Intro
Ahmadis will get on social media and present many ready-made arguments for the Mirza family. However, most of them have never researched anything themselves. This entire entry was taken from my friend, Waqar Akber Cheema’s essay on the matter.
Continue reading “Tawaffa in Bukhari—answering Ahmadis”
Intro
In 1911, an Ahmadi, Muhammad Zahir Al-Din wrote a book wherein he discussed the prophethood of MGA and its implications of Kufr upon the Muslims of the world. The book was named “Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor” aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” (April of 1911).
The 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad quotes this book in his 1921 book, “The truth about the split” and Muhammad Ali has quoted him quite a bit also in his books vs. Mahmud Ahmad. Per Muhammad Ali, this book seems to have been written in late 1910, and published in April of 1911 (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). In this book, which runs to 120 pages, Zahir ud Din or Zahir Al-Din argued that MGA was a real prophet of Allah and thus Muhammad (Saw) was not the LAST prophet and additional prophets will continue to appear. However, he was kicked out of Ahmadiyya in June of 1912, about 14 months later and after some confusing correspondence.
However, by August 1912, Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). The second part of the book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).
Yohanan Friedman direct quoted this book
Friedman’s book on Ahmadiyya was published in 1985, it was published again in 1989 and then 2003. He seems to have had access to Zahir Al-Din’s book in 1985.
The Direct Quotes
1. “His messengers (rusuluhu) is encountered in the Quran or in a declaration of faith, Ghulam Ahmad must be considered one of them. Belief in him is a part of Islamic faith and is, as such, necessary for the attainment of salvation (madar-i najat)” (“Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor” aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” (1911) by Muhammad Zahir al-Din, see pages 8, 71 and 99)(From Friedman, page 152, 2003 edition).
2. “If the Promised Messiah is rejected or considered in his claim (heaven forbid!) a liar and a cheat—the inevitable result will be the loss of prophethood of Muhammad….as well” (“Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor”: aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” (1911) by Muhammad Zahir al-Din, see page 80)(From Friedman, page 152, 2003 edition).
TIMELINE INFO
APRIL-1911
Zahir ud Deen’s book, “Nabi Ullah Ka Zahur” is published (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). In fact, the Ahmadiyya newspaper, the Al-Badr published an advertisement for it’s sales (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
OCT–1911
The urdu version of the Review of Religions praised Zahir ud Deen’s book, in fact they even called him as a Munshi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
JAN–1912
Noorudin writes a generalized announcement in the Al-Badr newspaper that some men are giving rise to dissensions. This seems to be about Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri and Maulvi Yar Muhammad(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).
JUNE–1912
Per Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad in June of 1912, Zahir Al-Din wrote a letter to the Khalifa asking whom the Jan-1912 announcement was about. Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad reports that the Khalifa clarified that Zahir al-Din was good, the announcement was about Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
JULY–1912
On July 11th, 1912, per Muhammad Ali, an announcement was published in the Al-Badr wherein Zahir Al- Din was officially ex-communicated by Noorudin (the Khalifa)(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). The Khalifa called him Zaheer ud Din Arupi. Arupi is probably the name of the city or village that he was from in India (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
AUGUST–1912
Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).
OCTOBER–1912
In the issue of 14 OCT–1912, Zahir ud Din gets published in the Al-Badr in contempt vs. the Khalifa. He impertinently writes that he disagrees with the Khalifa on many beliefs (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
APRIL–1913
The second part of his book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition). the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad agrees that this book was published in April of 1913(See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
MAY-JUNE 1913
A newer Ahmadiyya newspaper, “Al-Haq” tells Ahmadi’s to leave Zahir ud Din, Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri alone. The editor of this newspaper is Mir Qasim Ali. However, there was no official letter or announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa, most likely because the Khalifa was out of commission based on his health. Nevertheless, there is no announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa.
MARCH–1914
Zahir ud din was made a member of the advisory committee, which was formed at Lahore after the death of Noorudin (vide the Paigham-e-Sulh of 24th March, 1914) and his articles against the family Khilafat found a place in Maulawi Muhammad Ali’s magazine called the Al-Mahdi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
1918
Zahir ud Din was present at the Lahori-Ahmadi Jalsa of this year and was even allowed to speak (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).
