These are some interesting documents in the history of the split in Ahmadiyya. These two articles were published in the “Pagham-e-Sulah”, “Message of Peace” in english, magazine (which was owned by Lahori-Ahmadi’s). Both of these tracts were published about the
middle of November 1913. They followed one another with an interval of one or two days. The first tract had four pages and the second eight pages. Both of them instead of bearing the name of the writer were anonymously subscribed to “one who invited Ahmadis to the last Will of the Promised Messiah”. These 2 essay’s (Izharul Haq No. 1 and Izharul Haq No. 2) reached most places packed in printed covers belonging to the office of the Paigham-e-Sulh. Following this, Babu Manzur Elahi, and Syed Inamullah Shah, manager of the Paigham-i-Sulha, expressed agreement with the views embodied in this tract; and in an open letter addressed to “Ansarullah”, held this organisation to blame. Naturally, then, the Ansarullah replied by bringing out a similar tract entitled Khilafat-i-Ahmadiyya. This tract was published on November 23, 1913. In the appendix of this tract we read:

“If we fail to express our thanks to Hazrat Khalifatul Masih I, it would be the height of ingratitude on our part. In spite of his old age, and great pressure of his duties as head of the Movement, he read the MS of this tract then gave permission for it to be published with a kind promise of prayer in furtherance of the aim and purpose of the tract.” (See “Truth Prevails” by Qazi Muhammad Nazeer).

In “Izharul Haq” the point was argued that Qudrat-i-Thania in Al- Wasiyyat could not mean the Institution of Khilafat, since the Khalifa, in any case, would be a human being, with a limited span of life, while the Promised Messiah had stated that the Qudrat-i-Thania would stay with the Jama’at forever. One answer given in Khilafat-i-Ahmadiyya was that this expression stood
for a chain of successive Khalifas, which was the interpretation given by the Promised Messiah himself. To support this view a quotation was given from Al-Wasiyyat, where the manifestation of two powers is mentioned, with a specific reference to Hazrat Abu Bakr, as an instance of how Qudrat-i-Thania worked after the death of the Holy Prophet, to promote the emergence of Hazrat Abu Bakr as the first Khalifa.

The Khalifa, covered these article/tracts in 1922 in some detail, however, he refused to publish copies (see “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, online english edition of 2007). Muhammad Ali also covered them and also refused to publish copies. A reply was published under the direction of Noorudin (per Qadiani sources) in the form of two tracts. The first was named Khilafat-e-Ahmadiyya (published by the Anjuman Ansarullah, Qadian), and was a reply to the tract Izharul Haq No, 1. The second was named Izhar-e-Haqiqat (published by the Anjuman Ansarullah, Qadian), and furnished a reply to Izharul Haq No. 2. Both these tracts were shown to and were corrected by Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra. At one place, Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra added these words: “A thousand shames upon the Paigham-e- Sulh, which in publishing its letter delivered to us a declaration of war and cast the apple of discord.” After the publication of these tracts everything was quiet for some time. The manager of the Paigham-e-Sulh and Babu Manzur Ilahi had to sue for Hadrat Khalifatul Masih’s pardon and the whole affair seemed to have closed. The basis of the objection in “Izharul Haq” was that Qudrat-i-Thania had been visualised in Al-Wasiyyat as everlasting, while a Khalifa, being a human being had only a limited span of life. The answer given in Khilafat-i-Ahmadiyya, page 17. was that the Promised Messiah had himself written “And after me, there would be other personalities who would be manifesters of the Qudrat-i-Thania.” In “Izharul Haq II”, thirty holes where picked in the Khilafat of Hazrat Khalifatul Masih I. The reply to this was “lzhar-i-Haqiqat”, which said, among other things, that these were the plots and conspiracies beginning to be hatched against the Institution of Khilafat, in the days of Hazrat Khalifatul Masih I himself.(See “Truth Prevails” by Qazi Muhammad Nazeer).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________In Izharal Haq they wrote: “For Maulvi Nuruddin I have respect in my heart. But it is regrettable that a moahadd (one who does not tolerate infringement of the Unity of God) of his stature, full in the teeth of the teachings of his Imam, in a capable Community, he is sowing the seed of the
worship of Pirs.” (Tract entitled ‘Ba’z Khas Karname’, by Hazrat Maulvi Mohammad Ismail) (See “Truth Prevails” by Qazi Muhammad Nazeer).

