Rome, Paris, London and Venice. Reports were subsequently received that Mirza had been in touch with communists and German nationalists, but there is no reason to regard them as true. It is of interest to note that the Ahmadis are much interested in Russia as they believe in a prophecy, which promises their predominance in Moscow one day.

AHMADIS KILLED IN KABUL (1924 – 25)

The proselytizing zeal of the Ahmadis abroad has never met with any serious opposition except in Afghanistan. In September 1918, it was reported that the Ahmadiyya movement was slowly but steadily spreading through Kabul and parts of Afghanistan. Information about the same time showed that the Ahmadis as a whole were distinctly anti-Afghan and that they were preaching that Afghanistan was the ‘dar-ul-harb’ whereas India was ‘dar-us-salam’. This attitude was no doubt due to the stoning of two Ahmadi Maulvis a few years previously and to the general attitude of repression adopted towards the Ahmadis by the then Amir of Afghanistan. At the end of August, 1924, an Ahmadi missionary named Niamatullah Khan was stoned to death at Kabul for heresy. His execution was denounced not only by the Ahmadis in India but also by most of the orthodox Muslim press.

In February 1925, two Qadiani shopkeepers in Kabul were also stoned to death for heresy. They had been convicted by the ‘mullahs’ of heresy, and their sentences received the approval of the Afghan official authorities as a Police Superintendent and 15 Constables were present at the execution. Ahmadi meetings of protest were held throughout India. And protests were also raised by the Ahmadis in England. The sensation caused, restrained the Amir as no further executions took place. After these executions there were rumours that the Ahmadis contemplated sending 'jathas’ to Kabul to propagate the Ahmadi faith, but the proposal never materialised. The relations of the Ahmadis with the present King of Afghanistan (Amanullah Khan) appear to be cordial, for on the occasion of his recent visit to England the Ahmadiyya community England presented him with an address of welcome.

ARYA SAMAJ MILITANCY (1927)

In 1927 the Muhammadan agitation arising out of the 'Rangila Rasul’ case gave the Amadis another opportunity of trying to reconcile themselves; with orthodox Muhammadans and of championing Islam. Even before the ‘Rangila Rasul’ agitation, the Lahore sect had gradually come to be regarded as the spokesmen of Islam against the Arya Samaj. Pamphlets issued in which it was stated that they did not regard Mirza of Qadian as their `Nabi’ and that anyone who did so was a `kafir’, but (consider him) merely as a religious reformer and guide, made it easier for the orthodox Muhammadans to follow their lead. Orthodox opinion, particularly that of almost the whole of the educated class in Lahore, veered strongly in their favour and in a short space of time they became the leaders of Muslim opinion in Lahore. During the ‘Rangila Rasul’ controversy the Lahore section took a comparatively small part in the agitation. Its members, however, were interested in the Muslim economic boycott of Hindus and were undoubtedly partly responsible for the opening of Muslim shops in Lahore to cut out Hindu shopkeepers. In August, 1927 the Lahore sect drew much attention to itself by the issue of provocative communal articles in the ‘Light’ of August the 16th, one of its principal organs. The leading article entitled "Fight to the Finish" was a practically undisguised incitement to violence, while other articles were extremely offensive and calculated to spread class hatred. The editor was presented under section 153-A, I.P.C. and convicted.

INFLAMMATORY POSTER (1927)

The communal disturbances at Lahore in May, 1927, and their sequels, the Muhammadan agitation arising out of the acquittal of the author of the ‘Rangila Rasul’ pamphlet ridiculing the Prophet of Islam, the publication of an even more scurrilous article entitled "A trip to Hell" published in an Arya magazine, the Risala Vartman of Amritsar, the conviction of the editor and proprietor of the Muslim Outlook for contempt of court in questioning the integrity and impartiality of the High Court Judge who had acquitted the author of `Rangila Rasul’ Pamphlet and the subsequent unjustified Muhammadan attack on the High Court itself, were all exploited by the Qadianis and made the excuse for communal propaganda. Following the Lahore riots, communal ill feeling was still further intensified in Lahore by the production of inflammatory posters beating the signatures of Mirza of Qadian himself. At other places posters were issued by Mirza advising Muhammadans to keep a ‘lathi’ by them even at prayer time. Publicity, which would certainly not otherwise have been obtained, was ensured for the 'Risala Vartman’ article by the issue of an inflammatory poster by Mirza quoting at length from it. This was proscribed as it gave undesirable publicity to the article itself. The genuine Mohammedan apprehension aroused by the acquittal of the author of the ‘Rangila Rasul’ pamphlet lest the law as it stood was powerless to punish malicious attacks on the founders of religions was subordinated to a desire to seek revenge from the community which had been responsible for attacks on the Prophet, and possibly explained, though it did not justify, the prominence given by the Ahmadis to such attacks.

