Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari was an Ahl-e-Hadith (Wahabi) Muslim from British India, he was born into a family of Kashmiri descent. He was born on June 12, 1868 and died on March 15, 1948 in Sarghoda, Pakistan. He was a major opponent of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and the early Ahmadiyya movement. Sanaullah Amritsari served as the general secretary of Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadith Hind form 1906 to 1947. He was also the editor of the “”Ahle Hadees”” magazine. He moved to Pakistan at the Partition, losing his son in the process, and himself dying in SargodhaPunjab, Pakistan, in 1948, after suffering from a stroke. Syed Muhammad Hussain Batalvi was also an Ahl-e-Hadith scholar who beefed with MGA uptil about 1902, Sanaullah seems to have stepped up for the Ahl-e-Hadith of India as they battled vs. Ahmadiyya. In 1907, he refused to enter into a Mubahila challenge vs. MGA, instead, MGA prayed that if he was a false prophet, he would die in the lifetime of Sanaullah. He had many debates and arguments with various Ahmadi leaders, he eventually wrote many books, the most famous book in terms of his battles with Ahmadiyya is Ilhamat-e-Mirza (1928)– a critical account of the ‘revelations’ of Mirza. He was also the main editor and owner of a monthly magazine called, “Muraqqa-Qadiani” which lasted from 1907 until MGA died in May of 1908.
Its articles were compiled in the shape of book titled “Muraqqa Qadiani” published in 1917.

He seems to have also written the famous “”Tafsir Thana’i””, also spelled as Tafsir Sanai or Tafeer Sanai. This was published before 1908. MGA referred to it in Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya Vol. 5, MGA lied and claimed that Maulana Sanaullah had also written that Abu Hurairya was deficient in knowledge.
Via Maulvi Sanaullah and “Tahrik-e-Mirza”

Maulvi Sanaullah says that he met MGA for the first time and MGA didn’t say Asalamo Alaikum, this struck a chord with Sanaullah (See page 63).

“””Just as there are two parts of Mirza’s life (up to Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah and after that), likewise my relationship with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had two parts; pre-Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah and post-Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah. Until Barahin, I had a favourable view of Mirza. There was an interesting event about my first meeting with Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani when I was around 17 or 18 years old. I enthusiastically went to visit Mirza from Batala to Qadian on foot. In those days,
Mirza was an aspiring writer, but despite the desire and love I had, I saw something which changed my view of him in the first meeting. What I saw is still very vivid. What happened was that I was sitting in his house in the courtyard. He came in without saying, “Assalaamu alaikum,” and immediately asked, “Where did you come from? What do you do?” I was a student who learned and benefitted from the company of scholars who knew that it is Sunnah to say, “Assalaamu alaikum,” when approaching others. It struck a chord in me that he did not seem
to care about the Sunnah. What was his reason? Out of good faith I suppressed that thought.”””

MGa writes in Izala Auham that a Muslim cannot have a Mubahila with another Muslim.  He contradicts himself a few months later.

The ROR of Nov-1940 alleges that Maulvi Sanaullah and Syed Muhammad Hussain Batalvi were in attendance when the speech was given by Maulvi Abdul Karim, which ended up becoming the book, “Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam”.

MGA mentions Maulvi Sanaullah by name in the Appendix of Anjam e Athim.

MGA is ordered by the British Government to never do a Mubahila challenge ever again.

He was present in Lahore when Pir Mehr Ali Shah showed up and MGA was a “no-show”.

He published his famous commentary of the Quran called Tafseer Sanai. MGA quoted this book in 1902, as MGA called Abu Hurairah as stupid, since this commentary quotes a hadith from Sahih Bukhari wherein Abu Hurairah proved that 4:159 meant that Esa (As) hadn’t died yet. He gets into a debate vs. some Ahmadi’s. MGA mentions all of this in his book, Ijaz i Ahmadi. This debate was to be held on October 29, 30, 1902. Syed Muhammad Sarwar Shah and Maulavi Abdullah Kashmiri were to represent the Ahmadis at the debate, and Maulavi Sanaullah the other party. The debate was held in the open under a banyan tree. There were only three Ahmadis at the debate and over 600 non-Ahmadis were present. Maulavi Sanaullah
Amritsari fanned the feelings of the villagers by asserting that the Ahmadis were afraid of debates. When the terms were being settled Maulavi Sanaullah insisted that nobody should speak for more than 20 minutes despite the protest by Syed Sarwar Shah that the time fixed (20 minutes) was woefully inadequate.

