Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Month

December 2017

Ahmad, the Messenger of the Latter days: By Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (1924)


Intro

We have found another rare book by Ahmadiyya leadership, its from 1924 and gives us many clues as to the life of MGA.

MGA’s family only moved back to Qadian after Ranjit Singh died, i.e., 1839
Ahmadiyya leadership has lied for years and years about the birth-year of MGA.  MGA himself told the world that he was born in 1839 or 1840, he wrote that in 1897, in his famous Kitab ul Barriya.  In this book, Mahmud Ahmad is trying his best to argue that MGA was born in 1836 or 1837, however, he quotes Lepel Griffin’s famous, “Punjab Chiefs”, wherein Mr. Griffin tells us that it was only after Ranjit Singh Died in June of 1839 that MGA’s family was allowed to move back to Qadian.  Mahmud Ahmad, the Ahmadi Khalifa, thus disproves himself.  Mahmud Ahmad seems to quote the 1909 edition of Lepel’s Punjab Chiefs, which has a different name, “Revised as Chiefs and Families of note in the Punjab (1909)”.

Mahmud Ahmad’s quotation
(See page 6) “Mention must be made of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, younger son of Ghulam Murtaza and founder of the remarkable religious movement known as the Ahmadiyya.  Born in 1839, he received an excellent education, and in 1891 he declared himself to be the Promised Mahdi or Messiah of the Muslim faith…..”

Mahmud Ahmad lies about MGA being carried by Train to Batala
I have already covered this issue here: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/02/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-died-of-an-opium-overdose-1908/.

Mahmud Ahmad doesnt mention anything about a death certificate at all.  That story seems to have began its circulation after 1924, as Ahmadis were covering up the indiscretions of  MGA.  The truth is….MGA’s body was carried from Lahore all the way to Qadian (see Muhammad Ali, 1916).

The PDF book
Ahmad The Messenger of the Latter Days

Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya vol.1 and 2—A full review

Intro
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad announced in 1879 that he was raising money for his arguments in support of Islam (see Dard, it is unclear where these were published, by what newspaper?). The book was finally published some time in 1880. Ahmadiyya leadership lies and claims that the book was already fully written and MGA only published a portion of it. The reality is that MGA had ghost-writers at this time, he thus dictated the contents of this book and seems to have had help from friends like Sufi Ahmad Jan and a few others. In the BA2, MGA quoted 18:109 (18:110, in the Ahmadi quran)(see also 31:27, the verse is identical) and says that “”Say, ‘If the ocean became ink for the words of my Lord, surely, the ocean would be exhausted before the words of my Lord came to an end, even though We brought the like thereof as further help.’. Thus, MGA was arguing from the Quran that Allah will continue talking (prophethood) to Muslims until the Day of Judgement and this Islam was superior to all other religions. In volume 3, MGA quoted 9:32, and essentially was claiming prophethood for himself.

There were many announcements about this book. In 1908, Miraj-ud Din Umar wrote a short biography about MGA in this book also, which was removed in future editions. Mi‘raj-ud-Din’s biography (1908) is also quoted by Walter in the 1916-1918 era as he wrote his lengthy review of MGA’s and his Ahmadiyya Movement (see pages 14-15).

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the classic punjabi fraudster. He had promised the Muslims of the Indian sub-continent 300 arguments in favor of Islam in roughly 1878. However, he only delivered one argument, and that argument was his claim of prophethood, which immediately got him declared as a Kafir by the ulema in India.

The Ahl-e-Hadith Muslims of North India tore up the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya and sent it back to Qadian in that state (1884-1885 era), these were the Muslims who had invested heavily in the publishing of the Barahin. MGA stopped at one argument and even that was incomplete, see the quote in the below. In 1886, in Surmah Chashmay Arya, MGA again asserted that the Barahin was ready to be published, however, funds were needed. For the next 20 years, this promise remained broken. In 1906-1907 (See Haqiqatul Wahy), MGA and his team of writers of spoke about the creation of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya Vol. 5. However, it was not completed or published in MGA’s life.

