Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Thorough research work on the Ahmadiyya Movement, #ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyat #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome

Month

September 2016

MGA explains how he misunderstood his prophethood in 1880 and was confused for 20+ years

Intro
In roughly 1883, MGA told the world that he was only “LIKE-Esa” and even though his revelations indicated something else, he was only “LIKE-Esa” or “maseel e Maseeh”.  However, 7 years later, he totally contradicted himself and claimed to actually be Esa (as) (1890-1891).  MGA compared this confusion of 7 years to his confusion of over 20 years on prophethood.
In fact, as early as 1884, the Muslims of India were already at odds with MGA since he was claiming divine revelations, he was thus called a Kafir in 1884.  By 1885, one of the main leaders of the Ahle-e-Hadith ripped up the Braheen e Ahmadiyya and sent it to Qadian as such in this era.  They had previously read MGA’s nikah and had promoted MGA as a writer. Nevertheless, in 1890-1891, MGA claimed to be Esa (as) and was formally denounced as a Kafir by the majority of the Ulema in India.  MGA responded to this by denying prophethood and only claiming to be a “Muhadas” or a “metaphoric” prophet, like the mujadids and other muhaddas’, in fact, MGA even went as far as to argue that even prostitutes, as they spend nights with their customers were eligible to receive good dreams.  MGA then denied prophethood for 20 years and in every single book in this era.  Per the 2nd Khalifa in 1915, MGA formally claimed prophethood in Nov of 1901, with the publishing of his famous announcement, “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” or “The result of an error”, or a “Correction of a mistake”.  However, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s denied this altogether and said that MGA never claimed prophethood in 1901.  The 2nd Khalifa also began twisting Chapter 2:4 of the Quran to support the idea that MGA was a prophet.  The 2nd Khalifa then sparred with the famous Muhammad Ali over this topic over 10 books.  In the below, I have posted Muhammad Ali’s translation which uses a few different words, the Qadiani-Ahmadi translation is watered down and softened, they are known for this type of editing.  In conclusion, per the 2nd Khalifa, MGA found a new type of prophethood in 1901, which wasn’t given to any other prophet in any scripture.

1907, MGA explains his confusion of 20+ years
“The conferment of titles is the pleasure and the work of the Lord God. I have no share in it. As for the question why I have written like this? Why has this contradiction crept in? So, please, listen and understand with care. This contradiction is of the same kind as in Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya I wrote, at one time, that the Messiah, son of Mary, could descend from the heavens. Later on, however, I put forth that I, myself, am the Messiah expected to come in the later times. The basis of the contradiction in that case was the same. Although, in Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya itself, the Lord God called me Isa and also said to me that the tiding of my advent had been given earlier by God and His Apostle. Since, however, a portion of the Muslims happened to have become firm on the belief, and I myself believed the same, that Hazrat Isa would come down from the heavens, I endeavoured to take the Wahyi at the apparent level; in fact, I watered it down in interpretation, and clung to the former view I had shared with the rest of the Muslims; and this was the view I did my best to propagate in Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya. Later on, however, Revelations came down on me, like the rain from heaven, to the effect that I myself was the Promised Messiah, so eagerly expected to appear, with hundreds of wonderful Signs and the earth, as well as the heavens took their stand in support of my position; and brilliant manifestations forced me to perceive that I, myself, was the Masih expected to appear in the later times. Otherwise, my belief on these points was the same as I had stated in Barahin-i- Ahmadiyya…

Similarly, to begin with this was my belief that in no way was I comparable in quality with reference to Jesus son of Mary. He was a Prophet, great among those chosen by the Lord. Even when something occurred, which seemed to establish my superiority over him, always I took it to imply some limited and partial preference. Later on, however, the Wahyi sent down on me by the Lord, like pouring rain, it did not allow me to remain clinging to this belief; and I found the title of Nabi clearly conferred on me, in a manner that I was a Nabi from one angle, an Ummati from another… Anyway, the long and short of it all is this that there is no contradiction in what I say, I but follow the Wahyi, from the Lord. Just as long as this awareness did not come to me, I continued to say what I had said at the outset. But when I was given this awareness, I began to say different from what I had said before. I am no more than a human being: I do not claim to be the Knower of the Unseen.” (Haqiqatul Wahyi, page 148-150, online urdu version)(translated by Muhammad Ali in Prophethood in Islam).  

