Recently, there has a been a buzz on the internet about Ahmadiyya vs. Dawah man. One of the main points that was raised by Dawah man was about the Ahmadiyya Kalima which seems to be a bit different then the Sunni/Shia version. Kashif Chaudhry has claimed to have rebutted this argument vs. Dawah man and called him ignorant of ahmadiyya beliefs, however, has Kashif ever read the entire story here? Has Kashif reviewed all of the literature on this topic? I seriously doubt it, and even if he had, he is purposely suppressing the main references and refuses to analyze them properly.
In the next few paragraphs I will explain as to where Dawah man has gotten his info. Since most Ahmadis that I know, they are taking Kashif’s word, which is common for the average and fanatical Ahmadi. They believe the Ahmadi-Mullah without double–checking them, or fact checking them. In fact, the Ahmadiyya management team has created a website, Ahmadianswers.com, which is unofficial, as the disclaimer implies, however, this is the old game of the Mirza family, they spread info through unofficial sources, pass it off as official, and when they make an error, they call it unofficial.
As we all know, Ahmadis have been changing their beliefs in terms of Islam since 1891, when the community was only 2 years old. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad announced that Esa (as) was dead, and contrary to his previous statements, Esa (as) was not alive (see Braheen e Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, 1884). Later on, in 1901, after denying prophethood for 10+ years, he changed his entire position on the matter and claimed prophethood, or claimed to have found a new definition of prophethood (See “Reality of Prophethood by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1915). It should be noted, the ulema of India accused MGA of claming prophethood in 1891, however, MGA vehemently refused and called the ulema as liars and etc. MGA had a habit of contradicting himself, and was eager to blame it on Allah or Muhammad (saw).
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was accused of changing the Kalima based on his new prophethood just a few days before he died, in fact, in Mahmud Ahmad’s, “Truth about the Split”, page 25-26, MGA is quoted as he rebuts a Hindu newspaper that accused him of changing the Kalima, here is the quotation:
“In the Akhbar-e-‘Am of the 23rd May, 1908, in the second line of the first column, it has been reported about me, that at the dinner I pronounced a denial of my prophethood. In reference to the same, it should be known that in that meeting what I said was simply this, that I had all along been informing the public through all my writings and declare even now that the accusation, brought against me, is entirely unfounded, namely that I claim prophethood of a kind which entails severance of all my connection with Islam, which in other words means that I claim for myself a substantive prophethood such as leaves no need for me to follow the Holy Quran and introduces a new Kalima (formula of creed) and a new Qibla (direction to which to turn our face in prayer) and abrogates the laws of Islam and ignores the authority and example of the Holy Prophet.” (Truth about the Split, page 25-26, 1922)
Mirza Bashir Ahmad, who was the only college-educated child of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote in 1915 as follows:
“The fool does not realise that ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ was put in the Kalima because he is the crowning head of the prophets and the Khatam-un-nabiyyin. By mentioning his name all other prophets are implicitly included. There is no need to mention the name of everyone separately. Admittedly, the coming of the Promised Messiah has created one difference, and that is that before his coming the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ included (besides the Holy Prophet) only the prophets before the Holy Prophet Muhammad, but after the coming of the Promised Messiah one more prophet was added to the significance of these words. … In other words, the same Kalima is still to be used for admission into Islam, the difference merely being that the coming of the Promised Messiah has added one more messengerto the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’.” (p. 158, Kalimat-ul-Fasal by Mirza Bashir Ahmad published by them in 1915, and written only a few months after the Split of 1914.).
7 years later, in 1922, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad explained how there was an Ahmadi (Zahiruddin) in 1913, who proposed that MGA was actually a law-bearing prophet and that Ahmadis had a new Kalima and Qibla, in fact, the 1st Khalifa of Ahmadiyya, never ex-communicated this Ahmadi for his ideas, however, later, he did ex-communicate him on the grounds that he challenged his Khilafat.
Mahmud Ahmad writes as follows,
“”It is true that the Community, in actual practice severed all connection with him, but that was because of the novel doctrines forged by him, e.g. formulating a new Kalima (formula of faith), turning the face towards Qadian while at prayer, asserting that the Promised Messiah was a Nabi with a new Shariah (Law), denying the authority of Khalifatul Masih Ira and charging him with various malpractices.””(Truth about the Split, page 122, 1922).
A quote from Seeratul Mahdi
”Doctor Mir Muhammad Ismail Sahib narrated to me as, the first Khalifa tul Masih used to say, every Prophet has a kalima and Mirza’s kalima was”میں دین کو دنیا پر مقدم رکھوں گا”(i will precedence Deen on Duniya).
(Seerat-ul-Mahdi vol 1 part 3 page 824, narration 974)
In Ahmadiyya, during the period between 1908 and 1916, there were lots of discussions on the true nature of the claims of MGA, especially, in terms of his prophethood, Takfir, Ismuhu Ahmad and the role of the family in the management of the community . There are many beliefs that were formulated in this era by Ahmadis which represented the different sects in Ahmadiyya, in fact, the Lahori’s decided to drop the prophethood of MGA and take a liberal approach towards Ahmadiyya, however, Mahmud Ahmad tells us that the Lahori-Ahmadis invited Zahirrudin to many of their Jalsas in that era and even let him give speeches.
In 2016, 100% of Ahmadis have totally forgotten about the Kalima change that Mirza Bashir Ahmad was discussing in 1915-16, nor do they remember who Zahirrudin was and his ideas. It is quite possible that this is another belief that Ahmadis have temporarily dropped, however, its unsure if they will ever revive this belief.
As you read the timeline, it is obvious that Zahiruddin was at the forefront of claiming that Ahmadis believed in a new Kalima (1913), a few years later (1916), Mirza Bashir Ahmad agreed with Zahiruddin that there was a new Kalima in Ahmadiyya, however, MGA wasnt law-bearing, nonetheless, Mirza Bashir Ahmad was essentially claiming that MGA was prophet number 124,000, and that ALL prophets are included in the Kalima when its recited. He then goes to say that Sunni’s/Shias are Kafirs now since they deny prophet #124,000.
However, the islamic belief is that ALL prophets are included in the Kalima, and Muhammad (saw) is the final prophet, he is number 124,000. Moreover, one of the 6 articles of faith force Muslims to believe in ALL the prophets of Allah, and they are included in the Kalima, however, indirectly.
Finally, why do Ahmadis avoid these writings? Are there scholars capable of analyzing these writings and giving a proper interpretation? If so, we would love to hear it. Until then, the cat and mouse game with Ahmadiyya and the planet continues.