Note: The tract entitled ‘Ba’z Khas Karname’ bears the entire text of ‘Izharul Haq’. (The above passage we have taken for reproduction).(See “Truth Prevails” by Qazi Muhammad Nazeer).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ In ‘Izharul Haq’ No. 2, we read:

“Due to the negligence of venerable members of the Sadr Anjuman, the entire membership of the Movement found itself constrained to tender a pledge of bai’at to Maulvi Nurruddin; and in the grief and confusion over the death of the Founder, the guidance he had embodied in his last will and testament (Al-Wasiyyat) has been thrown behind the back.”


“A man who is a great scholar of the Holy Quran, and the Hadith, with a rich experience, on which Shar’ie basis did he fly into a rage? The accused is not told what crime he has committed. He has not been charge-sheeted in an arbitrary and biggoted judgement, characteristic of the Sikh rule, the Editor of the Paigham-i-Sulha, and other people connected with the journal, are being brought into disgrace by means of verbal pronouncements, and stuff sent into print in the Al-Fazl. Is this the sense of fairness and justice being engendered in the heart of the Ahmadiyya Community?”
In another place the worthy gentleman says: “Worship of the Pir, in a period of bare five years, has deprived the Community of moral courage.”

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Izharul Haq No. 1

From “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, online english edition of 2007. This book was initially published in Urdu in 1922 as “Aenas Sadaqat”.

“””The purport of Izharul Haq No. 1 was to the effect that the modern age was one of democracy and that this universal fact afforded an indication that the Divine teacher of the age was also to be an exponent of democracy. According to the anonymous author of this tract, this was what had happened. The Promised Messiahas used to consult his friends in all matters except those in which he acted under the special direction of Divine revelation. He also declared that one of the purposes for which he had been sent by God was to reduce to due proportion the excessive dignity which had been attributed to mere men. And when he was informed by God of his approaching death he wrote out a will, and therein solved the question of his succession by laying down that after him there would be democracy, and the management of affairs of the Community would be vested in an Anjuman. It was a pity, however, that the Community turned a deaf ear to his words and fell into saintworship, and forgot altogether his injunctions about democratising the management of the Community. There were in the Community many who had entered into the Bai‘at under constraint; and as a matter of fact the person to whom Bai‘at had been sworn (viz. Hadrat Maulana Nuruddin Khalifatul Masih Ira) was not the person most fitted in the Community to receive such Bai‘at. The people who were ultimately responsible for this state of affairs were the officers of Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiyya, who had after the death of the Promised Messiahas thrown the Community into the mire of saint-worship. The result had been that various means were being devised to secure possession of the Khilafat, and a special society of Ansarullah had been formed with the object of frustrating the efforts of all the leading members of the Community. The ostensible duty of the Ansarullah was to propagate the faith, but their real purpose was to advertise the leading members of the Community as a set of hypocrites. Men like Maulawi Ghulam Husain Sahib of Peshawar, Mir Hamid Shah Sahib of Sialkot, Maulawi Muhammad Ali Sahib, Khwaja Kamaluddin Sahib, Shaikh Rahmatullah Sahib, Doctor Sayyid Muhammad Husain Shah Sahib and Doctor Mirza Ya‘qub Baig Sahib were being held up to opprobrium. The Promised Messiahas had declared in clear words that after him the Anjuman would be his successor not an individual person. He had written distinctly that after him the Sadr Anjuman would have the last word in all matters. But now every one could see the present attitude of the Community—how they received with implicit obedience every word of a Ghair Ma’mur (one not Divinely commissioned—a term which this anonymous writer applied to Hadrat
Khalifatul Masih Ira). The Khalifa had refused to receive the Paigham-e-Sulh, and had thus alienated from it the sympathy of the Community. (Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra tired of the continued duplicity of the Paigham-e-Sulh. had directed that it should no longer be sent to him, and when the managers of the paper persisted in sending the paper to his address, Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra declined to receive it from the Post Office.) When, therefore, this man regarded by the Community as the most learned in the knowledge of the Quran, (i.e. Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra) treats leading members of the Community with such indignity, and only in order to display his pontifical authority, what can the leading members expect from young men lacking in experience and immature of understanding? How long will the leading members of the Community see these things and hold their peace? Ahmadis! turn away your eyes
from the other Pirzadas and attend instead to Pirzadas in your own home.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Izharul Haq No. 2