MGA mentions the debate in Mudh in his book, E’jaz-i-Ahmadi (I‘jāz-e-Ahmadi) roughly 70 times.
Maulvi Sanullah visits Qadian.  He writes:

‘Bismillah Al-Rehman Al-Raheem. To Janab Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Saheb, Raees-e-Qadian.
This humble self, according to your invitation mentioned in Aijaz-e-Ahmadi pp. 11-13, I am presently here in Qadian. Until now, Ramadhan prevented me from accepting your invitation, otherwise I would not have delayed it. I swear upon God that I do not have any personal grievance or animosity against you. Since according to you, you are appointed on such a high position which is for the guidance of all humanity in general and for sincere persons like me especially, therefore I firmly hope that you will not spare any effort to make me understand, and as promised, you will give me permission that I will express in front of people my thoughts about your prophecies. Once again I remind you of my sincerity and the trouble that I have taken to travel all the way, and by virtue of the grand position, please give me a chance.’ …. from Abu al-Wafa Sanaullah. dated 10th January 1903.’ (Tareekh-e-Mirza by Maulana Sanaullah Amratsari p. 61).

Mirza was stunned. He never thought in his wildest dreams that Molvi Sanaullah Saheb would ever come to Qadian. He replied, trying to avoid facing him. He wrote:

“””I have promised God that I would never debate with those people (opponents). Thus that way which is quite far away from debates is that to clear this stage you will have to promise that you will not go out of the ‘Minhaj-e-Nabuwwat – way of the prophethood’ ……. 2nd condition is that you will not be allowed to speak at all. You will only give a written objection, one line or two lines, that this is your objection. Then in the gathering, a detailed reply would be given. For objection, there is no need to write in detail, just a line or two is enough. 3rd condition is that you would raise only ONE objection per day. Since you have not informed us of your coming, rather you have sneaked in like a thief, because of lack of free time and work of printing the book, we cannot spend more than three hours. Remember that this will never be allowed that you give a long lecture like a sermon in front of public, instead you will have to absolutely keep your mouth shut, as deaf and dumb, so that the talk does not turn into a debate. First you will ask only regarding one prophecy. For three hours I can give its reply, and at each you will be cautioned that even if now you are not satisfied then write it down. It would not be your task to let (people) hear your objection. We will read ourselves, but it should not be more than two or three lines. This way, you will not suffer, since you have come to clear your doubts, this way is excellent to remove doubts. I will announce to the people that regarding this prophecy, such and such doubt has come into the heart of Molvi Saheb, and this is its reply. This way all the doubts will be cleared. But if you want that like a debate you are allowed to talk, then this will never happen. (Mirza repeated the same conditions at least two more times in the next paragraph) …. From my side, I swear upon God, that I would not go out of this, and will not hear anything, you will not dare to utter a single word from your mouth. And I bind you also with the swear of God, that if you have come with a true heart, then be bound to it and do not spend your life in creating trouble and disturbance. And whosoever among the two of us, breaks this oath, then God’s curse be on him, and may God will that he sees the fruit of this curse in his life. Ameen….. by the pen of Mirza  Ghulam Ahmad by his own hand”””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza pp.62-64). 

One would have thought that Molvi Sanaullah would have given up after reading such absurd conditions where he is not even allowed to say a single word. But Allah had given him long patience. He wrote back to Mirza Saheb:

“”””I received your long letter. Alas! what is the expectations of the whole country, same thing has happened. Respected Sir! When I have come according to your invitation mentioned in Aijaz-e-Ahmadi, and in clear words I have given reference of the same pages, then such long talk from you …. me dear Sir, it is so sad that on the one hand you invite me to come to do research, that I prove your prophecies wrong to get the cash reward Rs. 100 for each, and then in your letter you are binding me to write just one or two lines whereas for your self you propose to have three hours!!!