The new english version of this quote
See pages, 182-183

“”””Meaning that, tell them, ‘As far as I am concerned, I do not want any title for myself.’ In other words, my aim and objective is higher than these thoughts. Bestowing a title is an act of God; I have no influence in it.

The question remains why it has been written so and why such a contradiction has occurred in the statements. Ponder over it and realize that it is the same kind of contradiction as I had written in Barahine- Ahmadiyya that Masih Ibn-e-Maryam would descend from heaven; and later, I wrote that I myself am the Messiah who was to come. The reason for this contradiction was the same: God Almighty had named me ‘Isa in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya, and also informed me that God and His Messenger had prophesied my advent. But as a body of Muslims was firm in the belief—and I, too, held that same belief—that Hadrat ‘Isa would descend from heaven, I did not wish to take God’s revelation for its literal meaning, but interpreted this revelation and maintained my belief in consonance with that of the Muslims at large and published the same in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. But afterwards, divine revelations regarding this descended like rain, affirming that I am, indeed, the Promised Messiah who was to come. Along with them [i.e. the divine revelations] appeared hundreds of Signs, and both the heaven and the earth arose to testify to my truthfulness. The bright Signs of God compelled me to realize that, indeed, I am the Messiah who was to come in the Latter Days. Otherwise, my belief was what I had set forth in Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya. Moreover, not relying entirely upon it, I sought adjudication for my revelation from the Holy Quran. It was established by conclusive verses that ‘Isa Ibn-e-Maryam had indeed died, and the last Khalifah [vicegerent] would appear from among this very ummah
under the title of the Promised Messiah. As no darkness remains after the dawn of day, in the same way, hundreds of Signs, heavenly testimonies, conclusive verses of the Holy Quran, and definitive and explicit ahadith compelled me to accept that I am the Promised Messiah.

It was enough for me that God should be pleased with me, and I had absolutely no desire for such a thing. I led a life of seclusion and no one was aware of my existence, nor did I desire that anyone should recognize me. He forced me out of my solitude. I had wished to live and
die in obscurity, but He decreed that He would make me renowned with honour throughout the world. Therefore, ask God why He did so. What is my fault in this?

Similarly, I initially believed that I could not possibly be compared with Masih Ibn-e-Maryam since he is a Prophet and one of the distinguished men of God. Therefore, whenever something in my revelation appeared concerning my superiority, I interpreted it as partial superiority.  But later, when revelation from God Almighty descended upon me like pouring rain, it did not permit me to persist in this belief. The title of ‘Prophet’ was clearly bestowed upon me, albeit with the proviso that I am a Prophet in one aspect and an ummati [follower of the Holy Prophet sa] in another.1٭ The instances of divine revelation that I have cited in this book also reveal what God Almighty says concerning me vis-à-vis Masih Ibn-e-Maryam. How can I reject twenty-three years of continuous revelations from God Almighty? I believe in this holy revelation of His as I believe in all the revelations of God that have occurred before me. I also note that the Masih Ibn-e-Maryam is the last Khalifah of Musa, peace be upon him, and I am the last Khalifah of the Prophet who is the Best of Messengers. Therefore, God willed that I should not be inferior to him.””””

Conclusion
MGA surely claimed prophethood sometime in his career, more specifically from the summer of 1900 to Nov 1901, he made the claim.  He claimed to be the only person in the entire Ummah who was given the name Nabi.

 

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/01/ahmadiyya-leadership-began-twisting-the-quranic-verse-in-24-in-1915/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/25/al-qaulul-fasl-by-the-khalifa-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-early-1915/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/14/mga-confuses-all-of-his-readers-in-1891-as-he-claimed-to-be-the-promised-messiah/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/17/nooruddin-urged-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-to-make-the-claim-of-being-like-the-messiah-1882-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/03/in-1884-before-his-wildest-claims-mga-defined-inni-mutawafeeka-wa-raffa-as-i-shall-give-you-full-reward-and-shall-raise-you-towards-me/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/17/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-quoted-and-commented-on-178-in-1884-in-the-braheen-e-ahmadiyya-vol-4-he-then-connected-178-with-the-return-of-the-messiah/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-queen-of-the-princely-state-of-bhopal-invested-heavily-1878-into-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-his-braheen-they-were-disappointed-by-the-product/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/10/the-fatwa-e-kufr-vs-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mgas-ghost-writers-argue-on-the-prophethood-of-mga-in-1900/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/29/al-qaul-ul-fasl-by-mahmud-ahmad-1915/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/06/glaring-errors-in-the-translation-of-taudih-e-maram-or-elucidation-of-objectives-1890/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/truth-prevails/chapter-iii/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