OUTLOOK CASE (1927)

Meanwhile the prosecution of the editor of the ‘Risala Vartman’ and of the author of the article entitled ‘A trip to Hell’ had been ordered under section 153-A., I.P.C., and the case was referred to a full bench of the High Court. This action satisfied the more moderate and enlightened Muhammadan community but the Qadianis and the Khilafatists continued their attack on the High Court and tried to establish a position as leaders of Muhammadan opinion. Mutual jealousy and disagreement regarding the resolutions to be proposed led to be abandonment of the joint meetings which were to have been held in July to protest against the conviction of the editor and proprietor of the `Muslim Outlook’ and the High Court Judgement in the ‘Rangila Rasul’ case, but public meetings organized by the Qadianis were held at Lahore and Amritsar at which these protests were made in no uncertain language and at the same time the propagation of 'tabligh’ and the economic boycott of Hindus were urged, while posters setting forth these points and also demanding the dismissal of the High Court Judge who had acquitted the accused in the ‘Rangila Rasul’ case, the promulgation of an ordinance to provide for the punishment of vilifiers of the Prophet and the appointment of a Muhammadan Judge to the High Court bench were widely distributed in the Province.

SHARDHANAND ASSASINATED (1927)

During 1927 the Qadian Ahmadi’s were very conspicuous and seized many opportunities offered by the communal unrest in the Province to pose as protagonists of Islam. The indiscriminate condemnation of the Muhammadan community over the assassination of Swami Shardhanand and the widespread hindu belief that the murder was the result of a conspiracy aroused Muhammadan resentment and not unnaturally provoked criticism of the views expressed. In February and March the Ahmadis of the Qadian branch held a series of public lectures in Lahore on Islam and the communal question. The proceedings were generally moderate, but their was at times strong criticism of the Arya Smaj,. Speaking at one of these meetings on March 1st, Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Muhmud strongly condemned Arya methods of propaganda and their abuse of the Prophet.

ECONOMIC BOYCOTT OF HINDUS (1927)

The most dangerous point in the Qadianis’ propaganda was undoubtedly the incitement to boycott the Hindus economically and socially. Under the pretence of improving Muslim economic conditions this boycott movement was sedulously preached in towns and villages land at first met with considerable success. The Ahmadis showed themselves capable of well-organized propaganda, but the natural economic inter-dependence of Hindus and Muhammadans proved too strong for the organizers of the movement, which by October had spent its force. It left behind it, however, a legacy of ill-feeling in many places previously unaffected by communal trouble.

UNITY CONFERENCE (1927)

In September 1927 a ‘Unity Conference’ of ‘All-India’ leaders was held at Simla to which Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud submitted a memorandum embodying the demands of his community. He claimed interalia, on the social and religious sides, perfect religious freedom for all communities, non-interference in religious and social customs, liberty to work for the economic betterment of Muhammadans, the ostracism of vilifiers of any religion or its founder, while on the political side he demanded the extension of Reforms to the North-West Frontier Province, the conversion of Sind and Baluchistan into one separate Province and the maintenance of separate electorates. The conference broke down without effecting anything. Mirza’s own opinions, on the "cow and music" questions about this time were interesting. He opposed any restriction on the social life of Muslims by the prohibition of cow slaughter but expressed the opinion that cow slaughter should be confined to slaughterhouses. He did not consider the Muslims right in stopping music before mosques.

COMMUNAL PROPAGANDIST (1927)

As communal relations improved towards the end of 1927, the Ahmadis dropped unnoticed out of the picture. Inspite of all their vigorous championship of Islam and attempts to improve the economic conditions of Muhammadans it is doubtful whether they have, to any appreciable extent, won the sympathy and support of orthodox Muhammadans. They have, however, undoubtedly established the fact that in times of communal unrest they are a powerful and well-organized community with considerable initiative and a well-developed system of propaganda.