Is this the way of research that I write one or two lines and you make a speech for three hours? This shows clearly that you are now regretting having invited me, and is denying your own invitation, and refraining from research, for which you had invited me on page 23. Dear Sir! Did you invite me to your house write these two lines only? I could have done better sitting in Amratsir, and am doing it already. But remembering the troubles of my journey, I do not want to go empty handed, therefore I accept your injustice as well and will write only two three lines, and you can no doubt speak for three hours. However I would request this much alteration that I would read my two three lines to the audience, and after every hour of your speech, I would express my thoughts about your speech for 5 minutes, maximum 10 minutes. Since you do not like public audience, therefore the gathering from sides would be limited to 25 persons. You akin my coming without informing you to be like a thief! Is this how you greet your guests? There was no condition that you have to be informed in advance. Moreover, you would have received the news from heavens. Whatever speech you are going to make, kindly give it to me then, and proceedings will start from today. After I receive your reply, I will send you my brief question. As far as the talk about cursing is concern, it is the same which is mentioned in hadith…. from Sanaullah dated 11th January 1903″””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza p.65) (Hadith about Curse: If the person who has been cursed, does not deserve the curse, then it returns to the one who has cursed).

Mirza Ghulam A Qadiani did not reply to this letter, instead instructed his disciple Mohammed Ahsan Amrohi to write the reply:

“”””Molvi Sanaullah Saheb, your letter was read to Hazrat-e-Aqdas, Imam-uz-Zaman, Maseeh Mowood … since its contents were purely racist and hateful, which is far away from seeking the truth, therefore this reply is enough from Hazrat-e-Aqdas (Mirza) that you do not want to investigate the truth … Hazrat has sworn that he would not enter into any debate with his opponents, how can an appointee of Allah go against his promise of God?… therefore your proposals are absolutely not acceptable…. From Mohammed Ahsan by order of Hazrat Imam-uz-Zaman dated 11th January 1903″””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza p.66).
Via Mawahibur-Rahman

MGA has entire chapter wherein he talks about how Maulvi Sanaullah popped up at Qadian. 

MGA claims that Maulvi Thana’ullah was present at the famous Karam Din case (see Haqiqatul Wahy, online english edition).

Listen to our brother Obaidullah explain this entire scenario on the Shams channel herein (see at the 1:50:20 mark). This is in terms of an essay that appeared in the Ahl-e-Hadees newspaper dated April 5th, 1904. This was the newspaper edited by Maulvi Sanaullah. The topic starts on page 12, Qadiani’s have never began at page 12, they always start from page 13, which is a direct quotation from the Review of Religions and an article entitled, “Evidence that the Nasiree Messiah arrived in Kashmir”. However, the full article is entitled, “The Realty of Afghani’s and Kashmiri’s”, via the civil and military gazette, Lahore. On the final page of the essay, in brackets it is written {ROR}, thus proving that this was a direct quote. In the ROR quote, MGA argued that Jewish people would meet their wives even before marriage and touch intimately and Afghani’s and Kashmiri’s do the same.

here we have the Ahl-e-Hadees of August 5th, 1904


Scan from the Al-Fazl


Maulvi Sanaullah seems to have been challenging Ahmadi’s to a debate, quotes the AhleHadees newspaper as saying:

“”””Mirza’is! If you are truthful then come; and bring your people with you. The same Eid-Gah is ready where you did a mubahala with Sufi Abdul Haq Ghaznavi and were faced with heavenly disgrace And bring the man who has invited me for a Mubahalah in his book Anjam-e-Atham”””” (Ahl-e-Hadith, 29 March 1907 Page 10).

1907–April 4th
He responds to MGA’s request for a Mubahila.  He refuses to enter into a Mubahila with MGA.

1907–April 14th
“””“I give the good news to Maulvi Sanaullah that Mirza Sahib has accepted his challenge of Mubahalah. Undoubtedly(you) swear that this man  (i.e Mirza Sahib) is false in his claim and then openly state that if I am false in this claim then “May the curse of Allah be upon those who lie”. The verse of the Holy Qur’an upon which the foundation of Mubahalah is set only states that both parties should say, “May the curse of Allah be upon those who lie”””” (Badr, 14 April 1907).  