Tags

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

MGA’s ghost writers argue on the prophethood of MGA in 1900

Intro

I wanted to post a reference from the writings of Mahmud Ahmad in 1915 as he argued that MGA was in fact a prophet, however, without law.

The reference

“At last that event did take place. In the year 1900, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim, the preacher of the Friday sermon, gave a sermon in which he, used the words Nabi (Prophet) and Rasul (Messenger) for the Mirza. This caused great irritation to Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan Amrohawi. When Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim came to know of this, he gave another Friday sermon in which be addressed the Mirza, requesting him to contradict his belief, if he was wrong in considering him to be a prophet and Messenger of God. After the Friday prayers were over, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim caught hold of the skirt of the Mirza’s apparel and requested him to correct him in his beliefs if they were erroneous. The Mirza turned around and said that he, too, held the same belief. Meanwhile, Maulavi Muhammad Ahsan had been greatly agitated by the sermon and in anger was pacing the floor of the mosque. On Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim’s return, he began to quarrel with him. When their voices rose very high, the Mirza came out of his house and recited the Qur’anic verse: “O ye who believe! Don’t raise your Voice above the voice of the Prophet.”

(This event is based on the report of a speech of Sayyid Sarwar Shah Qadiani at an annual conference held in Qadian, and published in al- Fadhl, Vol. X, No. 51, dated january.4,1923)

(See also Haqiqat al- Nubuwat, p 124.[published in 1915])

Conclusion
MGA had multiple ghost-writers.  In this case, Maulvi Amrohi (who was the first payed Ahmadi-mullah), he didn’t know that MGA had finally claimed prophethood and Maulvi Abdul Kareem was ordered to pronounce it.  They proceeded to argue, then MGA quoted the Quran and thus claimed prophethood openly for the first time (summer 1900). However, he remained silent for an additional 1 1/2 years or roughly 14+ months.

Later on, after “Correction of an Error” was published, Maulvi Amrohi wrote a rebuttal to an inquiring mind who accused MGA of claiming prophethood, however, Maulvi Amrohi very tactfully only denied independent prophethood, he never even mentioned the “The Ummati-Nabi”.  Fast forward to 1914, Maulvi Amrohi nominated Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa and sided with him in his first year of his Khilafat.  He even read Mahmud Ahmad’s 2 books on the subject of prophethood, i.e. Qaul al Fasl and Haqiqatun Nubuwwat, however, in the summer of 1915, he seems to have had a change of heart and denounced MGA’s claim of prophethood and deposed Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa.  He then sided with the Lahori-Ahmadis and died in 1919 in this state.

 

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=right+arm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/lecture-ludhiana-was-not-a-lecture-it-was-a-riot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/12/the-story-of-how-mga-hurt-his-right-arm-and-was-disabled-since-his-youth/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-needed-toilet-attendants-his-entire-life/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/mga-used-scribes/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=ghost+writers

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/04/ahmadiyya-mullahs-have-been-caught-editing-the-writings-of-mga-yet-again/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Noorudin

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Amrohi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=arabic

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/06/hani-tahir-exposes-ahmadiyya-lies-again-the-arabic-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/was-noorudin-the-ghost-writer-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mgas-ghost-writers-argue-on-the-prophethood-of-mga-in-1900/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-muqamat-al-hariri/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/02/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-was-a-student-of-noorudin-pre-1891/

Tags

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

 

Maulvi Sanuallah acknowledges that MGA claimed prophethood in Nov 1901

Intro

“MGA contradicted himself all the time.  Just pick any topic.  I wanted to post the data which proves that MGA did claim prophethood in Nov, 1901.  And Maulvi Sanaullah took exception to it.

