The Light bases its accusation on an Urdu verse of mine:

Conversation too is a sign of indifference;
therefore, I prefer silence (to talk).

This is plain Urdu and only means that there is a higher stage in the spiritual life of man than verbal communion. But the verse has nothing to do with the doctrine of verbal revelation as a theological doctrine for which I must refer The Light to my Reconstruction in which I wrote on page 21:

"The organic relation of feeling and idea throws light on the old theological controversy about verbal revelation which once gave so much trouble to Muslim religious thinkers. Inarticulate feeling seeks to fulfil its destiny in idea, which, in its turn, tends to develop out of itself in its own visible garment. It is no mere metaphor to say that idea and word both simultaneously emerge out of the womb of feeling, though logical understanding cannot but take them in a temporal order and thus create its own difficulty by regarding them as mutually isolated. There is a sense in which the word is also revealed."

[Questioned about the tradition quoted by The Light that mujaddids appear at the head of every century, Allama Iqbal replied:]

The editor of The Light quotes a tradition which gives a mathematically exact picture of the historical process. While I do believe in man's spiritual capacity and the possibility of the birth of spiritual men, I am not sure that the historical process is so mathematical as The Light thinks. We can easily confess that it is beyond our intellectual capacity to understand the nature of the historical process. All that I can negatively say is that it does not appear to me to be as fixed and mathematically exact as The Light thinks. I am rather inclined to Ibn Khaldun's view which regards the historical process as a free creative movement and not a process which has already been worked out with definite landmarks. This view has been put forward in modern times by Bergson with much greater wealth of illustration and scientific accuracy than by Ibn Khaldun. The tradition quoted by The Light was probably popularised by Jalal-ud-Din Suyuti in his own interest and much importance cannot be attached to it. It is not mentioned in Bukhari and Muslim, the two books which are believed to be most reliable. It may embody a vision of the nature of the historical process by some spiritual men, but this personal vision of the individuals can form no basis for logical argument. This is the rule which expert traditionists have always observed.

[Questioned whether he had seen a letter published in Sunrise (another Qadiani weekly) in which the writer referred to a lecture of Allama Iqbal and accused him of the inconsistency, he replied:]

Yes; I am sorry I have no copy of the lecture in question either in the original English or in the Urdu translation which was made by Maulana Zafar Ali Khan. As far as I remember, the lecture was delivered in 1911, or perhaps earlier, I have no hesitation in admitting that about a quarter of a century ago I had hopes of good results following from this movement. Earlier still, even that eminent Muslim, the late Maulvi Chiragh Ali, the author of several English books on Islam, cooperated with the founder of the movement and, I understand, made valuable contributions to the book called Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya. But the real content and spirit of a religious movement does not reveal itself in a day. It takes decades to unfold itself. The internal quarrels between the two sections of the movement is evidence of the fact that even those who were in personal contact with the founder were not quite aware of how the movement would evolve itself. Personally, I became suspicious of the movement when the claim of a new prophethood, superior even to the Prophethood of the Founder of Islam, was definitely put forward, and the Muslim world was declared Kafir. Later my suspicions developed into a positive revolt when I heard with my own ears an adherent of the movement mentioning the Holy Prophet of Islam in a most disparaging language. Not by their roots, but by their fruits will you know them.

[Questioned about the possibility of divine inspiration and the advent of inspired reformers after the Holy Prophet, Allama Iqbal replied:]

I had better answer this question by referring you to my Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam in which I wrote on pages 120-21:

"The idea of finality … should not be taken to suggest that the ultimate fate of life is complete displacement of emotion by reason. Such a thing is neither possible nor desirable. The intellectual value of the idea is that it tends to create an independent critical attitude towards mystic experience by generating the belief that all personal authority, claiming a supernatural origin, has come to an end in the history of man. This kind of belief is a psychological force which inhibits the growth of such authority. The function of the idea is to open up fresh vistas of knowledge in the domain of man's inner experience. Just as the first half of the formula of Islam has created and fostered the spirit of critical observation of man's outer experience by divesting the forces of nature of that Divine character with which earlier cultures had clothed them. Mystic experience, then, however unusual and abnormal, must now be regarded by a Muslim as a perfectly natural experience, open to critical scrutiny like other aspects of human experience. This is clear from the Prophet's own attitude towards Ibn Sayyad's psychic experiences. The function of Sufism in Islam has been to systematize mystic experience, though it must be admitted that Ibn Khaldun was the only Muslim who approached it in a thoroughly scientific spirit."

The opening sentence clearly shows that saints in the psychological sense of the word or men of saintly character will always appear. Whether Mirza Sahib belonged to this category or not is a separate question. Indeed, as long as the spiritual capacity of mankind endures, they will rise among all nations and countries in order to show better ideals of life to man. To hold otherwise would be to fly in the face of human experience. The only difference is that the modern man has the right to a critical examination of their mystic experiences. The Finality of the Prophethood means, among other things, that all personal authority in religious life, denial of which involves damnation, has come to an end.

[Questioned about a letter published in The Statesman from Mr. Dinshaw, a Parsi gentleman, Allama Iqbal said:]