Much ado about nothing
- by Gulzar Anwar -
It all started when, one fine morning, I saw an open
letter of April 11, 2000 from one Mr. S. Ahmad of Lahore, appearing on
ahmadiyya.com, advising certain corrective steps to Gen. Musharraf for
the later’s own benefit and for the benefit of the country in general.
This letter, however, carried a veritable threat that unless the General
was going to see the way pointed out to him by Mr. Ahmad, his end was not
going to be much different to those who preceded him and who, during their
time, tried to take chances with the Qadiani community. In reply, I wrote
to Mr. S. Ahmad on May 27, 2000 reminding him that opposing Qadianis had
nothing to do with the people’s tryst with their political destiny. Among
other things discussed by me, I also pointed out:
"I
am a strong believer in the second coming of Christ and whenever he comes,
it will only be the original Jesus son of Mary and not any false messiah
who has grown big out of his own misgivings. Yes, either the Jesus has
to make a physical return to this earth himself to restore order to this
troubled world, and reinstate the dignity of man, or there has to be no
messiah at all."
To this
Mr. S. Ahmad shot back in his letter of June 14, 2000, reminding me of
some facts about the return of Jesus. He particularly emphasised on, and
informed me about, an upcoming TV documentary “In search of Jesus” by Peter
Jennings set for a worldwide broadcast on June 19, 2000 who, according
to Mr. Ahmad, had visited Srinagar the ultimate resting place of Jesus
in keeping with the exegesis of Mirza Sahib. That some stunning revelations
were expected which would jolt the world of orthodoxy and advised me not
to rush and, instead, wait for the outcome of the broadcast as I had confessed
to him earlier that I was a great believer in the physical return of Jesus
to his earthly abode before everything was wrapped up here for the hereafter
to begin. He wrote:
"I
may add here for your information a top USA TV network …….. is showing
a 2 hour documentary on June 17, 2000 named as “In search of Jesus” This
is produced by a top journalist Mr. Peter Jennings, and he visited Srinager,
(Kashmir, India). I am sorry if your wish to see Jesus Christ back may
not be fulfilled, because the answer of today’s problem is in the Islam
presented by Mirza Sahib- a noble face -rid off of violence and terrorism-not
Jesus Christ."
I was pretty well surprised
to see how much the Qadiani Jamaat was banking on Christians to do the
job for them in burying the person in a foreign land whose second coming
was the cornerstone of their own faith. In other words these Christians
were doing all the hard work, and spending all the money, to prove the
followers of new messiah right, while fully realising that burying Jesus
in India will mean the end of Christianity itself and they will soon become
shorn of someone who had atoned for their sins at a great personal cost.
In reply, I told Mr. Ahmad through my letter of June 17, 2000:
"The
upside is that if the findings of Mr. Jennings are anywhere close to your
official opinion, it will give plenty of boost to your missionary efforts.
You already have your show on the road. The downside is that if it goes
against you, will u accept it? I bet, not! You will have well founded reasons
to reject it. Am I correct? So, why to stake everything on the outcome
of Peter Jennings’ findings? “
There was so much commotion that, honestly, I was
amazed to hear all about the upcoming documentary and became curious to
know the details. In the meantime, my Qadiani friends looked very excited
and soon they were busy warning the people to get ready for the surprise
of their life. They were smarting and it looked as though the world was
soon going to be taken by the gathering storm and everything was hanging
on the thread of Peter Jennings’ documentary. A forewarning on ahmadiyya.com
read:
"……
he (Peter Jennings) travelled to all known places where Jesus Christ had
been ……….. he had travelled to Kashmir, specially, Srinagar …………This is
specially interesting in view of the claim made by Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad the Promised Messiah that he had been divinely informed that the
tomb of Jesus Christ was in Khanyar Street ……. Srinagar, in India."
I wonder if they knew that they were being fooled
into this but, on their part, they were expecting intriguing results and
loud claims were made that once the documentary was aired all the realities
and myths about the life and person of Jesus will stand separately and
conspicuously exposed for people to see for themselves what exactly was
the status of Jesus vis-a-vis the scriptures, history and ground realities.