Reference

“He [Sana-ullah] writes that Mirza sahib has written in Hamamat-ul-Bushra [published 1893-1894]: ‘How is it possible for me to claim prophethood and thereby become a kafir.’ After saying this, he [Sana-ullah] himself draws the conclusion that Mirza sahib did not claim prophethood at that time [in 1893-1894] but he claimed prophethood in 1901. So in this way from November 1901 till May 1908 is 6 years and 7 months, and not 23 years.

“””We answer this from his own same magazine. He writes on page 5 that Mirza sahib claimed to be a Mujaddid in 1880 by publishing his first advertisement [ishtihar]. Then he wrote Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya in the same year which is a good book to some extent but in most of it he has mentioned his prophecies, revelations and claims. Maulana Sana-ullah accepts here that Mirza sahib laid his claim in 1880 and that all his claims are mentioned in the Barahin. It is true to say: Darogh Go ra hafiz naba shood [Persian saying meaning that the memory of a liar is not good]. Since 1880 till now, 28 years have passed.

As to the fact that he [Promised Messiah] has called a claimant to prophethood as kafir in Hamamat-ul-Bushra, the answer to this is that it is true that, even after writing it, he has not claimed the prophethood which is mentioned in Hamamat-ul-Bushra. In fact, he has denied such kind of prophethood just three or four days before [his death]. See Badr, 24 May 1908. He himself and also his jamaat consider the claimant of such prophethood, which is against the finality of prophethood, as kafir. However, an ummati who is spoken to by God in abundance can be called as subordinate-prophet or mujaddid or muhaddas or fana-fir-rasul. And such kind of prophethood does not go against the prophethood of the Holy Prophet Muhammad; rather it displays its light. Since this ummah is the best of all ummahs so it has all the ranks of previous ummahs: Al-ulama warasat-al-Anbia [the righteous ulama are the heirs of the prophets].”

Al-Hakam, 6 August 1908, p. 8, col. 1

Conclusion

MGA did in-fact claim prophethood in Nov. of 1901, however, he was very sneaky about it.  The proof of this is contained in an article which was published in Al-Hakam dated August 6, 1908, just two months after the sad death of the Promised Messiah. It is a long article written by one Hakim Dr. Ahmad Husain of Lyallpur. The whole article is devoted towards the refutation of different allegations that Maulana Sana-ullah made against the Promised Messiah.

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/11/eik-ghalti-ka-izala-aka-correction-of-an-error-was-re-published-on-march-1-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Maulvi Abdul Karim claims Prophethood per MGA, Maulvi Amrohi disagrees

Intro
MGA had multiple ghost writers and scribes. They didn’t all agree on MGA’s claims and it is obvious that they disagreed with each other on the prophethood of MGA. In fact, after “Correction of an Error” was published in 1901, Maulvi Amrohi wrote a detailed response to an inquiry that MGA may have claimed prophethood….The Maulvi refuted it.  He wrote that MGA had only denied independent prophethood, nothing else. However, after the split of 1914, Amrohi had initially sided with Mahmud Ahmad and the people at Qadian, in fact, he was the Maulvi who had nominated Mahmud Ahmad for Khalifa, however, after Mahmud Ahmad wrote “Qaul al Fasl” and “Haqiqatun Nubuwwat” (1915)...a few months later, Amrohi had a change of heart and claimed that even though his sons had read these books out to him, he hadnt understood them, he then proceeded to do a 180 degree switch and became a Lahori-Ahmadi, and that was how he was buried.,  

Further, in Aug of 1908, Maulvi Sanaullah accused MGA of only being a prophet for 6 1/2 years. Continue reading “Maulvi Abdul Karim claims Prophethood per MGA, Maulvi Amrohi disagrees”

