Analysis of factors responsible for Mirza’s blundering into misguidance
The most important lesson to be learnt from Mirza’s “tale of woe” is that anyone who wishes to traverse the thorny and uphill path of religion and spiritualism must do so under the guidance of an accomplished teacher and a guide. Failure to do so is apt to land the seeker into pitfalls of superstitious, delusions and misgivings etc., from which it would be well-nigh impossible for him to extricate himself. Maulana Jalaluddin Rumi (R.A) has forcefully underscored this point in the following verse of his Mathnavi:
Translation: “Seek a Pir (spiritual guide) (for thyself), because without a Pir this (spiritual) journey is full of hardships, fear and hazards”.
Mirza Sahib has stated at various places in his writings that he had not linked himself with any spiritual school, that he had no “spiritual father”, and that God Himself was his sole spiritual teacher and guide. He also regards this as a sign of his resemblance to Jesus Christ, and of the blessing of God. He does not, however, realize that what he considers to be a source of divine benediction for him is in fact the real tragedy of his life. He also fails to recognize the basic truth that in this world which is governed by the interplay of cause and effect in every sphere, be it secular or spiritual, every art and craft has to be learnt from a skilled teacher. Without such guidance, aspirants to spiritual accomplishment remain ever vulnerable to self-delusion, which could lead them to make claims of prophet-hood in the same manner as Bab and Baha-ullah did in Iran and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in India in the recent past. What is even worse, these ill-fated personalities were responsible not only for their own spiritual damnation, but also for misguiding large number of simple-minded and ignorant people who readily succumbed to their seemingly ”revolutionary” calls in a spirit of hero-worship. In the case of Mirza, for example, those who rallied round him as his devotees and followers took no notice whatsoever of his palpably sacrilegious and heretical “ilhamat” (inspirations). They completely ignored Mirza’s claim, inter alia, that his God had called him His son, thus violating the Quranic assertion in Surah Al-Ikhlas (“God begetteth not nor was He begotten”), or that he had claimed to be Muhammad and Ahmad, thereby refuting the Quranic pronouncement that Muhammad (P.B.U.H) was the last of the Prophets (cf. XXXIII, 40).