What happened in the end? Their whole idea was dismissed in no uncertain
terms as Peter Jennings did not feel the necessity of even vaguely alluding
to the possible burial of Jesus in Kashmir. I, however, was so much intrigued
that I started making inquest with friends if there was anyway I could
have a first hand knowledge of the documentary through the availability
of its transcript. I was pretty sure that even though the documentary did
provide some clue to burial of Jesus in Kashmir, it will be hotly contested
and will only add to the controversy already raging for centuries. The
dogmas don’t change easy. A documentary is not enough. Tomorrow another
person will rise and, in the name of research, will make another documentary
disproving everything said and shown earlier. Actually, when you resolve
one controversy, you open the door to a whole lot of controversies which
do not help people understand and see the things clearly. Then suddenly
came the discomforting announcement that, for some reasons, the date of
the broadcast of the documentary was advanced and that it will now be aired
on the 26th of June, 2000. It was about this time that my Qadiani
friends began looking nervous and edgy. To salvage their own position,
and keep the spirits of their followers high, they began to slowly create
doubts in the minds of people that the deferment of documentary broadcast
was directly as a result of papal intervention and that the Holly See won’t
like the facts about the current status of Jesus in Christianity to be
altered by the Christians themselves. They started grouching and pointing
out that the post crucifixion life of Jesus will, probably, be clipped
and not shown to avoid any embarrassment to Vatican. n my opinion, they
were only trying to cover up their own mistake of making tall claims, before
time, about the outcome of the documentary in the run up to the broadcast.
I think they began seeing dampers being placed on their hopes. Finally,
the moment of truth arrived and the documentary went on air. To their chagrin
nothing came out of it and, as expected, it dealt with only the life of
Christ before crucifixion and totally excluded his life after crucifixion
because that was none of their business as Christians. Accordingly, on
ahmadiyya.com one Rahgeer was seen bellyaching:
"The
ABC TV documentary ‘The Search of Jesus’ was a great disappointment even
compared to what producer called as “very disturbing’. The documentary
……… was aired on 26th June at 9:00 p.m. but it was edited in
a way that there was nothing about the second part of the life of Jesus
…….. Seems like Vatican was informed by loyal friends about the movie and
ABC was forced to face a tremendous amount of pressure from the Vatican
……. This was a great dishonesty ……. “
It was, however, not only a great catharsis of the
emotive feelings running high before the event but when the event came,
finally, and nothing came out of it, there was a total emotional collapse.
Everything was back to square one and they were trying to avoid having
to explain the earlier stance taken by them on the outcome of this documentary.
Naturally, they had to accuse someone for this and decided to place the
entire blame on the doorsteps of Vatican. All the notices, publicising
the documentary to come, were withdrawn from the website at once and replaced
by those shellacking Vatican for the mess-up. Nothing could have been more
convenient than this. However, in between, I happened to reach “Tomb
Master” just for curiosity and then traversing back to ahmadiyya.com
again, I read a note left there by a staff member of the Tomb Master in
response to Rahgeer. I quote:
"I
would like to remind my Ahmadi Muslim brethren that on June 16, the Tomb
Master clearly warned people not to get excited about the airing of the
documentary ‘The Search for Jesus’ and he further predicted in clear terms
that Mr. Peter Jennings would not utter a single word about Jesus in India
either before or after crucifixion. “
This caught them on the wrong foot. Nevertheless,
it was a sincere piece of advice from one of their confreres and, I think,
it proved enough to send them scurrying and dampen their spirits seeing
all their hopes getting dumped along the road. Why was then there so much
furore about the apocalypse via the documentary and that the entire world
would come hurtling down to join them and the Qadiani community will swell.?
Now let us see what Peter Jennings himself had said about the documentary
well before its broadcast:
"I
know there are people who think that Jesus spent time in India, for example.
I did not look for that particularly."