Ahmadiyya and 4:69, everything you need to know

Intro
4:69 of the Quran only means that Allah will allow Muslims to be in the company of prophets in the Jannah, not on Earth (ardh)(see Suyuti and Ibn Kathir, see the story of Asbab e Nuzul). As early as 1892, MGA was using 4:69 to argue that Allah still talks and that this was in terms of Muhaddas, or metaphorical prophethood (See the refs in the below). The 3rd reference is from Tiryaq-ul-Qulub (which was published in 1902, written in 1899), again, for the 3rd time, MGA used 4:69 to argue against prophethood, and for Muhaddasiyyat (Muslims becoming the like of prophets, per hadith). I had written in a previous essay that MGA never wrote about 4:69 after Nov 1901, however, the AMJ has recently published “Kishti-nuh” aka Noahs Ark (1902) into English for the first time ever and a new reference has been found. Nevertheless, in both of these books, MGA claims that 4:69 asserts that Muslims can become LIKE-PROPHETS, not full prophets. After MGA died, the Qadiani newspaper again asserted that 4:69 meant that Allah can make anyone a prophet. Ahmadis also use 7:35 to argue that prophethood will never end. They also claim that MGA was mentioned in 48:29 of the Quran. They also use 2:4, as they argue that prophethood will not end. All of these arguments were developed in 1915 by the 2nd Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, he defined MGA’s prophethood thoroughly in 1915 (see Haqiqatun Nubuwwat). We have also recently found MGA (and his team of writers) arguing in 1906, via MGA’s book, “Chashma-Masihi”, that in a famous verse of Surah Fatiha wherein Muslims pray to Allah to be guided,they are actually asking Allah to be guided like the prophets and siddiqin (which is a direct inference to 4:69)(See pages 62-65). Thus, MGA would always connect the ability to achieve prophethood with the daily prayer, which is ridiculous, since prophethood is a gift, not something achieved (see 40:15)(See Muhammad Ali, Prophethood in Islam also). However, in Chashma Masihi, MGA doesn’t quote 4:69, nor have we found this quote in any other book after 1903.

We have posted references from Malfuzat on this also (1960’s, see in the below).

Continue reading “Ahmadiyya and 4:69, everything you need to know”

MGA invented the 23-year theory for Prophets, and his opinion on 69:44

Introduction
This short essay will cover MGA and his use of 69:44-46 in terms of his new theory that a false prophet never lives 23-years, whilst claiming to receive communications from Allah. MGA began using this argument in 1897, in Anjam e Athim. Watch my video explanation here. We will also show 2:61, 2:87, 2:91, 3;21, 3:112, 3:144, 3:181, 3:183, 4:155, 5:70 (That’s 10 verses) to prove how prophets had been killed in the past, it wasn’t a new thing, in fact, 3;144 of the Quran tells us that even if Muhammad (saw) was killed, it wouldn’t mean Islam is false. Furthermore, we all know how Yahya (As) was killed early on during his mission, MGA even admitted to it. In fact, in TUHFA-E-GOLARHVIYYAH, MGA admitted that the killing of a prophet is not a sign that any given prophet was a liar.

MGA argued as such in Arbain (1900) also. MGA and his team of writers wrote this in the same area wherein MGA was claiming to have

In the below, we have also posted the Al-Hakam of July 24, 1901. On page 6, MGA says that some opponents say that Akbar the king created his own religion and lived for 23 years but MGA says you need to show me a place where he said this is the revelation of God to me and lived for 23 years. On page 7, MGA claims that no person can claim prophethood and live for 23 years (see in the below). In 1904, an Ahmadi asked the editors of the Al-Hakam to explain why Bahaullah was allowed to live over 23 years after his claim of being the Messiah.
Continue reading “MGA invented the 23-year theory for Prophets, and his opinion on 69:44”

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad used scribes

Intro
MGA never wrote anything. He was helped his entire life, he even had toilet attendants, many servants and other people to massage him all day. Moreover, he broke his right hand in his youth, and thus was never able to have full function of his right hand. In fact, MGA’s right hand was so weak, he couldn’t lift a simple cup of tea with it, he was thus forced to drink and eat with his left hand, which is unislamic and nasty. In Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya Vol. 4, MGA mentions that he used a hindu scribe named Sham Lal, a Pundit’s son who could write in both Devanagari and Persian (seem page 361, online english edition). After Lekh Ram came to Qadian, Sham Lal seems to have grown weary of MGA and told his secrets, MGA immediately himself expelled him from the job and then employed another Hindu Barahman, namely Kalia Bawa Das for this task.

There was also Mirza Khuda Bakhsh and Maulvi Abdul Karim. Another one bears the name of scribe as Pir Sirajul Haq, these names are given in Maktubat. Abdullah Sanauri was another. After 1905, Mufti Muhammad Sadiq became the main ghost writer/scribe.
Continue reading “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad used scribes”

MGA’s right arm was disabled, he cant be Sultan-ul-Qalam

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was unable to do anything with his right arm.  Below is the reference.