“”The substance of the tract Izharul Haq No. 2 was as follows: There were no intrigues in the Ahmadiyya Community. Servility to a Ghair Ma’mur (i.e. oath of Bai‘at at the hand of Hadrat Khalifatul Masihra) has reduced us to this condition. In the time of the Holy Prophetsa and in that of the Promised Messiahas, the Muslim Community were free to express their opinion. Now there was much repression. False reports carried to the Khalifa were causing no end of trouble to our brethren. If this state of things continued for some time there would soon be nothing to distinguish between an Ahmadi saint-worshipper and a non-Ahmadi saint-worshipper. A new reformer was not likely to appear until at last one hundred years after the time of the Promised Messiahas. Those who held and spread a contrary opinion did so out of personal interests. The welfare of the Community lay in having all its affairs managed on democratic principles.

The tract then went on to trace thus the history of dissensions in the Community. On the death of the Promised Messiahas and in the excitement which naturally followed, the Community turned their backs on the instructions of the Promised Messiahas and elected Maulawi Nuruddin as their Khalifa. But it was on every body’s lips at the time, that after Maulawi Nuruddin, only Maulawi Muhammad Ali could be Khalifa. There were, however, envious people who, when they saw this, at once began their intrigues through the help of Hadrat Ummul Mu’minin. They got her to write to the Khalifa that she had sworn Bai‘at at his hands, but would not swear it at the hands of any person of mean descent. The Khalifa replied to her in soothing words and satisfied her for the moment. After this, efforts both fair and foul began to be made to interfere in the work of the Anjuman and to make the situation uncomfortable for Maulawi Muhammad Ali. Then trouble was created through Mir Muhammad Ishaq. (This refers to the questions submitted by him to Hadrat Khalifatul Masih Ira of which an account has been given above.) An agitation was started against members of the Anjuman. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was put up as a candidate for the Khilafat, and it was declared publicly that members of the Anjuman were hostile to the family of the Promised Messiahas—a statement which had not the least basis in fact. Members of the family of the Promised Messiahas were a burden upon the finances of the Community and were busy making attacks upon the Anjuman and upon its members. Charge after charge had been brought against Maulawi Muhammad Ali. When a proposal was submitted to the Khalifa for the publication of the Paigham-e-Sulh, immediately a request was made for permission to publish the Al-Fadl, a request which the Khalifa was obliged to grant for fear of trouble.

The tract continues: The authorities of the Paigham-e-Sulh have nothing to do with the contents
of the present tracts nor are they aware of their existence. When the Cawnpore mosque controversy began the authorities of the Paigham-e-Sulh sent Khalifa Rajabuddin to Qadian with a copy of the Tribune, and obtained instructions from the Khalifatul Masihra. If, however, at the time of their publication any departure had been made from those instructions, the right course for the Khalifa was to publish a contradiction in the columns of the Paigham-e-Sulh, and not to become offended with the authorities of the paper. The Khalifa in fact discontinued receiving the paper not because of any difference of opinion as to the mosque controversy but because of some minor matters which gave him offence. Ye Brethren! Is it not a matter of surprise that a person learned in the Holy Quran (meaning Hadrat Khalifatul Masih Ira) should thus seek to humiliate the editor of the Paigham-e-Sulh and other people connected with the paper—both by oral propaganda and through articles in the Al-Fadl? Is this the justice inculcated by Islam? The abuse that has been heaped upon the Paigham-e- Sulh by the Al-Haq of Delhi has not been replied to by the Qadian party. The latter therefore stands charged with being a party to the same.

The tract then proceeds to indulge in a series of personal attacks which it would be difficult for
readers living far away from Qadian to follow without laborious explanations. The substance of these charges is that members of the Promised Messiah’sas family have been fomenting discord in the Community and bringing into disgrace its leading members. The tract invites the Community to strive and save the Movement from the impending disaster and to put themselves into communication with the writer.

Who Wrote the Tracts?
This tract, like the first, was published anonymously, but there were certain points about
them both which clearly indicated their source:

Firstly, these tracts had been published from Lahore, which was at that time the headquarters of the party of Maulawi Muhammad Ali. By calling it their headquarters I do not mean that at that time Lahore was openly set up as a rival to Qadian. What I mean is that the majority of the members, who shared the views of Maulawi Muhammad Ali lived in that city, and their organ, the Paigham-e-Sulh, was published from that place. Practically, therefore, if not openly, Lahore was already the headquarters of the party. Of course, after the death of Hadrat Khalifatul Masih Ira,
Lahore began openly to be mentioned as such.