Mr. Peter Jennings did well to dismiss the unfounded
rumours in a terse statement. Note, I have taken all these references courtesy
the Tomb Master, as I have no direct access to anything Peter Jennings
had said on Larry King Live or even the transcript of the documentary itself
is not available to me. If what Tomb Master is saying is correct then the
people were expecting some devastating information on Jesus in India by
themselves and not because Peter Jennings had promised anything so revealing
that it will turn the world topsy turvy or better still the Qadianis had
played up the whole issue themselves and blown it up to the extent that
the people were misled to expect the shock of their life. According to
CNN none of the two broadcasts of Peter Jennings’ interview on CNN ever
reflected anything in regard to Jesus in India. The transcripts available
with CNN clearly point out that Peter Jennings had made no mention about
the life of Jesus in India after the crucifixion.
I have a question here for my Qadiani friends. Why
anyone should do this documentary for them and prove Jesus buried in Kashmir?
Why not dismiss the whole idea of this burial theory as mere trash. The
whole concept of the internment of Jesus in Kashmir is based on the claim
of a revelation of Mirza Sahib which is purely subjective and if you insist
on this the people will accuse you for blinding them with metaphysics.
Why the Qadiani community can’t do the research for themselves when the
route Jesus took from Palestine to Kashmir has been carefully sketched
out by Mirza Sahib himself as shown to him in a vision? Remember, a vision
is no half-baked story. So, if you rely on it, and follow it to the letter,
there should be no difficulty. Why to trust people who, by nature, are
drawn in the opposite camp? The Qadianis should take it upon themselves
and show the world the facts about the end of Jesus in India in order to
put a lid on this controversy once and for all, although I personally believe
that if one controversy ends, another comes up in its place, at least,
to keep the people busy. Why not heed the advice of Tomb Master?:
"Today’s
American news media, unfortunately, is not prepared to produce a quality
and accurate documentary on this issue ……… Public television might do an
excellent job producing such a documentary."
So, you have to do it yourself. But it will require
substantial funds and where they will come from? In addition, they will
need experts and equipment and that they will have to pass through the
hostile people along the way which, in itself, will add much to their problems.
I trust they can do it and I will show them the way. Just drop the idea
of buying ABC Network for the time being and funnel the money towards producing
the documentary on the burial of Jesus in India. When the world accepts
and rejoices over your disturbing discovery, the Kingdom of Promised Messiah
will stand established and the people will swarm to your sable(?) standard.
You will then need not buy anything. Everything will come to you, by itself,
and will be yours under the divine will.
Now, regarding the much publicised pressure of Vatican
to botch the efforts of ABC to show the broadcast leading to Jesus ending
up in India after narrowly escaping crucifixion and Peter Jennings vowing
to fight back, the Tom Master says:
"……..
that powerful institutions of any kind will fight for their own interests.
But since such rumours can never be confirmed they have to be ignored."
Pray, tell me where has all that propaganda gone
now telling people to be ready for the startling revelation once the documentary
got on air? Has it evaporated into the thin air, or we should still wait
for a better news? Remember, as I have already said, controversies never
die. One controversy begets another. Even if you succeed burying Jesus
in India for ever, you think this will end the polemics? No way, this will
kick off a new issue that suppose Jesus did die in Kashmir, what was the
necessity of his replica to come after 2000 years (circa)? What purpose
was it going to serve? Why not a brand new prophet with a brand new message
for a brand new world of the 19th century? The way my Qadiani
friends present the things, it appears that God, in fact, enjoys confusion
among His people. For plus or minus 2000 years everything was uncertain
and no one could make up his mind for sure about the position of Jesus
in this world. Everybody saw him going on the Cross and the controversy
started only after he was taken off the Cross. His resurrection, disappearance
or ascension all became controversial and to this moment remain a riddle
to solve.
The problem is not whether Christ travelled to Kashmir
or not, the real problem is that unless you bury Jesus finally in Kashmir
and say good bye to him for ever, the ministry of the Promised Messiah
from India will stand in doubt and rejected and will continue playing on
the sensitivities of the people both belonging to Christianity and Islam.