SIMON COMMISSION (1927)

Politically the Ahmadis remain supporters of government. Neither section has taken any part in the agitation against the Simon Commission, and the Qadianis have openly co-operated with the Commission. In the issue of the ‘Sunrise’ for December 22nd, 1927, Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad advanced, at great length many reasons in favour of co-operation, and a deputation subsequently visited the Commission in Lahore. The main points brought forward were the safe-guarding of the rights of minorities, the uplift of the untouchables, the maintenance of separate electorates, the preservation of Muslim majorities in Provinces where they exist at present, the extension of the Reforms to the North-West Frontier Province, the constitution of Sind and Baluchistan as a separate Province, perfect religious freedom and the unrestricted right of the propagation of any religion. The demands were dictated by communalism but the development of the Ahmadiyya faith depends on communalism.

AHMADYA ACTIVITIES IN INDIA AND ABROAD (1928)

Apart from their communal activities the Lahore and Qadian Ahmadis are a well-organized and financially sound community with missions abroad and in India. Founded in 1914 as the ‘Anjuman-i-Ishaat-i-Islam’, the Lahore section is mainly financed buy regular subscription and by the sale-proceeds of religious books and has an annual income of about three lakhs of rupees. These funds are satisfactorily controlled, and there are capable secretaries incharge of the various funds, such as the ‘tabligh’ fund, the mission fund, the literature fund, the `zakat’ fund, the buildings and books funds. Of their missions abroad the ‘Woking Mission’ is the best known and has made about 1,000 converts in England. The heads of the Woking mission are Khawaja Kamal-ud-Din and M. Abdul Majid. There is also German Mission, which was established in 1922 by Mubarak Ali and Sadar-ud-Din. The construction of a mosque was delayed owing to a rumour that the Ahmadis were pro-British propagandists, but this rumour was subsequently dispelled and a large mosque has been recently erected in Herlin. The mission has not yet achieved the success of the Woking mission and can only claim about 100 converts. There are other missions in Java, Burma, China and Singapore, Mauritius, Durban, Trinidad, Finland and Poland. All these, however, are as yet only in their infancy and can claim only a few hundred converts. In India here are some sixty branches in charge of properly trained workmen. A training and propaganda institution was founded in 1926 where students undergo a course of a study of comparative religions and are trained for missionary work. Commercial and philanthropic institutions have not been forgotten. There are, in Lahore a book depot, a mutual relief fund and co-operative stores, while a guesthouse is maintained for missionaries from abroad. The Lahore party has several papers of which the better knowns are ‘The Islamic Review’, the ‘Paigham-I-Sulah’ and ‘The Islamic World’. The number of their followers is difficult to estimate, but probably does not exceed 15,000. They are more pan-Islamic in their views than the Qadianis, but have never identified themselves prominently with any political movement.

The affairs of the Qadian section are equally well regulated and administered and are in charge of secretaries who direct the missionary, educational, social and political activities of the movement. The financial position of the section is dependent on voluntary contributions and is very sound, the accumulated balances amounting to some four lakhs of rupees. Their missions abroad are not so numerous or prosperous as those of the Lahore party, but they have a mosque in England at Southfields and smaller missions with a few hundred converts in the East and West Africa, Egypt, Syria, Apersia, Sumatra, Ceylon and in the United States of America. They are under the general control of Mufti Muhammed Sadiq and Abdur Rahim ‘Nayyer’. In India they have missionaries at work in the Punjab, the United Provinces, Sind, Bengal, Malabar, Bhopal, Behar and Kashmir. Educational institutions have also received their attention, and in addition to various institutions at Qadian itself they have primary schools in the Gurdaspur, Sialkot, Gujrat, Jhelum, Shahpur, Julundhur, Lyallpur and Hazara districts. There is a special missionary school at Qaidan at which students who have passed the Maulvi Fazal examination are trained in missionary and propaganda work. The Qadian party has several papers of which the Al-Fazl, the Sunrise, the Nur, the Faruq, the Misbah and the Ahmadiyya Gazette are the best known. The number of their followers was given in the Punjab census report of 1921 as 28,856 but this appears an under-estimate and they probably number about 75,000. 2

Part-2 to follow.....