______________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essays
http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/correctionerrorekghaltikaizala/importantdocumentscorrectionerror.shtml
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/
nabee-allah-kaa-zahoor-mukamal.pdf
Click to access nabee-allah-kaa-zahoor-mukamal.pdf
Who is Maulvi Muhammad Ali in the history of Ahmadiyya? – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian
Intro
In July-1908, after MGA died, (See Malfuzat-10, online English edition, pages 538-544)(Via (Badr, vol. 7, no. 25, p. 9, 25 June 1908 or Al-Hakam, vol. 12, no. 41, p. 2–13, dated 14 July 1908). Ahmadiyya editor’s attributed this fabricated tradition to Ad-Durr al-Manthur fi Tafsir al-Ma’thur, by Jalal-ud-Din Suyuti, Part 5, p. 386, Darul-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah (read about Ahmadiyya and Suyuti herein)(See also Farhan).
After 1915, the 2nd Khalifa of Ahmadiyya began creating false arguments in his attempt to substantiate the prophethood of his father, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (the caliph), twisted many writings of Ibn Arabi and many other hadith, as he lied about the possibility of additional prophets. Mahmud Ahmad mentioned this false argument in 1915 and then later in 1922-ish.
In 1915, Muhammad Ali refuted all of the new arguments of Mahmud Ahmad in “Prophethood in Islam” are some good ones that prove the lies of Mahmud Ahmad.
In 1922, Maulvi Muhammad Ali wrote “Last Prophet” (See page 54) and discussed this alleged hadith of Aisha (ra).
In 1924-1926, the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad presented this hadith in his book, “Invitation to Ahmadiyya” (See page 51).
It is as follows:
٤ّجخ ػ ػبئ خْ هٙ ٢ الله ػ ٜ٘ب هب ذُ: هٞ ُٞا فبر ا جُ٘ ٤٤ ،ٖ ٝلا روٞ ُٞا لا جٗ ٢ ثؼلٙ ٝأفوط اث أث ٢
It is reported by Ibn Abi Shaybah that A‟isha, may Allah be pleased with her, said, “Say [he is] the seal of the prophets, but do not say no prophet after him.”
In Nov-2025, At 1:42:30, Maulvi Razi says that the argument “La Nabiya Badee” is wrong as commentary of “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (See the clip on TikTok and Twitter). Razi alleges that NO sahabi challenged Aiesha (ra) on this. Razi alleges Ijma-sukhuti (consensus via silence). However, in “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala”, MGA specifically used the argument of “La Nabiya Badee” (see page 3).
In 2026 (Apr), Mirza Masroor Ahmad mentioned this alleged hadith of Aisha (ra)(38:35 time stamp).
Continue reading “Ahmadis lie about the Aisha hadith, in terms of the end of prophets”
Intro
Per Maulvi Muhammad Ali and his book, “The Last Prophet” (1922), the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad commented on “Khatam” in Gurdaspur court (1922)(see pages 14-15)(via the Al-Fazl, June-26 and 29-1922):
“‘The meaning of this term has always been rendered thus, we do not give any interpretation to it; on the other hand, these are the meanings given to it in the lexicons. Some people also render Khataman Nabiyeen as the last of the prophets, however, in the dictionary, “last prophet” is not the meaning of this term”.
In this book, Maulvi Muhammad Ali proved that all Arabic lexicons/dictionaries defined Khatam as Last. Maulvi Muhammad Ali also showed how the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad accepted the lexicologist wrote LAST.