1907–April 15th
MGA publishes his famous announcement vs. Sanaullah, entitled, “The Final Judgement with Sanaullah”.  In this announcement MGA prays to his God that he should die within the lifetime of Sanaulah, if he (MGA) is indeed a liar and a false prophet.

1907–April 19th
“”“I did not invite you to a Mubahalah, I only expressed my intent to make a sworn statement. However, you call this a Mubahalah, whereas a Mubahalah is when both parties swear against each other. I have only agreed to take an oath not to engage in a Mubahalah. A sworn statement is something else and a Mubahalah is something else”””(Ahl-e-Hadith 19 April 1907).

1907–April 26th
Maulvi Sanaullah published MGA’s prayer in his newspaper (the Ahl e Hadees) to God that he should die within the lifetime of Maulvi Sanaullah if he (MGA) is indeed a false prophet.  He also wrote:

“”””Your writing is not acceptable to me and neither can any sane person accept it.”””
(Akhbar Ahli Hadees, Amratsar, 26th April, 1907).


“””In case I die, what argument is my death going to resolve for other people?”””
(Akhbar Ahli Hadees, Amratsar, 26th April, 1907, p. 5).

See also—The Review of Religions, February 1992

1907–May 15th
Haqiqatul Wahy is published by MGA.  Maulvi Sanaullah’s name is mentioned 9 times, however, it is spelled as Thana’ullah.  MGA connects Saadullah with Sanaullah, it seems that the two knew each other.  Saadullah died in February of 1907.

In terms of a Mubahila Challenge, Maulvi Sanaullah wrote: 
(Moraqqai Qadiani, August 1907)

“””The Holy Prophet Muhammad, on whom be peace, in spite of being a true prophet, passed away before Maseelma Kazzab. Maseelma in spite of being a liar died after the true person but because he finally died in disappointment and frustration, therefore, there is no doubt in the authenticity of the prayer.”””
1908–May 26th

MGA dies in Lahore of cholera.

In his magazine, “Murraqqa Qadiani”, he states:

“””The Krishan of Qadian published an announcement of Mubahalah on 15 April 1907″””(Muraqqa-e-Qadiani, June 1908, Page 18).


Maulvi Sanaullah is mentioned in the Ahmadi newspaper Al-Hakam, as he argued that MGA’s prophethood only lasted 6 1/2 years, since it started in 1901.

Maulvi Sanaullah has a debate with top Ahmadi’s in Rampur. Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, Hafiz Raushan Ali, Maulvi Muhammad Ali, Syed Sarwar Shah, Mir Qasim Ali and  Maulvi Ahsan Amrohi were there representing Ahmadi’s (see Hakeem Nur ud Din) as they debated Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsari.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________1911, roughly April or May

Maulvi Sanaullah comments on Mirza Basheer ud Din’s famous essay wherein the Mirza calls all Muslims as Kafirs (see Truth about the Split).

Maulvi Sanaullah’s wrote a fatwa in terms of prayers behind the Lahori-Ahmadi’s.

The ROR of June-1916 alleges that he had a debate with Maulana Ghulam Rasul Rajeki in Kartarpur, this debate was reported in other urdu ahmadiyya newspaper also.

Muraqqaʻ-i Qadiani (The Qadiani Mosaic), 1917, 64 pages is published.
Tareekh-e-Ahmadiyyat, Vol 20, Page 447-449

Ahmadiyya sources claim that he had a debate with Maulvi Farzand Ali in Ferozepur on June 3, 1922.

“Shahadat-e-Mirza” is published, Maulvi Sanaullah also published a 6-month challenge to all Ahmadi’s to respond. Tarikh-i Mirza (History of Mirza), 1923, 64 pages is also published, it could also be spelled as “Tareekh-e-Mirza”.

He also edited, “The Judgement of the Mirza Case” (1932), edited by Maulvi Sanaullah.

He is also mentioned in the Jan-Feb-March edition of the ROR as doing preaching in South India against the Qadiani-Ahmadi’s.