After MGA died, Noorudin (who was the main ghost writer) wrote BA-5 and had it published in October of 1908, he added that MGA promised 50 volumes and 50=5. MGA didn’t write this at all. In fact, BA-5 isn’t even a continuation of BA 1-4, it is altogether a new book and in-fact contains 3-4 small booklets which were mashed together to create BA-5, one of which is Nusrat ul Haq and at least 40 pages of nonsensical poetry.

Continue reading “Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya vol.1 and 2—A full review”

Ahmadiyya vs. Sikhism–1927 edition

Intro
As we all know, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his team criticized our fellow Punjabi brothers, the Sikhs.  MGA and his team wrote that the founder of Sikhim was actually a Muslim and etc etc etc.  They went so far as to have visited the place that stored Baba Nanak’s cholla, aka tunic.  Nonetheless, we have acquired a book by an Ex-Sikh, who converted to Ahmadiyya in MGA’s lifetime and seems to have written books vs. Sikhism, very dirty books indeed.

The PDF
Baba Nanak Ka Mazhab

Summary
Mirza Ghulam ahmad was trying his utmost best to prove that Bawa Nanak was muslim, so some people from sikh sect joined Ahmadiyya religion. People who became ahmadi, Mirza ghulam ahmad asked them to write books, in favour of ahmadi religion. One of those person was Suran Singh who took the muslim name of Sheikh Muhammed Yousaf, Editor of Noor and was in a position of authority. so I read in Alfazal of 7 October of 1927 that, the book written by suran singh/mohammed yousaf was “bawa nanak ka mazhab”. The book was confiscated by the order of Mirza Mahmood. Since i read that i was on the look out for that book, although Mirza Mahmood made sure that all the copies were destroyed. I was lucky to acquire it, so obviously “all” copies were not destroyed. I am posting to share it with everyone who can read urdu and help is required to establish the reason, what was in it that made Mirza mahmood confiscate it.

From Alfazal I translate: By confiscating the book “baba nanak ka mazhab” hazrat Imam jamaat ahmadia has set such an example, does not exist in current religious world but also example/deed like this is impossible to find in previous centuries. It was expected that people who are slandering/using bad language against each other, would benefit from it. We are very surprised to read in a sikh Akhbar “Sher E Punjab” of 25 September, which has seen this action (confiscation of the book) with a very different angle. Sher e Punjab writes ” realising and finding the contents of this book illegal and extremely Infuriating and wrathful, every copy of this book is being searched and destroyed in qadian,so that police is unable to find its existence. Although, to start of with, hundreds of copies, were distributed to leaders of ahmadiyya jamaat

Some additional books

Who is Sufi Ahmad Jan of Ludhiana? AKA Munshi Ahmad Jan

Intro
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had a few disciples even before he made his claims, or before he published Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 1. One such disciple was Munshi Ahmad Jan of Ludhiana, who is also called Sufi Ahmad Jan of Ludhiana at different places in Ahmadiyya literature. Per the Al-Fazl of 1st July 1950, Mufti Muhammad Sadiq goes on record and tells the world that Sufi Ahmad Jan had in-fact done a bait with MGA even before he went for Hajj (roughly 1880). However, the Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya was a colossal failure, and MGA only boasted about his revelations and how he resembled Esa (as) in many ways, they also accused MGA of claiming prophethood (the Ahl-e-Hadith) and called him Kafir. Muslims of India had given MGA lots of money, since they expected MGA to write 300 arguments in support of Islam. By the publishing of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 4, MGA was considered a Kafir by most Muslims (Ahl-e-Hadith mostly) in India. Sufi Ahmad Jan died in 1888 or a few years before that, thus, he was never able to get into the bai’t of MGA, however, he had instructed his children to accept MGA’s claims as soon as he made them. This proves that MGA was planning to make his claims as early as 1879. Mirza Masroor Ahmad tells us that he begged MGA to claim to be the “Messiah”, See Mirza Masroor Ahmad’s Khutbah Juma, of 4-17-2005 at the mark. It should also be noted that during the Bait ceremony of 1889, MGA was staying at the house of the same Sufi Ahmad Jan (see Dard page 203). Noorudin was married to Sufi Ahmad Jan’s daughter (Sughra Begum, she was most likely 12-14 years old)(see “Maulvi Noorudin” by Zafrullah Khan, online english edition of 2006, pages 82-83)(see also, “Hakeem Noorudin” by Syed Hasanat Ahmad, online english 2003 edition, pages 3, 41 and 73) in the same month of March 1889, they seem to have held this wedding on 7 March 1889 and the  bait ceremony a few weeks later. Sughra begum must have thus moved to Jammu with Noorudin, its unknown. Noorudin moved to Qadian from Jammu in the winter of 1892 (Sep-Oct). Sughra Begum thus lived in the same house as MGA’s wife and Maulvi Abdul Karim’s wife. His eldest son was Hajji Iftikhar Ahmad, it is written as Sahibzada Iftikhar Ahmad, Ludhianvi (with wife), Qadiani (See Dard, page 845, this is the famous list of the first 313 Ahmadi, he is #26), MGA mentioned him in his book Izala Auham. His younger son was Pir Manzur Muhammad, he gets famous in the world of Ahmadiyya in 1906, when MGA fails another prophecy. His name is written as Sahibzada Manzur Muhammad (with wife), Qadiani (See Dard, page 845, this is the famous list of the first 313 Ahmadi, he is #27).
Continue reading “Who is Sufi Ahmad Jan of Ludhiana? AKA Munshi Ahmad Jan”

