Personally, I call all Ahmadis as Ahmadis, I try not to differentiate between them, however, I understand that there are many sects of Ahmadiyya and that they all have separate names and run separate non-profit organizations.  I consider Ahmadiyya to be a fraud comparable to Lance Armstrong or the tobacco cover-up.  This essay will deal with an issue of fanatical religious clergy who are working around the clock in terms of job security.  This is the case of the Ahmadiyya clergy and their attempt to dissuade their adherents from discussing their religion openly.

Nowadays, Ahmadis are trained by their Mullahs to never speak to Muslims about their faith. The Ahmadi-mullahs have trained every single Ahmadi that “Qadiani” is a derogatory term and anyone that uses it is some type of extremist and should be shunned altogether.  However, this is not true, the fact is, in 1914, there was a split in the Ahmadiyya movement and two opposing ideologies were created.  Here is an importance reference from a neutral source of information, Maulana Abu Kalamazad eventually became India’s first Minister of Education from 1947 to 1958, here is how he explained the split in Ahmadiyya:

“For some time, there had been two parties in this Movement over the question of takfir. One party believed that non-Ahmadis are Muslims even though they may not believe in Mirza sahib’s claims. The other party, however, declared openly and clearly that those people who do not believe in Mirza sahib are kafir absolutely — inna li-llahi wa inna ilai-hi raji‘un. The head of the latter party is Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, and this faction has now made him khalifa but the first group does not accept this. The writing published in this connection by Maulana Muhammad Ali, and the wonderful and admirable courage he has shown in expressing these views while staying in Qadian, where the heads of the other party live, is truly an event which shall always be regarded as a memorable event of this year.”  (See Al-Hilal, dated 25 March 1914, edited by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad) (Also See “A Mighty Striving” by Mumtaz Ahmad Faruqi, page 111, online edition).

As we all know, Ahmadis were debating the claims of MGA, Takfeer, his successorship, and the future of Ahmadiyya from 1909–1914.  This was the era of the Khilafat of Noorudin, who’s sons were later ex-communicated and publically shunned.  In fact, Noorudin even blurted out that Mahmud Ahmad hadnt understood the topic of Takfeer (1913) and had ordered Muhammad Ali to write a conclusive essay on the matter and thus put the matter to rest (1913).  However, Noorudin died before any formal policy was introduced, and thus Ahmadis created different and competing ideologies in terms of MGA.  Ironically, after 1935, the Qadiani branch adopted the Lahori-Ahmadi position on Takfeer and thus complicated their beliefs, similar to how Mormons dropped Polygamy for statehood with America.

Conclusion

Obviously, there is no malice when a person calls an “Ahmadi” a “Qadiani” or a “Lahori”.  In fact, the Qadiani branch called the “Lahori-Ahmadis” as “Paghamis” for over 30 years and the Lahoris returned the favor by calling them “Qadiani” since 1914.  It seems that Ahmadis dont have a problem calling each other names, however, they complain to the world about a nonsense issue and create additional nonsense issues that will somehow show them as a persecuted community.

Despite the strategies of the Ahmadi-Mullah.  We will continue educating Ahmadis in terms of Ahmadiyya and Islam.

Read Akber Chaudhry’s comments on this topic here: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/27/ahmadis-are-divided-into-so-many-groups-that-the-main-group-has-to-be-called-qadiani/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/27/ahmadis-are-divided-into-so-many-groups-that-the-main-group-has-to-be-called-qadiani/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/29/qadiani-ahmadis-vs-lahori-ahmadis-sectarianism-within-ahmadiyya-2018-version/