According to Mirza Sahib (translation is mine):
"Remember
that the demise of Jesus is the decisive criterion of the veracity and
untruth of ours and that of our opponents. If, in fact, Jesus is alive
then our claims are false and our arguments untenable and if, in fact,
Jesus has died according to Quran then our opponents are wrong. Now, Quran
is between us. Think over it." (Tohfa-e-Golarvia)
This is what prompts them to bury Jesus in India
and it is also because of this that they would like us to take it for granted
that Jesus masqueraded(?) and fled from Jerusalem all the way down to India
via Mosul, Tehran, Heart, Kabul and Peshawar and finally ended up in Srinagar
as shown to Mirza Sahib through the divine inspiration. This will make
their job half done. In my opinion, Punjab was a lot better place to live
and even if you say that it was because the lost tribes of Israel had gone
there (in Kashmir) after they were set free by their captors back home,
I will insist that none of the raiders, invaders or travellers ever went
to India via Kashmir. They all entered via Punjab because of not only being
an easy passage but also because it offered plenty by way of eating, etc.
Alexander, Babur and Sher Shah Suri all used my hometown to cross the river
Jhelum and those of their men who decided to stay back opted Punjab for
their new home. Another thing which comes to mind is that during his entire
stay in Kashmir he never once tried to contact his people back home. Very
strange indeed! This means he was not on a divine mission, was instead
a fugitive and was afraid of his own people that they will never accept
him again if he ever revealed his identity to them. I think had he revealed
himself, the sympathies of the people could have resurfaced and they would
have come scampering to him defeating the vicious designs of his enemies
from the Jewish religious groups. But he is seen nowhere doing this which
only means that he was actually raised unto heavens by some designs of
the Providence otherwise those who hold an office of a divine ministry
and/or are on a special divine mission do not run away and hide themselves
from their people or their enemies. They have to chase, face and hunt down
the evil and restore piety as also the dignity of the people. In short,
they are entrusted with a mission by the God Himself, and what they do
is only a command performance as the real instructions come from God, so
why should they be afraid of anyone or anything? I, for one, will fail
to reconcile to this idea of Jesus fleeing Palestine and finding refuge
in India among his “then lost and now found people” who had, long ago,
escaped the drudgeries of bonded labour back home.
Now, another thing said about Jesus is that what he
taught to people in India was assimilated by Buddhists who incorporated
his teachings in their religious books. For example, I have all along heard
and read that Buddha claimed that he was Alpha and Omega of the world.
Similar claim is said to have been made by Jesus. Who copied whom? To say
that Buddhists borrowed this from Jesus is a cruel joke and does not stand
to reason. That Christianity had, at some point in time, borrowed this
from Buddhism looks the more likely. The scholars, in general, have stuck
to the later version. To say otherwise is only a ploy to strengthen the
Qadiani claim of Jesus finally passing on into the heavens in India. In
other words it is like putting a cart before a horse. I understand that
when Jesus left his homeland he was 33(?) years old and when he died he
was 120 years. What about those 87 years? Why he did not establish contacts
back home and informed his disciples about his presence in Kashmir at least
is not comprehensible to me and far be it from a person like Jesus whose
first priority was to guide and emancipate his people?. He could have mustered
support from his people or at least inspired his own people to rise and
make way for his return home and once again they could have spread the
olive branches and their shirts for his triumphant return with the shouts
of “hosanna” and “here comes the saviour”, at least, expiating for their
earlier mistake of deserting and betraying him before the Romans. If travelling
could be done from this end to that, the return journey could have been
planned and undertaken equally well also or he could have at least sent
an emissary or a missive to his sympathisers priming them, at least, secretly
about his presence in Kashmir but we do not see anything to have been done
to this effect. It all looks like he was a tired man at 33 and wanted to
be away from the cunning and craft of the clergy at home with whom he had
had not a very good experience. Moreover, his people being fickle and inconstance,
failed to muster the support at the crucial moment and his own disciples
betrayed him at a time when he needed them the most. He just gave up his
ministry and mission in order for Paul to come later and carry on the good
work and Jesus decided for himself to enjoy peace and prosperity among
his newly found people in India and languish there for another 87 years,
allowing thereby Paul to become the founder of Christianity without ever
establishing contact with Jesus. As a messiah, he was supposed to have
established a hot line with God, through the Holy Ghost, and how could
he abandon his ministry unless commanded by God Himself and leave his people
in the lurch. It does not make any sense to me. May be there was another
reason for staying away from the blessed land in that Jesus was totally
resigned to getting buried in Srinagar of his own free will in order to
leave the field open to a later time messiah to come after nearly 2 millenniums
from a soil where there was already a pantheon of gods existing and whose
land was fertile enough for the 19th century ministry to flourish.