Continue reading “Khataam in the Arabic Lexicons”
Intro
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his team lied about Jesus in India. Furthermore, they lied about the tomb of Yuz Asaf and falsely called it the tomb of Esa (As). MGA and his team were fond of plagiarism, they stole Sir Syed’s belief that Esa (as) was dead and the would never return and twisted it to make MGA as Esa (as) bin Maryam in 1890-1891. MGA and his team them began to look for grave sites, they proposed 3 different grave sites:
1) Al-Khaleeli (Galilee) (Izala-e-Auham, Roohani Khazain vol.3 p.353-354)—–1890-1891
2) Al-Quds (Jerusalem) (Atmam-ul-Hujjat, Roohani Khazain vol.8 p.299)—–1893
3) Tarabulus, Lebanon (Tripoli) (Atmam E Hujat, Page: 18-19, Roohani Khazain vol.8 p.296-297)—1893
The scan work
“This has to be admitted that Hazrat Eisa is also dead, and interestingly enough the grave of Hazrat Eisa is also in Syria and for further clarity, in the footnote, I include the testimony of My brother, My lover in Allah, Molvi Mohammad Al-Saeedi Trablisi. He is a resident of Tripoli, in the Country of Syria and in his area is the Grave of Hazrat Essa AS (Jesus). If you say that Grave is a fake, then you must provide the proof of this fake, and prove that when this fraud took place. And in this event we will not be sure about the graves of any prophet and trust will be lost, and we will have to say that all those burial places are fake.” (Atmam E Hujat, Page: 18-19, Roohani Khazain vol.8 p.296-297)
By 2020, we have figured out exactly how MGA and his team of writers/reciters fabricated this entire story. As we all know, MGA and his team of writers/editors lied about almost everything they did. We have fodn a huge case of academic dishonesty in terms of MGA’s quotations to a persian book, “Ayn-ul-Hayat”. MGA and his team first quoted this book in 1898, in a book called ‘Raz-e-Haqiqat”, which was translated and published into english in 2016, see page 24. However, they were academically dishonest, they purposely didn’t mention that Yuz Asaf had a father and many other things, an Ex-Ahmadi, Shams ud Din, recently got a hold of Ayn ul Hayat and posted his results in a video, make sure you watch Part-2 also, these are in Urdu and watch part 3. We have also found “Ayn ul Hayat” and have posted the PDF’s in the below. This book proves that MGA totally lied. Shams ud Din found the book “Rahul ul Hayat” by Allama Muhammad Bakir, there is an urdu translation called, “Ainul Hayat”. On page 361, it is written that Yuz Asaf had a father in Kashmir. This immediately cancelled Yuz Asaf becoming Esa (As), since Esa (as) historically never had a father. Yuz Asaf was the son of a King and was able to live a life of excess. MGA never mentioned any of this. Yuz Asaf’s dad was a drunkard, and even prayed to idols. It is also important to read about Maulvi Shaikh Abdullah Wakeel’s story about Yuz Asaf.
Continue reading “Lahori-Ahmadis cast doubt on the Jesus in India theory”
Intro
Mufti Muhammad Sadiq was another ghost-writer for MGA. He grew up in Bhera and was a student of Noorudin, Noorudin gave him a job in Jammu, he also gave Abdul Kareem a job.
This trend would continue, as Noorudin began working for MGA, he also brought his team of writers and speech-makers, aka Abdul Kareem and Mufti Muhammad Sadiq and many others.
Here are some names of the main ghost writing team, Maulvi Abdul Karim, Maulvi Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, Maulvi Sher Ali, Hafiz Raushan Ali and Hakim Fazl Din of Bhera. Some other people who came independently, yet still joined MGA’s team was Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi, who was also a member of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, in fact, uptil his job with MGA, he worked for the founder of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, Syed Nazeer Husain from Delhi and Siddiq Hasan Khan of Bhopal. Ahsan Amrohi was an imam under Siddiq Hassan Khan until he died in roughly 1890, he was immediately hired by MGA. Maulvi Muhammad Ali was another, however, he came via Khwaja Kamaluddin and the prominent Ahmadi’s of Lahore.
Continue reading “Mufti Muhammad Sadiq was a student of Noorudin, pre-1891”
Intro
In the last few months of his life, in an attempt to cover up his own errors, MGA and his team blamed the Quran for also being grammatically incorrect. MGA had published many arabic, english, hebrew and urdu revelations that had grammatical errors from 1880–1907. This is the cover-up job. Here is a really good video on Grammar in the QURAN by Noman Ali Khan. Also check out Hani Tahir’s list of grammatical errors by MGA herein.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________The Quote
al-Badr, vol. 7, no. 16, April 23, 1908, p. 8 and al-Hakam, vol. 12, no. 27, April 14, 1908. p. 3
Also see Tadkirah, 2009 edition, page 1000
“”””The Promised Messiah said: On surface there seems to be a grammatical flaw in this revelation. However, Allah the Almighty is not bound by the grammar, of which there are examples in the Holy Qur’an also.””””””””””
The scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism