March 2018

Ahmadi’s follow 19th century science, they are stuck, Physics of the Night Journey of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. the Multi-verse

MGA and his team stole 90% of their theories from Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. Noorudin spear-headed this massive project. MGA and his team denied the physicality of the Miraaj in 1891, with their first book, Izala Auham. They were trying to prove that humans were not allowed to ever leave the Earth, and thus, the physical return of anyone was impossible. MGA and his team went on to argue that heaven wasn’t a physical location and thus many verses of the Quran couldn’t refer to Esa (As) ascending into heaven. Well, 21st century science, and stephen hawkins and many other scientists have proposed the idea of the multi-verse. Ahmadiyya is thus disproven.

Physics of the Night Journey of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. the Multi-verse

Links and Related Essays

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid
#Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

The wife of Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti, Zainab Bibi

Ahmadiyya editors are always busy trying to hide all of the controversial data in terms of Ahmadiyya history.  In this edition of Ahmadiyya editors tampering with the texts, we are highlighting the wife of Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti, her name was Zainab Bibi.  She isn’t talked about much in Ahmadiyya literature, most likely because she was very young (11–14) when she was betrothed to Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti.  This wife seems to have been given to him after he joined with MGA and moved to Qadian.  We also have to assume that she lived with MGA and his family in there house, and seems to have slept with Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti in his room, on the 3rd floor of MGA’s giant house.  Why do we assume these things about the wife of
Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti?  The 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah (page 780) tells us as follows:

“””The Promised Messiah[as] said: The dream in which I had seen that there were two other graves next to the grave of Maulavi ‘Abdul-Karim has been fulfilled. One of them is the grave of Ilahi Bakhsh of Maler Kotla and the other is of the deceased Chaudhry Sahib.”””
[Badr, vol. 2, no. 23, June 7, 1906, p. 4]

Footnote by Jalal ud Din Shams—
That is, Chaudhry Allah Dad, Head Clerk, office of the Review of Religions, Qadian. The dream mentions three graves. The third grave is now there. It is of the wife of Hadrat Maulavi ‘Abdul-Karim, Zainab Bibi. [Jalal-ud-Din Shams]

Some Conclusions
This footnote by Jalal ud Din Shams is from the 1956 edition of Tadhkirah, as stated in the 2009 online edition itself.  Based on this, we have to assume that the wife of Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti, Zainab Bibi, died in at least 1956, which covers 77 years after 1891, when Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti moved into MGA’s house.  If Zainab Bibi was 13-14 in 1891, that makes her 90-91 in roughly 1945.

Who was Zainab Bibi?
Per Jalal ud Din Shams, Shadi Khan was the father of Zainab (see the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, page 754, footnote).

Who was Shadi Khan?
There are 2 Shadi’s Khan listed in Ahmadiyya history, one was a wood-worker from Sialkot and very poor.  He was also listed under the 313 companions of 1896.  There is another Malik Shadi Khan.

Links and Related Essays

Click to access hope200802_abdulkarimsialkotipromisedmessiah.pdf

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #drsalam #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Sialkot #Mosqueattack




Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was getting lots of strange revelations in 1883

MGA lied about his revelations, these were the side effects of opium use.  In this entry, we have found some interesting data on this very topic.

The data

Maktoobat e Ahmadiyya. Volume No 1. Page No 584.
Maktoob No 36.
My dear brother Mir Abbas Ali Shah Sahib.
Assalam o Alaikum.
There have been few revelations in english language in this weak. The meaning of these revelations were known from a Hindoo boy but are not reliable. Few of them were revealed as translation from Allah while rest are in Hebrew language. The meaning and its verification of all of them need to be done so that these are published as revelations. You may search the meaning and inform to me in a legible writing as soon as possible. The revelations are as under:-

(1) Paration, Omer, Haratoos, Baplatoos, meaning Palatoos or Partoos is the word which could not be understood properly due to the speedy series of revelations. Omer is arabic word but meaning of paration, platoos or paratoos required to be known and as to which language words are these?

(2) Meaning of Two more words ie “HUWA SHANA NAASA” are not known as to which language these words belong to?
And english language words are but first there is an arabic sentence ie “

You must do what I told you.
Tmko wo karna chahoyye jo mein ne farmaya hai
This urdu text is also a revelation.
After this there is another revelation in english translation of which has been done by a hindu boy.
Some revelations may have little out of sequence these are:-

Though all men should be angry with you but god is with you.
He shall help you.
Words of god not can exchange.
I shall help you. You have to go Amritsar.
He hil this in zila peshawar.
Plz send reply soon. Convey my salam to Molvi Abdul Qadir sahib and Khawaja Ali sb
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani
12 December 1883.