The anxiety of my Qadianis friends is quite understandable in that unless
Jesus is buried their ministry fails to have any justification. I think,
they forgot to marry Jesus in Kashmir with plenty of offspring. It could
have made their task rather more easy. All in all, they still have not
arrived at a suitable mechanism to succeed in their quest to make it acceptable
to the Muslims at large, hence they placed too much reliance on Peter Jennings
to do the job for them but he refused to oblige. Why should he? He is after
all a Christian whose very source of salvation is being rigged. Now what
next? They have also tried to get the ghost out of Jesus through the holy
book but no luck. They have tried through poetry and prose but have failed
to impress the large majority. Just for the sake of interest, I translate
below some Urdu verses on the demise of Jesus (probably these verses were
composed by Mirza Sahib himself but I am not sure):
"By
God, son of Mary died. The respected soul entered the paradise. On every
step, God points to and gives the news of his demise. He (Jesus) is not
outside the company of those who have died, thirty (30) verses adduce to
this."
Now, they prove the demise of Jesus through these
30 verses but do not cite a single verse from the Holy Quran in favour
of the arrival of their own ministry.
I do not mean to demean their efforts and hard work
as they are, no doubt, well organised and being a small community, and
in constant danger of being harassed and undone, they are dedicated to
each other. Their otherwise a strong looking chain is no stronger than
its weakest link and their weakest link is their ministry which has no
strong basis to support it. Whether we believe Jesus is alive or dead in
both cases, it will never qualify their Promised Messiah to succeed the
Son of Marry.
Their strongest argument is that Mirza Sahib preached
non-violence and brought the violent Jehad to an end. Unfortunately, as
history proves, it was done in the wake of the traumatic events of 1857,
which shook the throne, in order to make sure that they do not raise their
ugly head ever again. Once bitten twice shy! What did Jesus do? He was
a non-violent person too, yet he worked to emancipate his people from the
yoke of foreign rule. His efforts were undone by the vested interests especially
the clergy.
In recent history, Gandhi preached pacifism and fought
the foreign rule with non-violent methods all the way from South Africa
down to India and succeeded. Pray, tell me how did Mirza Sahib utilize
the armoury of his non-violence or any other methods to emancipate his
people from the imperialist bondage. Mirza Sahib was a great author and
thinker. Obviously, he loved his people and his country. Jesus promised
a new Jerusalem to his people. He made sincere efforts but he could not
deliver in his life time because the vested interests stood in his way
but his message revolutionised the world after him. Did the Promised Messiah,
at the very least, even suggest some measures to boost the freedom struggle,
let alone working for it? If any one can show any such instance, I shall
be personally grateful and offer my allegiance.
The point to remember is that however caring and kind
a foreign rule may be, there is no substitute for freedom because physical
freedom saves you from intellectual and moral captivity if you just care
to think independent of others. Did I deliver the point home? May be, not.
So, let us talk in parables. Every tub must stand on its own bottom. If
you provide it support to stand upon, it will lose its independence and
is likely to fall the moment the foreign support goes. If the independence
goes, the pride of a nation goes. The intellectuals of a nation are responsible
to guide their people towards freedom. I would like to know the services
of Mirza Sahib in this area. Another point: China did not have an Aligarh
University and the socalled enlightened men we had, yet it has made astounding
progress. It succeeded because it had the will to succeed and its leaders,
coming from the working class, worked selflessly and relied on themselves
alone instead of invoking foreign favours. They started from the bottom
instead of beginning from the top. The common weal of the people was their
prime concern and they went for it lock, stock and barrel. Do you see any
beggars in China? Our every other person is seen “panhandling” about every
other corner. We are at least 100 years behind as compared to them and
always looking for their moral and material aid. Any one would like to
elucidate on it?
Let us now have a look at “Jesus in India”, for a
change, which is an English version of “Masih Hindustan Mein”. Mirza Sahib
says:
"So,
the doctrine of Jehad proposed by these sects of Islam, as well as the
belief that the time is near when there will arise a bloody Mahdi ………..