In a 3-day conference held in Qadian on April 1-3, 1924, by non-Ahmadis, Maulavi Sanaullah boasted about his challenge and his books and claimed that no one had written a rebuttal (See Hidden Treasures). Jalal-ud-Din Shams when writing the introduction of Hudur’s book says:  I came to know in December 1923 about the existence of this book, and when I came to Qadian I inquired whether anyone had received a copy of this book. As no one knew about it, I had to trace this book and wrote a strong rebuttal that appeared in the issue of April 1924 of the Review of Religions. Qadi Muhammed Zahooruddin Akmal, the editor of Review of Religions, in an introductory remarks to the rebuttal, said that he received the manuscript on January 31, 1924. The daily al-Fadl in its issue of April 8, 1924, carried the news that a copy of the issue containing the rebuttal of the book was sent to Maulavi Sanaullah under registered cover.

Nikat-i Mirza, 1926, 40 pages is published.

ʻAqaʼid-i Mirza (Beliefs of Mirza), 1928, 8 pages is published. “ilhamat-e-Mirza” is also published.

He wrote a refutation of Rangila Rasul, read about it herein.

The Lahori -Ahamdi’s would often send Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi, while that local organisation would also have obtained the services of Maulana Sanaullah. So Maulana Sanaullah was on the same platform and in the same team representing Muslims with a well known Lahori Ahmadi scholar (who had taken the bai`at at the hands of the Promised Messiah in 1907)!  As an example, we have a booklet entitled Munazira, published by the Anjuman Nusrat-ul-Islam of Hyderabad, Sind (an orthodox Muslim body), being the account of a debate between the Arya Samaj and Muslim representatives in January 1929.

Here is the link. (Opens in new window)

On the first day, Maulana Sanaullah appeared against a Pandit (see p. 14). On the second day, Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi appeared against another pandit (see p. 24). The speeches of all the representatives are reproduced.

Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi told us (including me) many anecdotes about Sanaullah’s replies at the debates which were sometimes silly. For example, an Arya asked “Can Allah create another God like Him if He is all-powerful?”, implying of course that there would then be two Gods. Sanaullah replied: Yes, Allah can create another God like Him, but the created God will say ‘I am not the real God’, so there would still be only one God. Maulana Abdul Haq said to us: I knew what a blistering reply the Arya would give to this foolish response, and so he did. The Arya said: This means that either the first God is wrong because he didn’t manage to create a God like him, or the created God is wrong because he is saying I am not a real God! So there is a conflict between the two Gods, one saying “I have created a God like Me”, and the other saying “No, I am not the real God”!

Once Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi published a challenge addressing Sanaullah and saying: You said in a gathering in my presence: “I (Sanaullah) have made a lot of money by opposing Mirza”. Can you deny saying this?

Maulvi Sanaullah had many public debates with an Ahmadi-Mullah named Maulana Abul ‘Ata Jallundhari. Maulana Abul ‘Ata Jallundhari was born in district Jallundhar in 1904. At the age of eleven his father brought him to Qadian for studies, where he completed his Honours in Arabic with distinction. For five years he served as the Missionary In-charge for Palestine, and acquired great proficiency in Arabic. He started al-Bushra magazine in 1933 and also started the magazine al- Furqan. He wrote numerous books in Urdu and Arabic. He served as the Principal of Jami‘ah Ahmadiyyah and Jami‘atul- Mubashshirin from 1944 to 1958. He was also one of the members of the delegations of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim Jama‘at in 1953 and 1974 to the Government of Pakistan. He also served as a member of the Ifta’ [Jurisprudence] Committee for many years until his death. He is one of the three members of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim Jama‘at who have been given the title, “Khalid-e-Ahmadiyyat” by Hadrat Musleh-e-Mau‘udra.(See Nubuwwat and Khilafat, 1966).

“The Judgement of the Mirza Case” (1932), edited by Maulvi Sanaullah


ʻAjaʼibat Mirza risālah “ʻIlm-i Kalam-i Mirza” ka doosra hissa (The Oddities of the booklet ‘Writings of Mirza as Literature’, part two), 1933, 25 pages is published.