The scans

The Ahmadiyya fatwa (opinion) on saying prayers behind a non-Ahmadi imam


Some quotes
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib was as much a prophet as was Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa(pbuh) in the nature of prophethood. So it is not permissible to pray for the salvation of a person who goes out of the circle of Islam by his denial of Mirza Sahib.”  (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Vol. 9, No. 30, Oct. 17, 1921)

“Chirag Din is a student of the Taleem-ul-Islam High School, Quadian. Recently, when he returned to his native place, Sialkot, his mother died. She had loved her son dearly, but since she was not an Ahmadi, Chirag Din did not attend her funeral prayers. He thus clung to his faith and principle. Well-done; Proud son of Taleem-ul-Islam. The movement (Quadianism) needs worthy sons like you. Well done.” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Vol. 2, No. 129, Apr. 20, 1915)

“I believe that those who follow the lead of non-Ahmadis (Muslims) in prayers, it is not permissible to hold their funeral service. Similarly, those who have given their daughters in marriage to non-Quadianis and died without repenting, it is not permissible to hold their funeral service.”(Al-Fazl, Qadian, Vol. 13, No. 102, Apr. 13, 1926)

“If one asks ‘Is it permitted for us that funeral prayers be said for the children of Muslims’, I would say: No – just as it is forbidden to pray for Hindu and Sikh children as the religion must follow his parents.” (Anwar-e-Khilafat, Page 93)

‘To the question “What must be done to a Muslim who dies in a place where Qadianism is unknown? Should formal prayers be said?” I would say: “We do not know his full particulars but it would appear from his deed that he died in a state in which he was ignorant of Rasul of ALlah and His Nabi. Therefore, no prayers should be said for him. Nor would we say funeral prayers for a Qadiani who has followed a non-Qadiani in prayer or one who mixes with them by this action, he has left the pale of Qadianism.” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, May 6, 1915, Bashir-ul-Din Mahmood Qadiani)

“Fadl Ahmad, the eldest son of promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam Qadiani) from his first wife, died, but he (Mirza Ghulam) did not say funeral prayers over his son as he (Fadl Ahmad) did not believe in his prophethood or in his prophecies, although he was obedient to his father in matters concerning day to day life.” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Dec. 15, 1931 – Jul. 7 1943, Page 3)

“Hazrat Mirza Ghulam did not attend the funeral service of his son (late Mr. Fazl Ahmad) only because he was a non-Ahmadi (Muslim).” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Vol. 9, No. 47, Nov. 15, 1921)

“Our prayer has been channeled and we are not allowed to marry our daughters to them. To say funeral prayers for them is also prohibited. What else remains that we share with them? Relations are of two kinds: religious and worldly. The former comprises prayers and the latter relates to marriage. Thus, following non-believers in prayer is forbidden and it is also forbidden that you make them your sons-in-law. Should you then ask: ‘then why do we greet them?’ Then I would say that even the Prophet(pbuh) used to greet the Jews. In short, our Imam (Mirza Ghulam) has declared has declared us a distinct sect in every respect. There is no ceremony which occupies an important position in Islam in which we have not been separated from others.” (Kalimatul-Fasl, Vol. 14, P. 169, Mirza Bashi Ahmed Qadiani)

“If a non-Ahmadi dies is it permissible to say” ‘May Allah pardon him and grant him admission in the Heaven?Answer: The infidelity of the non-Admadis (Muslims) is a proven fact and it is not permissible to pray for their salvation.” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Vol. 8, No. 59, Feb. 1921)

“It is my considered religion: it is not permitted that you should offer prayer led by a non-Qadiani in any place whatsoever, whosoever he may be and however respected among the people he may be. This is an order from Allah and this is what Allah expects of you. Those who doubt this are considered deniers. Allah desires that a distinction be made between you and them.”
(Al-Fazl, Qadian, Aug. 28, 1917)

“God has revealed to me that it is forbidden – strictly forbidden – that you should say prayers led by one who believes me to be a liar or is wavering in his allegiance to me. Instead it enjoined upon you that you should follow an Imam from amongst you.”
(Arbaeen, Vol. 3, P. 28; “Tuhfa-e-Golarwiah”, P. 27, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani)

