The following words of Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (ra), Khalifatul Masih II, are presented by critics of the Ahmadiyya Community to prove that he was inspired by Fascism and looked up to Hitler and Mussolini as ideal leaders:
“Unlike Hitler or Mussolini, we do not have a government to reform people by force and banish from the country whoever does not comply with our orders, or rigorously punish whoever is not ready to listen to or act upon our words. If we had government power, we would accomplish this work within a single day, and not let another day dawn where these flaws and shortcomings existed among us.”1
Before proceeding to any details, it is necessary to establish the context of the aforementioned excerpt. It is taken from a Friday sermon of Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud (ra), the very title of which is “Efforts should be made to bring about reformation in deeds.”
In this sermon, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud (ra) lays out an important point: the reformation of belief is a relatively straightforward undertaking, whereas the reformation of acts and deeds constitutes a far more demanding process. For instance, matters pertaining to inheritance may, at the level of doctrine, be acceptable to all; yet, in practice, deliberate or inadvertent deficiencies in the distribution of an estate serve as a sample of conduct that demands reform.
Throughout the sermon, Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud (ra) discusses various approaches applied for practical reformation, and explains how different systems of governance, each in its own manner, attempt to bring about practical reformation. He cites the examples of dictatorship and monarchy among others. Nowhere, however, does he express approval of any of these for the Ahmadiyya Jamaat.
What is particularly noteworthy is that the sermon concludes with the following words:
“Bearing these considerations in mind, we ought to devise a remedy so that we may reform our conduct, and so that, just as a momentous transformation has been brought about in the beliefs of the world through the Promised Messiah (as), a similar revolution may likewise be brought about in practical life. I offered on a previous occasion, and I offer it once again, that members of the Community ought also to reflect upon this subject in their individual capacities. It is my hope that those who reflect upon the means of reforming practical conduct will, even before hearing what I have to say, perceive within themselves a capacity by which they will be able to remedy their own shortcomings with great passion. I therefore call upon Ahmadis to reflect upon this matter themselves, and, should any proposal occur to them, to communicate it to me, so that I too may benefit from their proposals.”
These words, in themselves, dissolve the very objection under discussion. Would a leader possessed with an authoritarian disposition invite both the masses of his community to such consultation? And what autocrat is there who says, “Communicate to me your proposals, so that I too may benefit from them”?
Since it is thus abundantly evident that Hazrat Musleh-e-Maud (ra) harboured no such intention as the critics seek to impute to him by force, we now proceed to offer a detailed response to this objection.
Whether or not taking this quote in isolation suffices to show someone’s ideology – social, political and religious as it envelopes all three – is the aim of this article.
Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) (1889-1965) lived and led his community in colonial India, and later in the post-colonial child called Pakistan. The above words are from a time when colonial powers were head-to-head and a world war was brewing. Various forms of governance were at play in the global colonial theatre: democracy, dictatorship and fascism. Religious leadership had dwindled away in the hubbub and there seemed no sign of it coming back to life in the then foreseeable future.
It was in the grind of these secular forms of governance that religious communities were undergoing the struggle for survival. A thorough reading of the vast collection of Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s (ra) writings and lectures shows that he had a great understanding of the global politics and colonial dynamics. While he would highlight the pros of a certain style of governance, he would never hold back in voicing his critique too.
For instance, he once compared the outlooks of European Fascist powers with the British democratic tradition. Instructing his followers to strive to leave behind better followers of Islam, he wrote:
“A difference between the British and other nations is that the British focus more on future generations than the current one, with the confidence that when our great people pass, they will be replaced by more great persons.
“[…] Other nations are not as confident. For instance, Napoleon rose to power and endeavoured to conquer all European nations within a span of a decade. This was so, for he thought that there would be no Napoleon after him.
“Hitler’s haste too was out of the fear that there would be no Hitler for Germany after him. The same was the case with Mussolini, who knew that there would be no other Mussolini after him to rejuvenate Italy.
“On the other hand, every individual in the British society believes that even if they are unable to triumph, those who will come after me will. They do not fear losing one Lloyd George or one Churchill as they believe that many more Lloyds Georges and Churchills will continue to appear. Hence their policies are not based on haste […].”2
This, and many other passages from his works, exhibit the depth of understanding in regard to not only the geopolitical modus operandi of world powers, but the psychology and thought processes behind it.