Those who hold such beliefs live a life of hypocrisy in relation to others,
so much so that they cannot give true loyalty to state authorities of another
Faith; they dishonestly profess to give allegiance to them ……. That is
why some of the Ahl-i-Hadith sects mentioned by me just now are living
a double life under the British Government in British India. In secret,
they hold out hopes to the common people of the coming of bloody days of
a bloody Mahdi and a bloody Messiah, and instruct them accordingly, but
when they go to the authorities they flatter them and assure them that
they do not approve of such ideas."
I leave it to the readers to decide what services
Mirza Sahib were rendering to the cause of freedom for the people of his
motherland. Did not he belong to the soil of India? Was it not obligatory
on him to work for its liberation? He was instead tipping off the British
Government about the subversive elements in the ranks of Muslims of India
who were secretly planning some move to overthrow the foreign rule. What
did Mehdi Sudani do? He was not Mahdi yet he claimed himself to be one
just to launch his struggle for the liberation of his people. It is always
at such crucial moments that a man rises from amongst a nation to work
for their independence and not exhort them to quietly submit to the will
of foreign rule. The uprisings of 1857 were unfortunately called a mutiny
by the vested interests. Is it a sin to take to arms to liberate a people?
Where in the long human history do we see people not rising for independence
at a great cost of human lives. What did Moses do? Did he ask his people
to stay quiet and also say farewell to arms? Very often you have to cross
a river of blood to get to the end in mind. Any one from among the ranks
of a nation who sides with the foreign rulers is definitely called a turncoat.
I translate a Persian verse for you:
"When
one person acts injudiciously from amongst a nation. The high and low of
this nation lose their self-respect."
The
divine purpose of sending a messenger is to address the evils prevailing
in a given human society which have gone beyond repair. Moses came when
Israelis were in the Egyptian captivity and their life was miserable. He
emancipated them to a position of honour. When Jesus came, his people were
also in Roman captivity and he tried his best to liberate them and addressed
other moral abuses prevalent in the society and among the clergy. When
the Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH) came, the Meccan society was in the worst
moral crisis with idolatory uncontrollable and even the House of God was
not free from it. He underwent all possible hardships before he succeeded
extirpating the idolatory and restoring human dignity. Now when Mirza Sahib
appeared on the scene, his country and people were in captivity too. Instead
of using divine help and guidance to push the foreign rule over the edge
and free his people, he taught them instead to strengthen the hands of
the benevolent Government and stay calm.
Can you call it a judicious and balanced act what
Mirza Sahib was preaching to the people of his country? Another masterpiece
from the same book wherein he castigates his fellow countrymen secretly
planning to topple the Government:
"Some
of the Ahl-i-Hadith impertinently and unjustly state in their books that
the appearance of the Mahdi is imminent: that he will put into prison the
British rulers of India and that the Christian king will be arrested and
will be brought before him. Such books are still to be found in the houses
of these Ahl-i-Hadith, one such being Iqtarab-us-Saat by a well known Ahl-i-Hadith,
on page 64 of which such an account is to be found."
That settles it. Who was the Mirza Sahib trying
to please? Any more proof needed about the truth of the Promised Messiah.
He can be seen actually, indirectly, suggesting the Government, through
a tell-tale, to make a house to house search for this treasonous material
which may possibly lead to an uprising against the Raj. The one example
of 1857 will be enough. The insurgents and those who sided with them were
true freedom fighters and those who advocated peace and unconditional surrender
to the Government were stable boys of the Raj, no matter who they were
and whatever their personal status in the eyes of the people and in the
eyes of the Government.
If, inspite of the above, my Qadiani friends still
persist to prove the truthfulness of their Promised Messiah then I can
only pray for them but for this they will have to do everything themselves
and not rely on Christians to bury Jesus in India for them.
All said and done, although they did seize the opportunity
of Peter Jennings’ TV documentary with both hands and tried to cash in
on it by launching a propaganda campaign with considerable zeal, zest,
gusto and enthusiasm to realise their own selfish ends, yet they were failed
by the person they were most relying on and, instead of yielding any favourable
results, in the end, it all proved a mere claptrap and eventuated to become
just another case of much ado about nothing.
Islamabad
July 31, 2000
Back to Homepage