“No Qadiani is allowed to say prayers which are led by a non-Qadiani. People have asked this question again and again – is it permissible to pray behind them? I would say, whenever I am asked, it is not allowed for any Qadiani to pray behind a non-Qadiani. It is forbidden – not permitted – prohibited.”
(Anwar-e-Khilafat, P. 93)

“God has revealed it to me that the person who did not believe in me after having heard about me is not a Muslim.” (Al-Fazl, Qadian, Jan 15, 1935 – Al-Hukum, 4:24, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani)

“It seems that the Promised Messiah had also suspected that the word ‘Muslim’ which he used also for non-Ahmadis might be wrongly understood. So, he has made it clear in his writings occasionally that the word ‘Muslim’ which he used for also non-Ahmadis meant ‘those who claimed to be Muslims.’ hence, wherever he has used that term for non-Ahmadis, he means by it those who claim to be Muslims, for he could not have recognized those who denied him as Muslims under divine instructions.” (Kalimatul Fasl, Vol. 14, No. 3, P. 126, Sahibaza Bashir Ahmad Qadiani)


#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid
#Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig–who became a Lahori-Ahmadi in 1914

This is an interesting story about MGA and Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig.  This was the doctor who treated Lekh Ram at the Mayo Hospitol in 1897, Lekh Ram died, mostly likely because the Ahmadi doctor allowed him to die.  See here:

In 1897, Lekh Ram is murdered and the the doctors assistance is an Ahmadi
Lekh Ram was eventually murdered in 1897.  Batalvi urged the govt. to search MGA’s house. MGA seemed to have inside information on how Lekh ram died, this seems to have startled the entire Punjaab.  However, the inside story was that Lekh Ram was taken to the Mayo Hospitol in Lahore after getting stabbed, and the Doctors-assistant who was working that night just so happened to be an Ahmadi.  Mirza Yaquub Beg was the young Ahmadi doctor and he shared all of the info with MGA, in terms of where Lekh Ram was stabbed and etc.  And he boasted and gloated and was happy that Lekh Ram died (see pages 10-14).  Also See the ROR of 1984 for the story.

The story

“The heartfelt connection which the Promised Messiah had with me is known to everyone familiar with those times. When I took the final medical exam [to become a medical doctor] in 1897, he prayed for me, and received a revelation: ‘You have passed.’ Upon this, he said to me, and even wrote it in Haqiqat-ul-Wahy,: ‘As there is very close relationship between me and Yaqub Baig, this is why I have been addressed in the revelation [as ‘you’] whereas Yaqub Baig is meant.’

Then the affection and kindness of the late Maulana Nur-ud-Din, khalifat-ul-Masih, is known to everyone, that he always considered me as his son. From the beginning of our connection he addressed me as ‘son’. He maintained this relationship till the end. During his last illness, he would not take food or milk from anyone’s hand except mine or that of Maulvi Sadr-ud-Din. And it is the grace of Allah that the very last sip he took was honey by my hand.

As to the late Maulvi Abdul Karim, it was the Promised Messiah himself who designated me as his brother, and Maulvi Abdul Karim treated me with fraternal affection till he breathed his last.

I cannot sufficiently thank Allah that He, the Almighty, provided me with so much opportunity to serve all these three elders during their lifetimes, and at the time of their final, fatal illness Allah granted me to serve them as their medical doctor.” (Paigham Sulh, 22 August 1917, p. 5)

Note that it is not in Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, as stated above, but in his book Nuzul-ul-Masih (p. 223, Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 18, p. 601) that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad mentions his revelation about Dr Mirza Yaqub Baig as ‘You have passed’.

Links and Related Essays 20080411MN.pdf


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

Quotes from “Surma Chashm Arya” (1886) (“Lead-ore-Collyrium for the eyes of the Aryas”)

Just posting quotes here from “Surma Chashm Arya” (1886) (Lead-ore Collyrium for the eyes of the Aryas). This is from an era wherein MGA was a “Wahabi” aka ‘Ahl-e-hadith” type of Mullah, hence, MGA still officially believed in miracles and etc. At the end of this book, MGA issued his 1-year-challenge/mubahila. Maulawi Muhammad Husain Batalvi devoted about 14 pages of his paper Isha‘atus-Sunnah Vol. 9 No. 5 and No. 6, pp. 145-158) to this book and instead of reviewing it he gave quotations which he said spoke for themselves. He asked every Muslim to buy ten or twenty copies of the book for distribution amongst the Hindus so that the hostile activities of the Arya Samaj against Islam might be checked.”””” (dard, page 158). 