He is mentioned in the ROR of Dec-1933 in terms of Afghanistan.

The ROR of Nov-1940 mentions Sanaullah and admits that he is still alive.

In the ROR of March-1943, Sayyid Zayn al ‘Abidin Waliullah Shah explains how he freely moved into and outside of the house of MGA (1904-1907 era). He remembers when the plague hit Qadian and how MGA would use different chemicals to clear his house and the boarding house where all the students slept. He recalls how his father (Dr. Abdul Sattar Shah) asked MGA if he could visit a town that has already been hit with plague (in 1905) and MGA refused and cited the famous hadith wherein Muhammad (Saw) clearly said to never a visit a place where plague was raging. Sayyid Zayn al ‘Abidin Waliullah Shah alleges that the plague at Qadian only hit the Non-Ahmadi homes and Hindu’s (this is a lie, the editor of the Al-Badr Muhammad Afazl, died of plague). Sayyid Zayn al ‘Abidin Waliullah Shah then alleges that his parents had came to Qadian and were given a room in MGA’s house (the room is used in 1943 by a wife of the 2nd Khalifa). He alleges that the next door neighbor was a non-Ahmadi and someone died of plague in their house, which was only separated by MGA’s house by a wall. He also alleges that MGA gave a short speech. He mentions MGA’s beef with Maulvi Sanaullah, as well the famous Ahmadi apostate Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan.

What seems to be his final comments on Ahmadiyya were given in the Ahl-e-Hadees newspaper of 1944. The British had just won WW-2 and the idea of a Muslim state was always in the press.

Ahl-e-Hadith of Amritsar, 6 July 1945, p. 4

This sermon had so much impact that even a staunch opponent of the Jamaat, Maulvi Sanaullah Amritsari wrote:

“The passion to free 400 million Indians from slavery – which is evident from this speech of Khalifa Ji [Hazrat Khalifatul Masih IIra] – cannot be found even in the speech of Gandhi Ji.”

“In August 1947, Amritsar was the scene of a mini-doomsday. The death-afflicting storm of rioting completely enfolded the residence of Maulana, and even though he succeeded in evacuating himself and his family out into safety, his only youthful son Ataullah was cruelly slaughtered under his very eyes and the horror of that grief minced his heart into pieces.”  (Al Aitzan June, 15 1962 page 10).  

And also:

Maulvi Abdul Majid Sohdarvi, biographer of Maulvi Sanaullah, writes: “The moment he left his house, vagabonds and looters who were waiting for the opportunity swept in and took everything, including all the household items, cash and jewelry. After looting and robbing, they put the house on fire. That was, however, not the end of it; the looters also put on fire and turned to ashes Maulana’s most precious and valuable collection of books which included some very rare publications worth thousands of rupees and which he had brought together after great pains and expense. The loss of these books was no less distressing to Maulana than the loss of his only son. Those books were the most valuable estate of his life and some of them were so rare that it was not only difficult but impossible to replace them” … “This violent grief remained with Maulana until his death and, in fact, these two tragic incidents were the major cause of his sudden death. The sudden loss of his only son and the burning of his most precious collection of books, and the affliction of both of these misfortunes over a short while claimed his life (Seerati Sanai, Maqbool Aam Press, Lahore).

The ROR of May-1947 mentions Maulvi Sanaullah. 
Additional data


Sanaullah Amritsari r.a. was a notable Muslim Scholar and a contemporary of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani. He was a man with a high quality religious knowledge and God gifted debate talents. He gave a very tough time to Mirza Ghulam Qadiani with regard to his lies and false claims. He kept on chasing him till Qadiani’s death.

In April 1907, It was Sanullah Amritsari against whom Mirza issued his famous Ishtihar seeking divine decision and praying that whoever among them is a liar, may be killed with Allah,s wrath of plague or cholera. Eventually Mirza Qadiani died at Brandreth Road Lahore on 26 May, 1908, whereas Sanaullah remained peacefully alive decades after his death.

