Qadianism: Why a state declaration of ‘non-Muslims’ was in the best interest of Islam, Pakistan and the Qadianis

Qadianism was a movement that originated in Punjab, British India, in the late 19th century. It was found by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. The Qadianis presented and propagated themselves as Muslims and followed all the basic beliefs and tenets of Islam except for one fundamental point of divergence. A divergence severe enough to have them labelled as ‘non-Muslims’ by the entire Muslim world. Mirza Ghulam openly claimed to be a prophet of God, denying the finality of the Prophet Muhammad, the last Prophet sent by God. When Mirza Ghulam openly declared himself to be a prophet, there was constant strife among the majority of Muslims of the then Greater India. Although, the British government in India could not but adopt a policy of non-interreference in religious matters, it was hardly the case that such a policy would continue after the creation of Pakistan. Therefore, on the 7th of September 1974, Pakistan formally declared the Qadianis as ‘non-Muslims’ by law. I will present the theological arguments highlighting why Qadianis are a hereditary group, and the arguments supporting why a state declaration of Qadianis as ‘non-Muslims’ was the best course of action. 

Islam is a religion that has perfectly defined its very basic boundaries, and anyone who ventures beyond them is regarded as a disbeliever. This boundary is reflected in the very statement people proclaim whilst they enter Islam: belief in the Oneness of God and belief in the finality of Muhammad’s prophethood. Even the most conservative of scholar can not render someone an infidel (kafir) until they hold these beliefs. However, for any person or group to cross these boundaries is essentially rendering them as not being part of the community they profess to be a part of.  Qadianis, from this point of view, then, are essentially un-Islamic for they deny the very basic belief in the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad. Mirza Ghulam, the founder, claimed to be a prophet and openly declared the rest of the Muslim world as infidels. Needless to say, a movement which declared the entire Muslim world to be ‘non-Muslim’, was bound to pose a threat to the majority community of Islam. Besides the religious aspect, the Qadiani movement was essentially political in nature which is evident from the fact that whilst they separated themselves socially from the majority of Muslims, they remained politically within the fold of Islam. Up until the partition, the British adopted the policy of non-interference and did nothing to solve the dispute among the orthodox and the hereditary group. Perhaps this was indispensable, as Allama Iqbal wrote and explained to Jawaharlal Nehru, due to their being many religious communities in India. However, Iqbal did suggest the Muslim legislatures in India to declare the Qadianis as a separate community for that would solve the constant strife that took place between the two groups. Hence, after the formation of Pakistan, it was almost inevitable that such a decree would be passed and so during the reign of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the Qadianis were declared ‘non-Muslims’ by law. But this move by Bhutto was not received without criticism. However, to understand the importance of this declaration, it is necessary to reflect on what Islam's infidelity laws entail and under what conditions they are to be carried out.

In Islamic law, minorities or non-Muslims are given rights and protection, and are free to practice their own religion and cultural practices. However, such a dispensation is not available for Muslims who leave the fold of Islam (murtad). Within the context of the Arabian Peninsula, when Islam was spreading, such Muslims would be taken to court and after being given time to revert back, and in case of non compliance, they were decreed to be executed and their properties were taken by the state. This was a necessary law because Islam had to be protected from hypocritical strife from within. Such a law in Pakistan, however, was inapplicable since there were no proper Islamic judicial systems-a necessity because people can not take law into their own hands. Thus, with the absence of Islamic judicial systems, the decision of declaring someone an infidel within Pakistan fell into the hands of the religious scholars who operated independently of the state. Any scholar could issue a religious decree (fatwa) anytime, declaring a Qadiani to be an infidel. What could follow was people taking the law into their own hands and killing those convicted of infidelity. Therefore, a group such as the Qadianis, who claimed to be Muslims, would posit constant threat to Pakistan’s peace for every scholar would try to declare the Qadianis as infidels, and people would try to kill them extra-judicially due to their being no Islamic judicial system.

As per Allama Iqbal’s suggestion to the Muslim legislators in British India, it was in the best interest and would ensure the prevalence of peace if the Qadianis were declared a separate or a ‘non-Muslim’ community. This would ensure that the power that went to the scholars who, rightfully yet through wrong ways, would declare any Qadiani an infidel, was taken away. Therefore, the decision by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to constitutionally label the Qadianis as ‘non-Muslims’ was the best course of action. The religious scholars could no longer declare any Qadiani an infidel because the group was itself rendered ‘non-Muslim’ by default instead of being considered “Muslims” and then being labelled as infidels. The former gave them rights similar to any non-Muslim living in a Muslim land, while the latter was the reason why they were killed. This not only drastically reduced the killings of Qadianis and the constant strife in Pakistan, but also made them distinct from the orthodox Muslim community. The Qadianis were given the same rights in Pakistan as any non-Muslim though the ground realities did tend to differ.