Intro
Anwar-i Khilafat is a book which is the text of a speech delivered by the 2nd Khalifa, Mirza Basheer-ud Din Mahmud Ahmad at the December 1915 annual Jalsa at Qadian. It was published a few months later in 1916. In this book, the Khalifa argued most emphatically that the prophecy of Jesus about the coming Ahmad, referred to in the Quran in 61:6, does not apply to the Prophet Muhammad but to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. The 2nd Khalifa also discussed John 14:26 and its connections to Muhammad (saw) being “the Paraclete”.
He also continues to deal with the points of difference between his followers and the Lahori Ahmadis. The first issue that he raises in this connection is the interpretation of the prophecy about the coming Ahmad. This book is available online at the Qadiani website in the collection Anwar-ul-‘Uloom, v. 3, no. 5 from the link http://www.alislam.org/urdu/au/?j=3. Anwar-i Khilafat was mentioned in the Jan-Feb-March-1923 edition of the ROR.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Quotes
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 18-19, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“The first issue is whether Ahmad was the name of the Promised Messiah or of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and whether the verse of Sura Al-Saff which mentions the prophecy about a messenger whose name would be Ahmad, applies to the Holy Prophet Muhammad or to the Promised Messiah.
My belief is that this verse applies to the Promised Messiah, and he is the one who is Ahmad. … The more I ponder, the more my conviction grows, and I believe that the word Ahmad that occurs in the Holy Quran applies to the Promised Messiah. In proof of this, I have evidences by the grace of God which I am prepared to put before the scholars and learned ones of the whole world. So much so that I am prepared to offer a reward: if anyone can disprove my evidences and show from the Holy Quran and authentic Hadith that Ahmad was the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and not his attribute, and that the signs about Ahmad given in the Holy Quran apply to the Holy Prophet, and that the Holy Prophet applied this prophecy to himself, I will pay that person a monetary penalty as mutually agreed between the two parties.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 20, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“I have read out the verses of the Holy Quran giving the news about Ahmad, in which Ahmad is mentioned. Now I will explain by the grace of God that in these verses the real person meant by Ahmad is the Promised Messiah, and the Holy Prophet Muhammad only fulfils it because of his attribute of being Ahmad; otherwise, the man having the name Ahmad, to whom this news relates, is only the Promised Messiah.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 23, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“Hence the messenger named Ahmad, whose news is given in this verse, cannot be the Holy Prophet Muhammad. Of course, if all those signs of this messenger called Ahmad were fulfilled in his time then we could undoubtedly say that since by the name Ahmad in this verse is meant the messenger having the attribute of Ahmad, why should we apply it to someone else? But even this is not the case, as I will prove later on.”
— pages 23, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“This prophecy does not contain any word to show that it is about the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, nor any word to cause us to apply this prophecy necessarily to the Holy Prophet Muhammad.… There is no Hadith report of any kind, whether true or false, weak or strong, of whatever standard of authenticity, mentioning that the Holy Prophet Muhammad applied this verse to himself and declared himself as fulfilling this prophecy. When that also is not the case, why should we apply the prophecy to the Holy Prophet Muhammad, in contradiction to the subject-matter of the verse?”
— pages 23, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 24, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“Why should the meaning of this verse be distorted to apply it to the Holy Prophet Muhammad just in order to prove that no messenger can come after him? Has the fear of Almighty God departed from the hearts of the people so much that they alter His word in this way and distort its meaning by misinterpreting it so blatantly? As long as truth had not come, people had no choice. But now that events have proved that by Ahmad is meant a servant of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, it is not the way of true believers to be stubborn.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
(pages 25-27)
Dr. Tahir Ijaz vs. Dr. Zahid Aziz, the famous debate from 2003-2004, Lahori-Ahmadi vs. Qadiani-Ahmadi – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
“Another argument which our opponents use against us is that they try to prove the ‘Ahmad’ prophecy from the prophecy of the Paraclete given in the Gospels and say that the word Paraclete shows the name ‘Ahmad’ …
In short, the ‘Ahmad’ prophecy has no connection with the Paraclete prophecy, which in any case is about the Holy Prophet”
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 31, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“To sum up, it is not proved in any way that the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad was Ahmad. So this leaves only two choices. One is that this prophecy applies to some other man having the name Ahmad. The other is that the prophecy does not mean that his name would be Ahmad but rather that his attribute would be Ahmad, and as the Holy Prophet Muhammad had the attribute Ahmad hence this prophecy can be applied to him in this sense. However, this [second choice] does not work because the signs of the person having the name or the qualities of Ahmad that are given here are not fulfilled in the Holy Prophet Muhammad, as will be shown later. This leaves only one way, that the prophet whose name or whose attribute is Ahmad, as the case may be, shall be someone after the Holy Prophet Muhammad, from among his servants. Our claim is that it is the Promised Messiah who is that messenger, the prophecy about whom is given in this verse.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________— pages 33, original edition, Anwar-i Khilafat. See here for Urdu text.