Friedman errs on Ishaat us Sunnah volume numbers and the corresponding year


Intro

Ahmadiyya leadership is fond editing the writings of MGA. My team and I have found a interesting situation wherein it seems that MGA made his claims in December of 1889. However, after researching this further, Friedman was incorrect. Ishaat us Sunnah vol.12 corresponds to December 1890, and vol.13 corresponds to January of 1891. This can be figured out by reading the essay of January 1891, (((13(1890): 1-100, under the titles, “A Discourse with the imaginary Messiah Mirza of Qadiyan”  (Khayali masih Mirza Qadiyani se guft o gu)))), which refers to 1891. Furthermore, the ROR of June 1908, which was in memorial to MGA, tells us that MGA found fault with the physical ascension and descent narrative in Islam in 1889, after he accepted Bait (see page 228).

Friedman quotes the Ishaat us Sunnah of 1889 and 1890 vs. MGA
On page 6, of the 2003 edition, in a footnote, Friedman quotes as follows:

“Isha’at al-Sunnah 12 (1889): 353-388; 13(1890): 1-100, under the titles, “A Discourse with the imaginary Messiah Mirza of Qadiyan”  (Khayali masih Mirza Qadiyani se guft o gu) and “A discourse with the fictitious apostle” (farazi hawari se guft o gu).  An account of the debate itself was published in the same journal, 13(1890): 115–326.”

Some additional data
Remember, MGA was claiming to be “like the messiah” in this era. The Maseel e Maseeh claim.

The PDF file of Ishaat us Sunnah
FB Masih Maoud Claim

What’s in this PDF?
Ishaat Sunna No. 12 (december) vol 12, printed in 1890, a discourse with the fictitious apostle, also i have uploaded related pages from Fateh Islam, which were mentioned in Ishaat Sunna, so at least Urdu readers can read the letters exchanged between Mohammad Hussain batalwi and Mirza Ghulam ahmad of qadian. I have also circled the printing of first edition fateh Islam as 1308 Hijri. Please see the letter in Ashaat sunna where MGA says “yes” to batalwi query.

Another piece of evidence that proves that Izala Auham was published at least before Feb 10th, 1891
In “Life of Ahmad” by Dard, Dard quotes (247-248) a letter between MGA and Batalvi wherein Batalvi claims to have already read Izala Auham.

‘””Copies of the letters which have passed between myself and Mirza Sahib have been sent to you so that you may have a say in the matter if you are so inclined. I am determined to refute the claim of Mirza Sahib. You always talk about him with others, but when I said something to you about Mirza Sahib you were displeased. If it is the same with you still, then I have nothing to suggest; but if you have the courage of hearing and saying anything about him, then it would be better if you could come to Lahore and have a talk. Taudih-e-Maram and Izala’-e-Auham cannot prove his claim. (The writer of this letter had not yet seen Fath-e- Islam and Taudih-e-Maram; Izala’-e-Auham had not even been published yet—Author). If you can do something, you should, there is time yet.’”””