This isn’t the space to delve into his understanding of the political motives of the world powers, but the Ahmadiyya inclination towards the British is quite conspicuous – an allegation thrown at them by their Muslim critics and interlocutors.
Similarly, the Ahmadiyya standpoint on their loyalty to the British Raj too is not inconspicuous: fidelity in exchange for religious freedom. This stance of Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) left no room for any inclination towards European Fascism.
He was once criticised by one of his own followers for demonstrating too much optimism in the British and not seeing any promise in the Fascist powers. Referring to this criticism, which he had received through a letter, he addressed it in depth in one of his sermons:
“In his book Mein Kampf, Herr Hitler lays a manifesto for his government and clearly states that any nation with its nerve centre outside Germany cannot live under the German government. He questions the possibility of a nation being controlled by an external power, yet it dwelling on German soil. This, he declares, would mean that some people would be living among us, but they would not be submissive to us.
“I ask that under such a policy, how can Ahmadiyya survive in Germany? The Promised Messiah (as) has declared Qadian to be the headquarter of the Ahmadiyya movement; now imagine Qadian being under Britain or Italy, and other regions with Ahmadiyya population being under German control. The German administration would persecute these Ahmadis. Similarly, if Qadian were to go under German control, Italy and its likes would persecute Ahmadis for the same reasons, as they too believe in such policies.
“Hitler goes on to declare an even more disastrous policy where he says that he would not allow any religion even near his country that lays for its followers economic, commercial and social laws. It is for this very reason that he is a bitter enemy of Jewish people […].”3
Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) goes further to explain how Russia, in the wake of its communist revolution, would not tolerate religious people, let alone allow religious freedom. He explains how an Ahmadiyya missionary, Zahoor Hussain, had been severely persecuted by the Russian authorities when sent to Russia to propagate the message of Islam.4
Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) also analysed the economic policies being applied by the world powers to gain more control. It was from this arena that he thought the actual victor would emerge. He identified three major clusters of actors: Socialism in the likes of Britain, France and America; Bolshevik Communism in Russia; and Nationalist Socialism in Germany, Italy and Spain.5
He further criticised the racial factor at play behind Nazi Germany: Hitler’s theory of Herrenvolk – supremacy of the Aryan race.6 Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) found no room for any other race or nation to survive under an administration with such inhumane and discriminatory policies.
In his analysis of the global powers of his time, Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) seems to identify any lessons that could be learnt – from their successes as well as their failures. In understanding Hitler, he saw him as “an extraordinary person, full of fire that could destroy whatever came in its way for thousands of miles. He was actually a volcano that shook its nation to the core.”
But he saw Hitler’s downfall in his misjudgement of his rival forces and, consequently, “called God’s wrath upon himself.”7
He saw that submission to its leader and complete obedience were paramount to a nation’s success. Hence, while criticising their oppressive nature, he chose this factor to be something that could be learnt and benefited from. He spoke of how Mussolini had raised Italy from a state of helplessness and turned it into a great power that now stood with its head high, challenging anyone to contest it.8
He rooted this praise in the Quranic teaching of “O ye who believe! obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority among you”9 by highlighting that if Italians could show exemplary obedience to their leader, even not being religiously bound to do so, why should Ahmadis not do so when they are bound by their faith. He emphasised that obedience in Islam is tied to bai’ah, the pledge of allegiance, which means complete submission to the point of being sold to the leader. He cited as examples the Companions of the Holy Prophet (sa) of Islam, who had very limited resources, were far fewer in number as compared to their adversaries, but were able to defeat them and make Islam triumphant.10
Alongside his emphasis on absolute obedience and submission, Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) remained cautious of the fact that the Islamic caliphate was not to be misunderstood as synonymous with dictatorship. He clarified that while Islam asks for absolute submission to the caliphate, “the Islamic system of governance is thousands of times better than dictatorship.”11
He laid out similarities and differences of both systems side by side:
“Although there is similarity in the two, in that just as dictators are to be obeyed unreservedly, God Almighty asks for the same for caliphs. But there is a huge intrinsic difference between the two: the dictator makes his own legislation and asks for it to be obeyed, while the caliph himself is under a system of law that is set and revealed by Allah the Almighty.
“Hitler has set his own law, so has Mussolini, and so has Lenin, but the Muslim caliph is under the same law as are his ordinary followers. He [the caliph] has no legislation of his own as he is bound by divine law, and it is the same that he asks his followers to abide by.”12
In the same sermon, and on many other occasions, he condemned some Muslim circles who had seen Hitler’s and Mussolini’s Fascism as the way forward for Islam.13
He not only condemned Fascism, but made it quite clear, as discussed above, that Fascism had no sympathies towards Islam. In 1939, he analysed the Italo-Turkish war – where Italy had attacked the Ottoman territory of the Tripolitanian Vilayat on the coasts of North Africa – and made it quite clear that “wherever they [Italy and Germany] can, they will try and eliminate Islam. The British can have many other vices, but they stay away from interfering with religion, as much as they can, and are, hence, better than Italy and Germany.”14
Contemporaneous Muslim inclination towards Fascism
Having looked at Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s (ra) view on European Fascism, it is important to know what views his contemporary Muslim leadership held about it.
Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra), while on a tour to Europe in 1924, visited Mussolini during his short stay in Rome. The meeting was arranged by the then British ambassador to Italy and was planned to be an hour long. However, Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra) recalled and recounted later that about three-quarters of the hour were lost in the struggle to tell the taxi driver where he intended to go.
He recalls having left with only a quarter of an hour, during which Mussolini showed particular interest in Indian politics in general and Mahatma Gandhi in particular. He later expressed his regrets that not enough time was left to discuss with Mussolini the possibilities of establishing a Muslim mission in Italy and sending missionaries there.15
This was at a time when Mussolini was the prime minister of Italy and not the full-fledged dictator. Other Muslim leaders were to engage with him when he was the Fascist dictator. Among them was Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the national poet of British-Indian Muslims.
After the second roundtable conference held in London, Iqbal visited Rome and made an appointment with Mussolini. During research for this essay, the author looked through Mussolini’s records held at the National Archives of Italy and was only able to find the appointment confirmed in Mussolini’s official diary. Marked under the date 27 November 1931, and scheduled for 15:45, it read: “Sir Muhammad Iqbal – grande poeta mussulmano”.16 It is said to have lasted for around forty minutes.17
Iqbal had walked out of the meeting quite impressed by Mussolini. We know this from his reply to a journalist’s question about his impressions of Mussolini: “Your Duce is a Luther, but without a gospel.”18
Iqbal was to later record his impressions about Mussolini in poetic verse:
فیض یہ کس کی نظر کا ہے ؟ کرامت کس کی ہے؟
وہ کہ ہے جس کی نگہ مثلِ شعاع آفتاب
Whose benevolent eye has graced this miracle upon you? He whose vision is like the light of the Sun!19
Dr Javed Iqbal, Sir Muhammad Iqbal’s son and biographer, acknowledges the difficulty in ascertaining Iqbal’s viewpoint on Mussolini, but, to make this task easy, he quotes a letter written by Iqbal himself to Ale Ahmad Saroor on 12 March 1937:
“You see a contradiction in what I have written about Mussolini. You are right, but what can I do if the devil and the saint are combined in this banda-e-khuda [lit. man of God, but used for an amusing figure]? If you were to ever meet Mussolini, you would testify that his gaze is so inexplicably intense that it can only be likened to nothing but a ray of the Sun. This is, at least, what I felt.”20
Despite this bloody conquest of Abyssinia, Muslims of Libya seemed overjoyed to welcome Mussolini when he visited the country in March 1937. The purpose of Mussolini’s visit, as described by his Governor General to Libya, was to present himself to the Libyan people as “founder of the empire” and “defender of the prestige of Rome, the common mother of all Mediterranean peoples.”21
But the Muslims of Libya seemed to be more royalist than the king. They not only presented to him a cordial welcome, but presented him a Saif al-Islam – the sword of Islam. One of the two Muslim army men, who had been vital in Italy’s campaign on Egypt, came forward and said the following while presenting Mussolini the sword of Islam:
“In the name of the soldiers and Muslims of Libya, proud sons of fascist Italy, I have the honour to offer the victorious Duce this well-tempered Islamic sword. At this moment, with our hearts, beat those of all Muslims of the Mediterranean shores who, filled with admiration and hope, perceive in you the great statesman who guides our destiny with a sure hand.”22
Mussolini, to his loyal Muslims of Libya, responded by exclaiming:
“You have shown your loyalty to Italy, exercising the greatest discipline at a time when Italy was engaged in a distant war, and you offered thousands of volunteers who made a valuable contribution to our victory.” He went on to promise the Libyan and Ethiopian Muslims “peace, justice, well-being, respect for the laws of the Prophet” and, to demonstrate “sympathy towards Islam and towards Muslims the world over.”23
Some Muslims beyond the Libyan borders too seemed fascinated by Mussolini’s diplomatic infatuation with the Muslim world. Palestinian journal Filastin welcomed Mussolini’s apparent sympathies towards the Muslim world.24
Assad al-Shuqairi, a follower of Jamal al-din al-Afghani’s pan-Islamism and the mayor of Acre, saw Mussolini’s friendship as his repentance for his injustices, and strongly advised Libyan and Ethiopian Muslims to grab the opportunity.25
The Cairo-based newspaper al-Balagh showed optimism in Mussolini’s declaration and saw it as parallel to the German Kaiser Wilhelm II, who had made similar commitments with the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II before undertaking his tour to Constantinople, Jerusalem and Damascus in 1898.
We conclude this sword of Islam episode by quoting the qadi of Derna, a prominent local Muslim leader, who presented a flowery resolution to Mussolini at the footsteps of the mosque in Derna. He referred to Mussolini as “a faithful instrument of the divine will because God wants to give peace and prosperity to the world again”.26
In another passage, the qadi of Derna told Mussolini that “400,000,000 Moslems in the world will not remain insensible to the particular attention you have paid to Islam”.27
Syed Abul A’la Maududi, an Islamic scholar of great influence, an Islamo-political activist and a contemporary of Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (ra), appears to have remained immensely impressed by European Fascism.
For Maududi, Islam not only provided individuals with a code of life, but was a regime that had to, by hook or by crook, take political control of the entire world. His core theory of a so-called Islamic revolution is summed up in his own words, when he called every single Muslim to “come out and join the struggle”.28 This was Maududi’s call to armed conflict, with the motive being:
“Eliminate all those who reject God […]. If you accept the truth of Islam, all that remains for you to do is to put all your strength into establishing Islamic rule on Earth.”29
His ideology spread across parts of the Muslims world and inspired movements like Ikhwan al-Muslimun in Egypt and the likes of al-Qaeda and ISIS in more recent times. This violent tendency had stemmed from his deep inspiration for Fascism.
Presenting his worldview of such an Islamic revolution, he declared that “German National Socialism would never have enjoyed the success it did without the framework Fichte, Goethe and Nietzsche provided, taken up under the brilliant and strong leadership of Hitler and his comrades.”30
The founder of Ikhwan al-Muslimun, Hassan al-Banna, was deeply inspired by Abul A’la Maudidi’s Fascist ideals. When the grand mufti of Jerusalem, and al-Banna’s mentor, Amin al-Husseini died in 1946, he delivered a eulogy stating:
“O Amin, what a great, indomitable, incredible man you truly were […]. What a hero you were – what a miracle of a man […] who challenged an empire, battling Zionism with Hitler’s help.”31 Quite telling is the way he mentions both Mussolini and Hitler with honorific titles of “Il Duce” and “der Fuhrer”.32
Mussolini committed Italy to an everlasting war in a speech he delivered in 1935 and made it clear that “every Italian man between eight and fifty-five must be gripped by a militarist spirit.” The speech gripped al-Banna’s attention, especially the statement that “militarism is a new idea, something no one has succeeded in realising throughout human history […].” While al-Banna made reference to this speech on many occasions, the most striking is where he corrects Mussolini by pointing out that the idea of total militarisation of the society began thirteen centuries ago through Islam and its founder, Prophet Muhammad (sa). He went on to proclaim with great pride that “there is barely a surah in the Quran in which the Muslim is not summoned to show courage, endurance and militancy, pursuing jihad in the name of God.”33
A confidant of al-Banna and later defector, Ali Ashmawi, tells how deeply inspired by Fascism al-Banna was. In his book The Secret History of the Muslim Brotherhood, he goes into the details of how al-Banna studied not only the structures of Nazi security services and the Gestapo, but also those of underground Zionist groups.34
One of Egypt’s leading literary scholars, Taha Hussein, criticised Ikhwan al-Muslimun for their pro-German stance. Another renowned analyst, Abbas al-Akkad, provided evidence that the Ikhwan had received secret payments from Nazi intelligence to sow seeds of fascism in Egypt. Jeffrey Herf, in his book Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World, discusses how the Nazis saw the Ikhwan as not only a military ally but as a vehicle to spread their anti-Semitic ideas in the Muslim world.35
Another key figure of the Ikhwan, Syed Qutb, started studying the works of Abul A’la Maududi and ended up being a prominent name in what is termed as Islamic terrorism. Two of his works, Signposts on the Road and The Future of this Religion, acquired the status of textbooks for violence in the name of political Islam.
This helps put Hazrat Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s (ra) views in perspective. He made it quite clear, staying in line with the founder of the Ahmadiyya Community, that he did not approve of a militant Islam. Nor did he approve of oppressive regimes like those of European Fascists.
On the other hand, prominent Muslim scholars not only admired Fascism and were inspired by Fascist tendencies, but also introduced Islam to the Western world as the mother of Fascism.
Endnotes
1. Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Khutbat-e-Mahmood (being a collection of sermons), Vol 17, Friday Sermon, 29 May 1936, p. 337, Fazl-e-Umar Foundation, Nazarat Nashr-o-Ishaat, Qadian, 2022 (Henceforth to be cited as Khutbat-e-Mahmud)
2. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 3, p. 614
3. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 20, p. 434, Friday Sermon 13 October 1939
4. Ibid., p. 437
5. Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Nizam-e-Nau, p. 32, Nazarat Nashr-o-Ishaat, Qadian, 2016
6. Ibid.
7. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 26, Friday Sermon 24 August 1945, p. 332
8. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 17, Friday Sermon 7 August 1936, p. 504
9. Surah an-Nisa, Ch.4: V.60
10. Ibid.
11. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 20, Friday Sermon 7 July 1939, p. 302
12. Ibid.
13. Ibid.
14. Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Khitabat-e-Shura, Vol. 2, Address to Majlis-i Shura 1939, p. 424, Nazarat Nashr-o-Ishaat, Qadian, 2013, V.2
15. Khutbat-e-Mahmood, Vol. 39, Friday Sermon 27 June 1958, p. 166; Abdur Rahman Qadiani, Safar-e-Europe, Zia-ul Islam Press, Rabwah, p. 154
16. Mussolini records, Archivio Centrale Dello Stato (Italian state archives), Segreteria Particolare, Di S. E. Il Capo Del Gerverno
17. Dr Javed Iqbal, Zinda Rud, p. 519, Sang-e-Meel Publications, Lahore, 2019
18. Ibid.
19. Muhammad Iqbal, Bal-e-Jibril (being a collection of poetic works), Taj Company, Lahore, p. 202. Translation adopted from iqbalurdu.blogspot.com
20. Muhammad Iqbal, Iqbal Nama (being a collection of Iqbal’s letters), Vol. 2, Ed Sheikh Ataullah MA, published by Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore, p. 314
21. Proclamation by Governor General Italo Balbo to the Libyan people, 10 March 1937
22. Popolo d’Italia, 19 March 1937, quoted by John L Wright in Mussolini, Libya, and the Sword of Islam, in Italian Colonialism, Ed R Ben-Ghiat, M Fuller, Palgrave, New York, 2005
23. Gaspare Ambrosini, I problem del Mediterraneo, Istituto Nazionale di Cultura Fascista, Rome, 1937
24. Filastin, 17 March 1937
25. Ibid, 18 March 1937
26. New York Times, 13 March 1937
27. Ibid.
28. Abul A’la Maududi, Khutbat, Markazi Maktaba Islami, New Delhi, 1998
29. Ibid.
30. Abul A’la Maududi, Minhaj al-Inqilab al-Islami, Cairo, Dar al-Ansar, 1977, p 19
31. Hassan Al-Banna, Majmua’at Rasael al-Imam al-Shahid Hassan al-Banna, Cairo, 1999, p406; Hamed Abdel-Samad, Islamic Fascism, Prometheus Books, New York, 2016
32. Ibid.
33. Ibid.
34. Ali Asmawai, at-Tarikh as-Sirri li Gamaa’at al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin, Cairo 2006, 2 edition, pp. 8-9
35. Jeffrey Herf, Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World, Yale University Press, New Haven, 2009, pp. 242-244