Missionaries set forth for Syria
Due to the very short notice with which the date of the ship’s departure was confirmed, it was not possible to organise formal farewell gatherings for Syed Zainul Abideen Waliullah Shah Sahib[ra] and Maulvi Jalaluddin Shams Sahib Fazil[ra] in accordance with the wishes of their friends. […]
On the morning of 27 June [1925], these missionaries were scheduled to depart from [Qadian], Dar-ul-Aman. Students and teachers from both educational institutions, along with several other companions, had arrived early in the morning at the bend of the road to bid them farewell. Around 8 am, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih II[ra], accompanied by the departing missionaries and a number of other friends, set out.
Upon reaching the designated point of departure, Huzoor[ra] raised his hands in prayer along with the gathered assembly. Following the prayer, he embraced the missionaries. Due to the limited time and the large crowd present, it was not possible for him to shake hands with every single individual. As Huzoor[ra] stood amidst two rows of friends lining either side of the road, his gaze remained fixed upon the departing missionaries.
When their carriages began to move, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih[ra] returned from the farewell point. Although a carriage had been arranged, and despite the intense heat of the sun ahead, he chose to return on foot.
At the moment of parting, Maulvi Jalaluddin Sahib[ra], overcome with emotion, was unable to speak coherently. Friends are especially requested to remember in their prayers that God Almighty may grant these missionaries success and fulfilment in their service to His faith, safeguard them in every respect, and return them to us triumphant.
Telegram from the King of Bulgaria
When an attempt was made on the life of the King of Bulgaria and he survived, Dr Mufti Muhammad Sadiq Sahib[ra] sent him a congratulatory letter in a spirit of missionary outreach. The reply came in the form of a telegram, which reads as follows:
“Sofia Palais.
“Mufti Mohammad Sadiq Ahmadia Community, Qadian, Batala, India. Heartiest thanks for your kind congratulations, which deeply touch me. Boris R.”
Tabligh in India
[Hazrat Chaudhry Fateh Muhammad Sayal[ra] states]:
The Chief of Mankind, the Holy Prophet Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings be upon him, who was born among the idolatrous Arabs, at the age of forty, proclaimed the Tawhid [Unity of] God and his prophethood. The social and religious conditions of the Arabs at that time bore striking similarities to those of present-day Hindus. Yet, within the span of just 13 years, the message of Islam stirred a spiritual revolution throughout Arabia. In the 23 years of Hazrat Muhammad’ssa prophethood, the entire Arabia resounded with the powerful and majestic call of Allahu Akbar.
Following the Holy Prophet’ssa passing, Islam began to spread with astonishing speed in all directions across the globe. Just as Arabia accepted Islam en masse, so too did the mountainous and rugged Afghans – devoted to the ancient culture of Persia – and the nomadic tribes of Balochistan. All embraced Islam without resistance.
However, the moment this magnificent spiritual force entered India, the situation took a different turn. We observe that Hinduism has withstood the influence of Islam for over a thousand consecutive years, and even today, Islam has not emerged from its precarious position in the subcontinent.
One reason for this is that Muslims arrived in India only after the era of the early period of Islam (qurun-e-ula) had passed. The difference between the Muslims who entered India and those who entered Persia is akin to the difference between Hazrat Umarra and Muhammad Ghori.
Yet, in my view, the fundamental reason lies elsewhere: Muslims have engaged with Hinduism as though it were a conventional religion, while in reality, it is a distinct and comprehensive civilisation or way of life, not merely a faith. As a result, their critiques never struck at the heart of the issue. That same strategic error continues to this day.
In most other religions, the core lies in doctrinal beliefs. If those beliefs are proven to be flawed, adherents are often willing to reconsider their stance and embrace Islam. For instance, if a Jew is convinced that prophethood did not end with Mosesas and that the belief in confining prophethood to the Jewish people is erroneous, he may become inclined toward Islam and, in many cases, accept it. Similarly, when an Arab is shown that attributing partners to God is a grave error, he becomes Muslim. A Christian, when made to understand the fallacy of deifying a human being, also accepts Islam. The same principle can be applied to adherents of Zoroastrianism and Buddhism.
Hinduism, in essence, is not fundamentally concerned with matters of belief or doctrine; rather, it is grounded in a set of cultural norms and principles of social stratification – most notably, the system of caste distinctions and the practices surrounding discrimination on the basis of caste. A person is considered a Hindu not on the basis of specific theological convictions but by adhering to these sociocultural codes. Within this framework, one has full liberty to hold any range of beliefs. In Hindu thought, the central question is not what one believes about God or the afterlife. A person who believes in the oneness of God is considered a Hindu, just as someone who worships any number of natural or material objects is also regarded as a Hindu. Similarly, both a theist and an avowed atheist may equally claim a Hindu identity. One may revere the Vedas as divine revelation, or conversely, view them as frivolous and meaningless literature and yet still remain within the fold of Hindu society. One may believe in the doctrine of reincarnation (avagamana), or reject it entirely; one may abhor the consumption of meat as a grave sin, or partake in it freely and both positions are considered legitimate within the Hindu social order.
However, the moment an individual renounces the rigid system of caste hierarchy or violates, in practice, the traditional rules governing commensality, marriage, or social interaction, they are swiftly excommunicated from the Hindu community.
Thus, because Hinduism is not defined or limited by theological commitments, engaging in doctrinal debate with Hindus often proves ineffective. The true axis around which Hindu society revolves is not belief in God or the hereafter, but the system of caste-based stratification. The issue of discrimination on the basis of caste and untouchability is inherently tied to this hierarchical order. It is this system that determines who may be a priest (purohit), who holds rulership, and who is relegated to servitude. It dictates marriage eligibility, leadership roles, social status, wealth, poverty, honour, disgrace, education, and ignorance – not one’s creed, moral character, or intellectual merit.
For this reason, Hinduism is often referred to as Brahminism, for it privileges the Brahmin class and upholds the belief that the world and all that is within it exists for the benefit of the Brahmins. A person may deny the existence of God and yet remain a Hindu, but one who practically rejects the superiority of the Brahmin caste can no longer be considered part of the Hindu fold.
Therefore, when engaging in dialogue with a Hindu on matters of religion, it is more fruitful to focus not on doctrinal debates, but rather on the moral and social harms caused by the caste system and the injustices stemming from untouchability. The discussion should highlight how these practices have harmed India as a nation and the Hindu community as a people. At this particular juncture, the spirit of nationalism among Hindus is running high, and they are increasingly sensitive to anything that diminishes the honour or dignity of India. If it can be demonstrated that Brahminism and the caste system are sources of national disregard, it is likely that Hindus will grow disenchanted with these institutions. And once dissatisfied with Brahminism and Hinduism, the only refuge available to them is Islam, for the maladies of the Hindu caste system find no remedy except in the teachings of Islam. Thus, it becomes all the more necessary to make the most of this opportunity.
I intend to elaborate in a separate essay on how the caste system has obstructed Hindu national progress and how the community may be made aware of its detrimental effects. In the meantime, I urge friends and colleagues to reflect seriously on this matter. Before I compose this forthcoming article, I would appreciate it if others would share with me any insights or suggestions that may occur to them. – Fateh Muhammad Sayal
(Translated by Al Hakam from the original Urdu, published in the 30 June 1925 issue of Al Fazl)