Links and Related Essays

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/2018/03/06/nusrat-jehan-begum-and-other-women-didnt-get-into-to-mgas-bait-in-1889-and-after-were-they-illiterate/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/17/ahmadiyya-leadership-lied-about-the-first-bait-ceremony-in-1889/

Click to access reviewreligionsenglish1908.pdf

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

 

Some rare books from the 1901-1902 era, which refute MGA’s claim to prophethood


Intro

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed prophethood in Nov. of 1901.  Through an announcement, “A correction of an error”, aka “Aik Ghalti Ka Izala”.  Ironically, he had denied prophethood for 20 years.  The 2nd Khalifa, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad told us that MGA discovered a new type of prophethood in 1901, a prophethood that had never existed in the Quran, nor had it ever been given to any prophet.  It was the idea of the “ummati-nabi”.  All 124,000 prophets sent by Allah were NOT ummati, they were independent.  When the Quran and hadith talked about prophethood, this was the type of prophethood that it referred to, “independent-prophets”, even Aaron (as) was an independent prophet.  My team and I have additional information that MGA did claim prophethood in 1901, (contrary to what the Lahori-Ahmadis believe), and I have now posted the new research find in the below.

A Muslim scholar Qazi Muhammad Sulaiman, special Megistrate, Patiala wrote these
Mirza sahib aur nabwat Ka Ishtihar

Mirza Sahib Aour Nabwuat Per Mohakma

 

“”Nabi Ullah Ka Zahoor”” aka “”The Appearance of the prophet of allah”” 1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din—the full book

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.  Mahmud Ahmad quotes this book in his 1922 book, “The truth about the split” and Muhammad Ali has quoted him quite a bit also in his books vs. Mahmud Ahmad, which was published in 1924, ‘Haqiqatul Ikhtalaf” or “Reality of our disagreement”.  Zahir ul Din, or also spelled as Zaheer ud Din was a clerk in the Canal Department in Gujranwala (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  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).  Zahir ud Deen also wrote two other books which were mentioned by the main Ahmadiyya newspaper, Al-Hakam, they are Vedon Ka Fatur and Radd-e-Chakrhalawi, the Al-Hakam praised these books in their official capacity (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

The full book
Nabee Allah Kaa Zahoor Mukamal

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
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/04/nabi-ullah-ka-zahoor-aka-appearance-of-the-prophet-of-allah-1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din/

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/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/correctionerrorekghaltikaizala/importantdocumentscorrectionerror.shtml

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

Mirza Nasir Ahmad discussed his father’s and uncle’s statements on Takfir in 1974 at the National Assembly hearings

Intro
Ahmadis are trained to lie about everything. I mean everything. Mirza Nasir Ahmad was forced to talk about his father’s, grandfathers and uncles statements wherein they did Takfir on the whole Muslim community. This happened in 1974, at the NA hearings on Ahmadiyya.  In the below, my team and I have translated and collected an interesting exchange wherein Mirza Nasir Ahmad goes to call all Muslims as Kafirs.
Continue reading “Mirza Nasir Ahmad discussed his father’s and uncle’s statements on Takfir in 1974 at the National Assembly hearings”

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad liked his opium sprinkled into his Lassi


Intro

In this specific instance of MGA taking opium, MGA and his team developed Tiryaq-e-Ilahi 1898). This was the super-opium medicine that MGA and his team developed and sold as a cure for bubonic plague, and they did this in typical overconfident-villager-style. A few years later, the British govt. was forced to ban this medicine altogether. MGA even wrote his silly book, “Noah’s Ark in this era, MGA and team were really selling religion, in the name of “freedom-of-religion”, and with a team of writers, speakers and rogues.  Further, Ahmadiyya leadership seems to have ordered an “edit” in this case, in the below, I will show how the 2004 Tadhkirah differs from the 2009 Tadhkirah. They seem to have added Maulvi Abdul Karim’s name. One more thing, this was recorded from the register of Register Riwayat-e-Sahabah, vol. 9, p. 20, how could this have been wrong? And what error was noticed in 2009? In reality, there was no error…its a forced edit-job by Masroor and his goons.
Continue reading “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad liked his opium sprinkled into his Lassi”

Up ↑