“Now I present evidence from the Holy Quran that the one who fulfills this prophecy can only be the Promised Messiah and no one else.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 40
Dr. Tahir Ijaz vs. Dr. Zahid Aziz, the famous debate from 2003-2004, Lahori-Ahmadi vs. Qadiani-Ahmadi – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
“The mention of the word rasul in the prophecy in the Quran clearly points to the fact
that it contains a reference to the prophecy of Paraclete, and not to the second advent of
Jesus (page 40).”
______________________________________________________________________________________________— Anwar-i Khilafat, page 93 of original edition; underlining is ours.
See pages 150–151.
See original Urdu text below from the book Anwar-i Khilafat [Urdu 3].
“Now another question remains, that is, as non-Ahmadis are deniers of the Promised Messiah, this is why funeral prayers for them must not be offered, but if a young child of a non-Ahmadi dies, why should not his funeral prayers be offered? He did not call the Promised Messiah as kafir. I ask those who raise this question, that if this argument is correct, then why are not funeral prayers offered for the children of Hindus and Christians, and how many people say their funeral prayers? The fact is that, according to the Shariah, the religion of the child is the same as the religion of the parents. So a non-Ahmadi’s child is also a non-Ahmadi, and his funeral prayers must not be said. Then I say that as the child cannot be a sinner he does not need the funeral prayers; the child’s funeral is a prayer for his relatives, and they do not belong to us but are non-Ahmadis. This is why even the child’s funeral prayers must not be said. This leaves the question that if a man who believes Hazrat Mirza sahib to be true but has not yet taken the bai‘at, or is still thinking about joining Ahmadiyyat, and he dies in this condition, it is possible that God may not punish him. But the decisions of the Shariah are based on what is outwardly visible. So we must do the same thing in his case, and not offer funeral prayers for him.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.irshad.org/exposed/think.php
“In Lucknow, I (Mir Mahmood Ahmad Qadiani) met a man who was a great scholar. He said: ‘Those are your enemies who make the propaganda that you condemn people as infidels. I can not believe that such broad minded people as you are can indulge in such things.’ The man was making this remark to Sheikh Yaqub Ali Qadiani. I asked him to tell the man that we really believe them as infidels. The man was astonished to hear this.”
(Anwar-e-Khilafat, Miyan Mahmood Ahmad Qadiani)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.irshad.org/exposed/think.php
“It is incumbent upon us that we should not regard non-Ahmadis as Muslims, nor should we offer prayers behind them, because according to our belief they deny one of the messengers of Allah. This is a matter of faith. None has any discretion in this.”
(Anwar-e-Khilafat, P. 90, by Mirza Mahmood Ahmad Qadiani)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Anwar Khilafat page 97
Loyalty to Government
There is another special thing which is also very important to mention because Hazrat
Sahib has repeatedly stressed about it. I have explained about it in the previous meeting and it is the loyalty of the government. This government has great favors on us. I have repeatedly heard from the mouth of the Promised Messiah (on whom be peace) that this government has
so many favors on us that if we do not show loyalty to it and help it, we will be very disloyal. I also say that we should be loyal to the government with all our heart and soul.
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Anwar Khilafat page 98
If I hear something from someone that is against the government, I shudder. Because it is very rude to talk about this kind of thing, it should be well remembered that if it was not for this government, we don’t know what problems would have happened for us. Only a few days ago, the condition of our Malabar Ahmadis became very alarming and their boys were stopped from attending schools. Their dead were prevented from being buried, so one dead lay there for several days. Banned from mosques. Trade has been closed, but this Government has given such assistance that even if we had an empire of our own, we could not do more. And that is that the government, seeing the suffering of Ahmadis, has given land from its side to build a mosque and a cemetery in it, but the king there did not stop even on this and he raised the question that this land is mine, I am not giving it. And it was also written that if you build a building on it, you will be punished. And he also said that you people should come forward and tell why you should not be boycotted because the scholars have issued a fatwa that you are not a Muslim. On this, the Ahmadis applied to the government, then the Deputy Commissioner gave an order that if the Ahmadis face any problem, all the leaders of the Muslims will be deported under the new law. He cannot come out of the mouth except from the mouth of the one who has compassion for mankind in his heart. So this new behavior has been done by this government with your Mala Bari brothers. And whoever does good to one’s brother does it to him. So when Malabari Ahmadis are our brothers, how much should we be kind to the government. Then, one of our preachers has gone to Mauritius, who used to shut down non-Ahmadis wherever he wanted to give lectures. Finally, he requested the government for a government hall, then the governor ordered that you can give lectures in this hall three days a week. Go or government half day of Saturday our He gave it to the preacher and kept half for himself.
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Anwar Khilafat page 99
Therefore, for a government that is so kind, no matter how loyal you can be is not enough.
Once Hazrat Umar (RA) said that if the burden of caliphate was not on me, I would have become a Muazzin (Call for prayer)
“Likewise I say that if I were not the Caliph, so too would I go to war as a volunteer”
by this time The government is in great need of men. Therefore, from whomever a service can be rendered Must do. We have benefited a lot from this war. Many of our Ahmadi friends They have gone to the battlefield, but by the grace of God, not a single one has died yet. Then those friends who are in the battlefield of France are also doing a good job of preaching are He has translated Teachings of Islam into French and published it. Besides that Many other tracts have been written and published in French. So if someone goes to the battlefield It will be as if we will have a free preacher at the expense of the government. So if anyone wants to go, sure It’s a great job. As many Ahmadis have asked me to go on a fight Yes, I have gladly given them permission. And has said that if you with this good intention It will be said that we are going to serve the government and at the same time preach the religion If you do, God Almighty will be your guardian and protect you from every pain. So, this is an opportunity for the government, which God Almighty may join.
(Note) Since the time for Maghrib prayer was very near. That is why Hazrat Khalifa
He ended the speech here and said that there were many things but there was not enough time to speak about them.
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Declaring Muslims as kafir
Declaring Muslims as kafir
|
From about the year 1911 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad started to put forward the doctrine that it is not sufficient for a person to declare belief in the Kalima Shahada in order to be a Muslim because Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had now appeared as a prophet and belief in him must be acknowledged as well.
According to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, it is no longer sufficient for the existing Muslims to believe in the Holy Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets before him. Now they must also declare that they believe in the prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as well. Otherwise they cannot remain Muslims but become just like those Jews and Christians who believed in the previous prophets but failed to accept the Holy Prophet Muhammad.
In a book which the Qadianis have translated and published in English, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, while acknowledging his beliefs, writes:
“(3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s] bai`at formally, wherever they may be, are Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit.”(The Truth about the Split, Rabwah, 1965, pp. 55-56. This book was first published in 1924, and is the translation of his Urdu book A’inah-i Sadaqat. See the scanned pages from the original work A’inah-i Sadaqat.)
In this book, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad also gives a summary of his first article expressing these views which had earlier appeared in April 1911. He writes regarding this article:
“The article was elaborately entitled `A Muslim is one who believes in all the messengers of God’. The title itself is sufficient to show that the article was not meant to prove merely that `those who did not accept the Promised Messiah were deniers of the Promised Messiah’. Its object rather was to demonstrate that those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims.” (pp. 135-136)
He further writes:
“Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiah to be one of the prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims.” (pp. 137-138)
“not only are those deemed to be Kafirs who openly style the Promised Messiah as Kafir, and those who although they do not style him thus, decline still to accept his claim, but even those who, in their hearts, believe the Promised Messiah to be true, and do not even deny him with their tongues, but hesitate to enter into his Bai`at, have here been adjudged to be Kafirs.” (pp. 139 -140)
“And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiah as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable Kafirs.” (p. 140)
(See the scanned pages from the original work A’inah-i Sadaqat.)
According to these views, the only Muslims in the whole world at any time are those who have taken the bai`at of the Qadiani leader of the time. In the last quotation above, the closing words given as “veritable Kafirs” are “pakkay kafir” in the original Urdu book A’inah-i Sadaqat, of which The Truth about the Split is the English translation. The word “pakkay” conveys the significance of “real, true, absolute and full-fledged”, meaning that all other Muslims are kafir in the fullest sense without the least doubt.
Views of M. Mahmud Ahmad’s brother Bashir.
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad also expressed the same belief quite plainly. Referring to verses 4:150 -151 of the Holy Quran, which say that those who believe only in some messengers of Allah and refuse to believe in others are “truly kafir”, M. Bashir Ahmad writes in a book:
“Thus, according to this verse, every such person who believes in Moses but does not believe in Jesus, or who believes in Jesus but does not believe in Muhammad (peace be upon him), or believes in Muhammad (peace be upon him) but does not believe in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but pukka kafir and excluded from the fold of Islam.”
(Kalimat-ul-Fasal, by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, published February 1915, p. 20.)
This statement expresses the Qadiani belief that all Muslims who do not belong to the Ahmadiyya Movement are non-Muslims because they do not believe in Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet, just as Jews and Christians are non-Muslims for not believing in the Holy Prophet Muhammad as a prophet. Again the description used is pukka kafir, meaning kafir in the real, true, and fullest sense.
Qadianis disallow funeral prayers for other Muslims.
Since the Qadiani belief is that any non-Qadiani Muslim is a non-Muslim, just like a Christian or a Hindu is a non-Muslim, the Qadiani leader Mirza Mahmud Ahmad forbade his followers from saying the funeral prayer of any non-Qadiani Muslim. This instruction is given by him quite clearly and forcefully in his book Anwar-i-Khilafat, published October 1916. At the end of the section where he deals with this question, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad writes as follows:
| Image of the full page 93 | Image of the title page of Anwar-i-Khilafat | |
 |
 |
Translation of relevant portion:
“Now another question remains, that is, as non-Ahmadis are deniers of the Promised Messiah, this is why funeral prayers for them must not be offered, but if a young child of a non-Ahmadi dies, why should not his funeral prayers be offered? He did not call the Promised Messiah as kafir. I ask those who raise this question, that if this argument is correct, then why are not funeral prayers offered for the children of Hindus and Christians, and how many people say their funeral prayers? The fact is that, according to the Shariah, the religion of the child is the same as the religion of the parents. So a non-Ahmadi’s child is also a non-Ahmadi, and his funeral prayers must not be said. Then I say that as the child cannot be a sinner he does not need the funeral prayers; the child’s funeral is a prayer for his relatives, and they do not belong to us but are non-Ahmadis. This is why even the child’s funeral prayers must not be said. This leaves the question that if a man who believes Hazrat Mirza sahib to be true but has not yet taken the bai`at, or is still thinking about joining Ahmadiyyat, and he dies in this condition, it is possible that God may not punish him. But the decisions of the Shariah are based on what is outwardly visible. So we must do the same thing in his case, and not offer funeral prayers for him.” (Anwar-i-Khilafat, page 93)
It is quite clear and plain from these instructions that the Qadianis regard all other Muslims, including the children of those Muslims and even including those Muslims who believe in the truth of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad but have not taken the pledge to join the Movement, as being kafir and non-Muslim just like Hindus and Christians.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essay’s
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad retreats from his belief about the “coming Ahmad” prophecy
Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad had 20+ children with 7 wives – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
The 1915 Jalsa at Qadian – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
Al-Fazl, September 1917, proves Ahmadiyya Takfir towards all Sunni’s/Shia’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/13/mirza-bashir-ahmad-did-takfir-on-all-muslims-and-lahori-ahmadis-1916/
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Takfir
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=1911
“Al-Qaul-ul-Fasl” by the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad–early-1915
“My beliefs about non-Ahmadi Muslims”, dated 18 August 1911 by Khwaja Kamal-uddin
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s Speech In January 1913 Saying Only Those Are Kafir Who Brand Ahmadis As Kafir
Al-Fazl, September 1917, proves Ahmadiyya Takfir towards all Sunni’s/Shia’s
A fake Ahmadiyya response to our essays which expose Ahmadiyya Takfir from Ahmadi.answers.com
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Takfir
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=1911
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s Speech In January 1913 Saying Only Those Are Kafir Who Brand Ahmadis As Kafir
Ali Rizvi mentions the lies of Qasim Rashid in his book, in terms of Takfir from Ahmadis to Muslims
“Haqiqat Un Nubuwwat” (1915) by Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad, some quotes and data
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad says that any Muslim who believes in abrogation, is a Kafir
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and 2:62, the “Salvation” or “status” of Non-Muslim’s in an islamic state?
The 1976, English edition of Tadhkirah, now available for free download
Mirza Bashir Ahmad did Takfir on all Muslims and Lahori-Ahmadis (1915)
Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad had 20+ children with 7 wives
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #Ahmadiyyatakfir #takfir
9 Pingback