In the riotings of 1947, at partition of India, his son Ataullah was martyred and his library containing hundreds of valuable books was destroyed by the Sikhs. He migrated to Gujranwala Punjab Pakistan and then moved to Sargodha where he got a printing press on claim for his electric printing press at Amritsar. He returned to his real creator and moved to his eternal abode on 15 March, 1948. He was buried at Sargodha Pakistan.

This debate took place in October 1902, at a place called Mudd in district of Amritsar between Sanaullah Amritsari r.a. and Qadiani elders led by Molvi Sarwar Hussain. Mirza Ghulam has mentioned this in his book Ijaz e Ahmadi. Background of this debate was that Muhammad yaqub, a resident of this village had converted to ahmadiyya. Locals of area put him under social boycott.
A debate with Qadianis was organised wherein Molana Sanaullah Amritsari was invited by the local muslims. Qadiani Mullah Sarwar Hussain took part on behalf of Jamaat Qadianiya. It was a written debate, 20 minutes time was assigned to each party to read their arguments.

Although Tareekh e Ahmadiyya describes this a success as usual for Qadianis, yet he mentions the concern of Mirza for giving only 20 Minutes to Qadiani side. On return to Qadian after debate Molvi Sarwar was given a lecture by Mirza who listed points on how to debate. It is also mentioned by DM Shahid that the written papers of debate were with Shaikh Yaqub Ali Turab who misplaced it somewhere and hence these could not be published.

Sanaullah Amritsari wrote a booklet titled “ILHAMAT E MIRZA”. In this booklet Sanaullah discussed four ilham of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani and proved them false. These ilham and claims are :-
Birth of promised son.
Marriage with Muhammadi Begum.
Death of Ahmad Baig and Mirza Sultan Muhammad husband of Muhammadi Begum.

Death of Athem and Lekhram.


Sanaullah Amritsari challenged Mirza Qadiani if he could prove his arguments wrong he would give him a cash prize of Rs. 500/-. However, he increased the cash prize to Rs.1000/- in the second edition of the booklet, when Mirza did not respond months after publication of first edition.


In November, 1902 Mirza Qadiani published his book Ijaz e Ahmadi. At pages 11-12 of this book Ijaz e Ahmadi (RK-19 pages 117 onward,), using a very derogatory language, Mirza challenged Snaullah Amritsari, if he is truthful he may come to Qadian and prove his ilham wrong. He will give Amritsari a cash prize of Rs. 100/- for each of his Ilham, he proves wrong, in addition to the two way trip fair, Mirza Qadiani also prophesied that Sanaullah will never ever come to Qadian. This prophesy has miserably failed when Sanaullah Amritsari reached Qadian.

Mirza writes in Ijaz e Ahmadi that he has written about 150 ilham and if all are proven wrong, Sanaullah has the opportunity to earn upto Rs.15000/-. He further writes that his followers are in hundred of thousands so if I ask them to donate one rupee each, they would accumulate money worth Rs. 100,000/- and I would pay all this money to Sanaullah.
He goes on to state that, I know his present status of, Sanaulah is that he wanders in humiliations in the streets of Amritsar for penny wise things under the wrath of god. He is dependant only on the coffins of dead or his waaz. (Religious speeches.) Getting Rs 100,000/- would be a dream of paradise for him. If he do not come to Qadian then curse be upon him for his boasting at Mudd and speaking shameless lie. A man barking without reason is worse than dogs and his life is under curse which he spends shamelessly.

Molvi Sanaullah and Muhammad Hussain Batalvi both are of dishonest profession and are under deception to present contradictory ahadiths. They are like jews within Islam. There are some books which they quote reference from, but even their fathers have never been able to have a look at these books.


On January 1, 1903 Sanaullah Amritsari r.a. arrived in Qadian. His arrival in Qadian took Mirza by surprise. He did not come out of his home by saying that he has promised god that he will not debate with these Molvis. Sanullah sent a letter through a special messenger to Mirza saying that he has come to Qadian on his invitation in Ijaz e Ahmadi to prove his ilham wrong. So as promised you would give me the opportunity to express my views about your ilham in the public gathering.

Using his skills of trickery Mirza Sahib replied to Sanaullah that he has to accept following conditions :-
You will not be allowed to speak.
You will give your objection in writing only, in one or two lines.
I will give you my oral reply by speaking in a majlis.
You will present only one objection a day.
I will not give you more than 3 hours a day.
Sanaullah Amritsari wrote another letter to Mirza and proposed that he may be given the opportunity to read his two lines over to a learned gathering and may also be allowed to speak for commenting on your reply for 5 to 10 minutes.

However, Mirza did not accept this reasonable and humble suggestion and wrote to him through Ahsan Amrohi that he can not accept these demands and do not also approve the suggestions of a gathering of wise people of Qadian.


Finding no way to talk to Mirza Sanaullah sahib returns from Qadian and publish a pamphlet titles as Fateh saying that Mirza sahib himself invited him for the challenge and then he avoided to talk to him on the pretext of his Ilham not to talk.


Friends: This whole episode reflects the deception, lies, cheating and breach of commitment on the part of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani. One way he challenges the opponent, then predicts that he would not come to accept my challenge, but when the opponent reaches his doorstep he avoided to face him on one pretext or the other. This proved that his tall claims of spirituality and morality and claims of Mahdi Messiah and Ilham were fake fabricated and based on fraud and forgery.

This article is based on books Ijaz e Ahmadi pages 11-12 onward (RK 19 pages 117) by Mirza Ghulam Qadiani, Tareekh e Ahmadiyya vol 3 pages 281 onward by DM Shahid, and Ilhamat e Mirza by Molana Sanaullah Amritsari.

Screen Shot attached.

Links and Related Essays

Tarikh-i-Mirza (History of Mirza), by Maulvi Sanaullah (1923), quotes and background information

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad accused Maryam of meeting with Joseph before her marriage with him

“The Judgement of the Mirza Case” (1932), edited by Maulvi Sanaullah

Who is Maulvi Sa’adullah or Saadullah or Sa’dullah of Ludhiana (died Jan-1907)??

Anjam-e-Athim (1897) quotes

Tafser Sanai BY:Moulana Sanaullah Amratsari تفسیر ثنائی از مولانا ثناء اللہ امرتسری

Who is Syed Muhammad Hussain Batalvi? 1840-1920

Maulvi Sanuallah acknowledges that MGA claimed prophethood in Nov 1901

Maulvi Sanaullah visited Qadian

Anjam-e-Athim (1897) quotes

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and 4:159 (4:160 in the Ahmadiyya Quran’s), before the death of Jesus (as)

Out of fear from Ahmadi’s and MGA’s fake prophecies, Batalvi registered to buy a gun (1898-1899), but was denied

Click to access Ijaz-e-Ahmadi.pdf

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s disparaging comments on Abu Hurairah

The Final decision with Mawlana Sanaullah Amritsari by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1907)

“A Muslim is only he who accepts all those appointed by God” by Mirza Bashir-uddin Mahmud Ahmad, April 1911

Maulana Sanaullah of Amritsar

Maulvi Sanaullah vs. Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib [Rajeki], Debate in Kartarpur in 1918

Rangila Rasul was written in response to #Ahmadis

“ilhamat-e-Mirza: in english as “The Revelations of Mirza” (1928) by Sanaullah Amritsari

“The Judgement of the Mirza Case” (1932), edited by Maulvi Sanaullah


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

  1.  “Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadees Hind”Archived from the original on 2017-10-12.
  2. ^ “Biography of Shaykh Al-Islam Thanaullah Amritsari”
  3. ^ “Sanaullah Amritsari – wiki”wiki.qern.orgArchived from the original on 2016-10-02.
  4. ^ “Tafseer Sanai (By Molana Sana ullah Amritsary) — Australian Islamic Library”AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIC LIBRARYArchived from the original on 2016-09-30.
  5. ^ Faz̤lurraḥmān bin Muḥammad. (11 February 1988). “Hazrat Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari”Archived from the original on 11 February 2018 – via Hathi Trust.
  6. ^ Qureshi, Aqeel (25 April 2016). “Seerat sanai(Hazrat Molana Sanaullah Amritsari RA) ~ Siqarah Public Library islam pora jabber”Archived from the original on 19 October 2016.