He also talks about the delay in the publishing of the Barahin, and even promises the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya Vol. 5 to be published soon (this was published after MGA died, since it was a failed promise).

You can listen to the audio book herein. 
Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol.2, p. 53

“””””The Christians cannot stand their ground against Islam because they have taken as god a man who had a father, four brothers and two sisters, and was constantly persecuted by the Jews.””””
Surmah Chashm-e-Aryah, pp. 40-41, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 2, pp. 88-89, See Hidden Treasures, page 33 Continue reading “Quotes from “Surma Chashm Arya” (1886) (“Lead-ore-Collyrium for the eyes of the Aryas”)”

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s first debate–1886, a written debate with Murlidhar

MGA only did written debates. He wasn’t capable to even have any type of intelligent conversation with. MGA had his first debate with a Hindu, and didn’t even properly finish the debate, MGA and his team then wrote about the entire scenario in Surma Chashm Arya (Collrium for the eyes of the Aryas).

The topics discussed in this book are:

  1. The miracle of the splitting of the moon by the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.
  2. Is salvation eternal or a limited phase?
  3. The soul and the matter, whether they are uncreated and eternal, or they have been created by God.
  4. Comparison between the Holy Qur’an and the Vedas (the sacred scripture of the Hindus).

The book also contains a challenge in the form of a Mubahila (a prayer duel to prove the truth of a religious doctrine). It closes with a prize of Rs 500/ – for anyone who could refute satisfactorily the proofs adduced by Hadhrat Ahmad (as) in the book Surma Chashm Arya.

Quotes from this book

MGA vs. Murlidhar as explained per Dard, page 144-onwards

“”At the end of these days of communion with God, Ahmadas saw a great number of people there and accepted many invitations of friends and acquaintances. In those days a religious controversy also took place there between him and Murlidhar, an account of which is to be found in his book entitled Surma Chashm Arya.

Murlidhar was a leading Arya Samajist of Hoshiarpur. He was a teacher of drawing in a local school. He came one day to Ahmadas in March 1886, and wanted to ask him a few questions about Islam. Though the Arya was not a seeker after truth but merely wanted to hold a controversy, Ahmadas accepted the challenge.

Murlidhar began, on the evening of March 11th, 1886, at the house of Ahmadas, with an attack on the miracle known as Shaqqul Qamar (the rending of the moon). The debate was to be carried on in writing by an exchange of two papers from each side. The papers were to be written there and then and read out in a public meeting. But Murlidhar did not wait to hear the final reply from Ahmadas. He left the meeting on the lame excuse that it had become too late for him to stay there. One of the audience, Shatru Ghan, repeatedly asked Murlidhar to wait, but he would not listen. The following are the names of a few of those who were present there that evening: Shatru Ghan, eldest son of Raja Rudder Sen, ruler of Suket; Shatranji, younger son of the Raja of Suket; Janmi Ji, another son of the Raja; Babu Mulraj, copyist; L. Ram Lachhman, a headmaster of Ludhiana; and Babu Har Kishan Das, a second master, of Hoshiarpur.

The second meeting took place at the house of Sh. Mehr Ali on March 14th, 1886. It was Ahmad’sas turn to start, but Murlidhar would not let him do so. He insisted that Ahmadas should first of all verify his statement made on the previous day to the effect that Swami Dayanand had written in the Satyarath Parkash that the souls of human beings fall as dew on vegetables and are born into this world after being swallowed by women. He insisted that Swami Dayanand had made no such statement. He was told that it was not right to drag the previous proceedings into the second meeting, and that, if he must have the reference, he could have it later 30. But he was obstinate. The audience protested against his attitude but he stuck to his point. To stop him from wasting time, Ahmadas gave him a pledge in writing that the required reference would be inserted in the report of the proceedings which was to be published. This was done, to the eternal shame of Murlidhar. The reference is: Page 263, Sam. 8, Edition 1875.

