Batalvi and MGA were close friends up to 1891, they were both the same age and had shared some of the same teachers, further, MGA’s father knew Batalvi’s father and etc etc etc. In 1884, A fatwa of Kufr landed on MGA’s head from many Muslims in India, this was in response to MGA’s Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya Vol. 4 which was published in the early summer of 1884. MGA had went the Sir Syed-route and denied all of the miracles of Esa (As), however MGA was a a Ahle-Hadith (aka Wahabbi) affiliated person, in fact, his friend Noorudin was also Ahle-Hadith, as was his future wife, Nusrat Jehan and her father and Batalvi, who helped MGA arrange this marriage.
See Upal(2017), page 125 and onward
“””In our opinion, it is in this time and in the present circumstances, a book the like of which has not been written up to this time in Islam, and nothing can be said about the future; Allah may bring about another affair after this. Its author, too, has proved himself firm in helping the cause of Islam, with his property, his person, his pen, his tongue and his personal religious experience, to such an extent that it is rarely seen among Muslims who have gone before. If someone thinks that my words are Asian exaggeration then show me at least one such book that confronts opponents of Islam especially the Arya Samaj with such gusto and enthusiasm. And point out such supporters of Islam who have taken upon themselves to help the cause of Islam with their property, their person, their treasure, their pen, and their tongue. And who has successfully challenged, with all his manly courage, opponents of Islam and deniers of revelation that if they doubt divine revelation to visit him and experience, observe and taste it. (Batalavi, 1884: 169-170).”””
“””Perhaps some of our critics will place me in the same category as the author of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya and slap the fatwa of kufr on me as well. They may say that I have raised the author of Braheen to the level of prophet Muhammad and I have declared his revelations to be innocent similar to the revelations of the Prophet but I am not afraid of their fatwa of kufr… (Batalavi, 1884: 284)”””
:”””What does he [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] conclude from his revelations and miracles? Does he use them to prove his prophethood or the prophethood of Muhammad? What religion does he invite people (including many top padres, pundits, Brahmo Arya rajas, and sardars of other religions) with such bravery and boldness? Is it the Islamic religion or Ahmadi religion or Mirzai religion? Unless you are a person whose heart has been darkened with prejudice, these arguments and reasoning would have convinced you that he absolutely makes no claim whatsoever to his own prophethood [emphasis in the original]. The true purpose of all of each and every one of his claims is the proof of prophethood of Muhammad. (Batalavi, 1884: 278-279).