Masroor’s Friday Khutbah of 1-15-16

“””Sometimes some people employing hast do not understand the finer points and formulate an opinion without delving into the thing fully. And then the faith of some weak natured persons also becomes affected as a result. Hazrat Musleh Maud mentions an incident. He says that once at a gathering an individual was drinking water with his left hand and I told him to not do so. He was told to drink with his right hand unless there is some valid reason. He said that the Promised Messiah (as) also used to drank water with his left hand whereas there was a reason for him to do this. And this was that the Promised Messiah (as) had fallen down in his youth and his right hand was injured so much so that although he could pick a glass with it he could not take it to the mouth to drink. Nevertheless to comply with the requirement of the sunnah [the practice of the Holy Prophet (sa)] he would drink with the left hand but he would give the hand support with his right hand.

The Promised Messiah (as) has mentioned the weakness of his right hand himself also. He says that once, in front of some people who were opponents, who had come for some discussion, I picked a glass or a cup of tea with the left hand and upon seeing this they made a criticism that you do not practice the sunnah and you are trying to drink holding the vessel with the left hand.

The Promised Messiah (as) himself says that hastiness and thinking ill forced the person to level this criticism at me whereas my hand is weak on account of the injury it had suffered and I cannot take the cup to my mouth for drinking from it with my right hand. Nevertheless I do definitely always place my right hand below the hand holding the vessel I am drinking from.

So while haste is making the enemy commit ill thinking those who belong to us their lack of understanding and haste has made them think that the Promised Messiah (as) was doing this deliberately. Whereas they should have tried to find the reason behind this and when Hazrat Musleh Maud (ra) had stopped them they should have stopped. These hasty decisions lead to innovation and incorrect commentaries.””””””””””

The scans
2

1

15181564_1647924188840413_263302106149344142_n

Also see this narration:

Seeratul_Mahdi_3.pdf
page pdf 41/316
Narration no. 526

“Dr. Mir Ismail stated to me that Masih Mouood used to shake hands with right hand only and sometimes with right and left hands. Sincere followers used to kiss his hands and touch them to their eyes and sometimes touch his clothes to get blessings.”

Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=right+arm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/lecture-ludhiana-was-not-a-lecture-it-was-a-riot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/12/the-story-of-how-mga-hurt-his-right-arm-and-was-disabled-since-his-youth/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-needed-toilet-attendants-his-entire-life/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/mga-used-scribes/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=ghost+writers

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/04/ahmadiyya-mullahs-have-been-caught-editing-the-writings-of-mga-yet-again/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Noorudinhttps://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Amrohi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=arabic

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/06/hani-tahir-exposes-ahmadiyya-lies-again-the-arabic-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/was-noorudin-the-ghost-writer-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mgas-ghost-writers-argue-on-the-prophethood-of-mga-in-1900/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-muqamat-al-hariri/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/02/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-was-a-student-of-noorudin-pre-1891/

Tags

 

#Jalsawc #wcjs2018 #ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

 

Was Noorudin the Ghost-writer of MGA?

This is a quick essay and referencing post that I wanted to create.  Here is the reference:

“””Many people used to say that his holiness, the Promised Messiah, did not know even Urdu and someone else wrote the books which were attributed to him. The others held even a worse opinion about his writing potentialities. They believed that Shaikh Nuruddin was the person who wrote the books for him.” (Al-Fadl, February 5, 1929; by Mirza Mahmood Ahmad Qadiani)””””

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=right+arm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/lecture-ludhiana-was-not-a-lecture-it-was-a-riot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/12/the-story-of-how-mga-hurt-his-right-arm-and-was-disabled-since-his-youth/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-needed-toilet-attendants-his-entire-life/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/mga-used-scribes/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=ghost+writers

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/04/ahmadiyya-mullahs-have-been-caught-editing-the-writings-of-mga-yet-again/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Noorudin

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Amrohi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=arabic

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/06/hani-tahir-exposes-ahmadiyya-lies-again-the-arabic-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/was-noorudin-the-ghost-writer-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mgas-ghost-writers-argue-on-the-prophethood-of-mga-in-1900/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-muqamat-al-hariri/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/02/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-was-a-student-of-noorudin-pre-1891/

Tags

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Up ↑