Ahmadas wrote the first paper in which he pointed out that, according to the teachings of the Arya Samaj, God could not create anything; and in so far as man could not attain to everlasting salvation, God was void of love. This paper was read out in one hour. Murlidhar spent more than an hour, not in explaining and vindicating the position of the Samaj, but in pointing out that Ahmadas raised two questions instead of one. Ahmadas removed his misunderstanding, and then he took three hours in writing his answer, which was even then not complete. It had to be read out incomplete because he said the remaining portion would later be supplied at his own convenience. He was pressed to complete his answer there in the meeting, in which hundreds of people had gathered. But he neither completed his answer nor handed over the written portion to Ahmadas for reply; and instead of finishing the debate as previously arranged, he left the meeting, as before, under an excuse that he had to attend another meeting of the Samaj. The following are the names of a few of those who were present in that meeting: Sh. Mehr Ali, M. Ilahi Bakhsh, Vakil; Dr. Mustafa Ali, Babu Ahmad Husain, Deputy Inspector of Police; MiyaĔ Abdul Hakim, Miyan Shahabuddin, dafadar; L. Nara’in Das Vakil; Pt. Jagan Nath, Vakil; L. Ram Lachhman, headmaster; B. Harkishan Das, L. Ganesh Das, Vakil; L. Sita Ram, Shatru Ghan, Shatranji, M. Gulab Singh, M. Ghulam Rasul, a teacher; and M. Fateh Din, a teacher.

Ahmadas was prepared to stay for two more days if Murlidhar desired to complete the debate but the latter did not agree; therefore, Ahmadas returned to Qadian on March 17th, 1886; in one of his letters dated March 11th, he had written that he would leave for Qadian, on Tuesday, March 16th, 1886. I have also seen a notebook of my uncle in which it is definitely written that the party reached Qadian on the 17th.

It may be noted here that the sole aim of Ahmad’sas controversy was to spread truth and refute error. It was entirely free from exaggeration, bitterness, and any show of spiritual pride. Ahmadas desired not to display his learning but to reveal the will of God. He loved not controversy for its own sake, but whenever he feared the truth to be in danger, he gladly undertook it as a holy duty. The modern man, on the contrary, refuses to take religion and theology seriously. It seems as though the many religious wars of the past have made him so fearful of conflict that he has swung to the other extreme and has developed a lamentable spirit of indifference towards the vital matters of faith. ‘It is a very shallow view that so long as a man’s conduct is honourable his creed is a matter of no importance. Conduct depends on character, and character is built on creed. That is a point worth insisting upon, for there are many people who, while admitting the importance of right conduct, on which the happiness and well-being of society depend, yet fail to see that morality and faith are necessarily bound up together. Figs do not grow on thistles.'”””

Links and Related Essays

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid
#Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Dear Muslims, beware of the Ex-Ahmadi-Atheists!!!!

This blog and research group has been in existence for almost 2 years now.  We are pro-muslim, however, we don’t have any issues working with Atheist, Christians, Hindus or whatever.  We wanted our readers to understand that most Ahmadi’s who become Atheist see Muslim’s as worse then Ahmadi’s.  They see Ahmadi’s as better, and Muslims as terrorists and etc.  These are facts.  These facts have been experienced through 15 years of online presence and 100 years worth of research on Ahmadiyya.

Ex-Ahmadi-Atheist hate Muslim’s
Just be careful out there, per the Ex-Ahmadi-new-Atheist, Muslims are the bottom of the evolutionary scale.  They see Ahmadi’s as better off, in fact, Nabeel Qureshi  (ex-Ahmadi Christian) never directly criticized Ahmadiyya, he blamed Islam.  Another Ex-Ahmadi-new atheist, Reason on Faith, he blames Islam, not Ahmadiyya.

We blame the MGA and his sons
Ahmadiyya is something unique, Islam cannot be blamed for it.  Ahmadiyya comes from capitalism, under British capitalism, any citizen of British India was allowed (even congratulated) for calling Islam as stupid and needing reform.  Thus, the Mirza family business was launched.  Under the Mughal Empire, MGA and his family would have never been allowed to open this type of business.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had 5 written debates, NO ORAL Debates

We all know that MGA was unable to have oral debates with anyone, he stuttered terribly into his 50’s, his arabic was horrendous, and most of his speech was unintelligible. MGA’s team did most of the writing on behalf of MGA anyway. Further, Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti was MGA’s mouthpiece, with Syed Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi working behind the scenes editing arabic and etc. In the below, you will notice that MGA only debated 1 Christian in his entire life, and even that was a written debate. MGA debated one hindu (murlidhar) and 3 Muslims.

The hard evidence
1. March 1886 Hushiarpur with Master Murlidhar.
2, July 1891 at Ludhiana with Molana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi.
3. October 1891 at Delhi with Molvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali
4. January 1892, at Lahore at Lahore with Molvi Abdul Hakim Kalanori (the content of this exchange have never been published.
5. June 1892 at Amritsar Deputy Abdullah Athim.
Seeratul mahdi pages 219-220

The scans

Links and Related Essays

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

Up ↑