Intro
In August of 1897, the case of Dr. Clarke and the British government vs. MGA was in full swing. Lekh Ram had died just a few months earlier, and it seemed like some fanatical Ahmadi’s had planned the murder. Nevertheless, a few months later, Abdul Hameed showed up at Dr. Clarke’s location in Amritsar in the guise of wanting to convert to Christianity. Soon after showing up, he confessed that MGA had sent him to murder Dr. Clarke. However, after the case started, and trial began, Abdul Hameed seemed to have totally recanted the story and blamed the Christians at Amritsar and Beas for scaring him into such a testimony, i.e. that MGA sent him to commit murder. In the below, we have extracted Yusuf Khan’s testimony in this case to Abdul Hameed via Ahmadi sources. We found this testimony in MGA’s book,. “kitab ul Barriya” (1897), in a Lahori-Ahmadi translation, pages 197-198. After Abdul Hameed recanted, MGA gave this specific testimony. Furthermore, MGA was never under oath, hence, his testimony can’t be taken seriously.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________20th August 1897. Statement of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani without oath
When the debate of 1893 was finished, at the end I had made a prophecy about Abdullah Atham on his request. This prophecy was not about Dr. Clarke, nor was he included in this prophecy. The word ‘party’ means Atham, as is clear from the context. ‘Party’ and ‘person’
have the same meaning and it includes me also. No attack was made on Atham. Had it been so, he would have himself filed a suit or made a report. But this did not happen. Abdullah Atham died subsequent to the period of fifteen months. At the expiry of fifteen months I heard about Abdullah Atham that he stated to his friends that he was attacked three times. On this also I warned him that I had heard that he accused me, saying that he had been attacked three times. If that is true then he should take an oath or file a suit in a court of law or give its proper proof privately. But I did not receive any reply. Before this he had never stated this, neither in a newspaper nor in any other manner. I had not made any prophecy about a snake. I had seen Abdul Hameed once in the mosque. Someone had mentioned that this man had become a Christian and now had come here. There had been no conversation between myself and him. I do not know who had given him any job for labour etc. I had not given him any job. I did not
make any prophecy about Dr. Clarke, neither pointedly nor indirectly. I had heard that Abdul Hameed was not a boy of good character. Hence I sent a note in writing from my house that he should be expelled. Then I do not know where he went. I did not give him even a penny when he was going, nor send him to Amritsar. Uprooting of falsehood means that falsehood would go waste. It does not point towards Dr. Clarke. Until a person gives his willingness, no prophecy
is made. I present herewith a letter dated 5th May 1893 signed by Abdullah Atham, in which he demands a miraculous sign or a decisive argument. (Exhibit ‘Y’). In exhibit ‘O’, the meaning of ‘throwing light again’ is that the fulfilment of the prophecy increased belief. Signed: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Read out. The whole statement is recorded truly and correctly. Accepted correct. Signature of the Judge.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Lekh+Ram
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/30/who-is-abdul-hameed/
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/06/who-is-maulvi-burhanuddin-of-jhelum-1830-1905/
http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/bar180-201-frm.htm
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/26/the-mirza-family-was-above-the-law-in-british-india/
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Lekh
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Athim
http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/bar180-201-frm.htm
Yusuf Khan (an Ex-Ahmadi) testified vs. MGA in the case brought by Dr. Clarke in 1897
MGA’s final remarks in court in the case of Dr. Clarke (1897)
When Abdul Hameed recanted his story vs. MGA in the case brought by Dr. Clarke
Shaikh Rahmatullah’s legal statements in 1897 in the case of Dr. Clarke vs. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian
Leave a Reply