Secondly, the tracts reached most places packed in printed covers belonging to the office of the Paighame-Sulh. The fact was sufficient to prove that they had been dispatched from the office of that paper, or at least that the people connected with that paper had a hand in the distribution of the tracts.

Thirdly, the writer of the tracts asked his readers to communicate with him on the subject-matter of the tracts, but at the same time failed to furnish any address. The question naturally arises as to how, in the absence of an address, were the people to communicate with the author?
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Quote from the Pagham e Sulh, as quote by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad in “Truth About the Split”

“The people who wrote the Izharul Haq and those who published the open letter as well as those who discussed the question of Khilafat and those who published the booklets what right had they to do so?” The Paigham-e- Sulh dated 14th January 1914, page 13.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Dost Muhammad Shahid in Tareekh Ahmadiat Vol-4 pages 467

On 26 May 1908, when Mirza Ghulam Qadiani died, his eldest son Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmoud Ahmad was a young man of 17 and there was a man of calibre of Nuruddin, so he was selected as the khalifa 1 without any hindrance.

However, the situation was entirely different when Nuruddin was at his death bed. Qadiani Jamaat elders were divided into two factions one was Led by Molana Muhammad Ali Lahori and on the other side were Mirza Family including Mir Nasir Nawab, Nusrat Jehan with some old Mullahs of MGA team at their back.

Dost Muhammad Shahid in Tareekh Ahmadiat Vol-4 pages 467 onwards, writes the events that clearly depicts a big rift in the party. He writes :- in mid November, 1913 two tracts of 4 pages and 8 pages each were published under the title of. Izharul Haq, 1 and Izharul Haq 2. The authors of these tracts were anonymous and had fictitious names as DAEE ILAL WASIYYAT. (Preacher of the Will) at the end. Tract 1 says when hazrat Masih Moud (MGAQ) died he wrote his will which resolve the issue of his predecessor in the manner that Anjuman would precede him not a single person and only his decision would be binding on all. But contrary to this will, not only khalifa was appointed but a group namely Ansarullah was created to defame the elders of Jamaat. They are targeting Molana Muhammad Ali Lahori , Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig,Shaikh Taimur , khwaja Kamaluddin, Shaikh Rehmatullah, Dr. Syed Muhammad Hussain and calling them Munafiq. Similarly, an un appointed khalifa who is a scholar of Quraan insults any one he likes using the powers of his Khilafat .

Second tract says an un appointed person has destroyed the jamaat. No one in jamaat can express his views for the fear of displeasure of khalifa. They are observing taqayya.(hypocrisy). There is no difference between ahmadi peer worshipping and those of non ahmadis peer worshippers.

When Molvi Nuruddin was accepted as Khalifa every body was saying that Molvi Muhammad Ali would be the next Khalifa. Then Bivi Sahiba (Nusrat Jehan) got activated and she conveyed message to the Molvi Nuruddin that they have accepted him but are not going to accept an arain (a prime cast of Punjab) after you. Every effort was made to interfare into the affairs of anjuman and to tease Molna Muhammad Ali. A fuss was also created through Mir Muhammad Ishaq. Propaganda was created about Paigham e Suleh magazine which was boycotted by Molvi Nuruddin and Al Fazl was issued in its place. Khalifa who is a scholar of Quraan, start insulting the editor and staff of Paigham e Suleh through Al-Fazl.

The publication of these tracts sent a wave of shock among the rank and file of the Jamaat. Khalifa Nuruddin expressed his severe displeasure on it.

On 18 February, Nusrat Jehan along with hazrat Amman Jan came to see Molvi Nuruddin, She said salam to him and tears started flowing from the eyes Molvi Nuruddin. Molvi Nuruddin decided to move to the House of Nawab Muhammad Ali Khan for change of atmosphere. On 27th February after Juma prayer, he proceeded to the house of Nawab riding in a palanquin. Molvi Sadruddin and Molvi Muhammad Ali wanted to shift him to the upper story of Boarding House. However Molvi sb was not able to go upstair so they arranged few dining tables in a way that four person carry him upstair through these dining tables. Their aim was to keep khalifa in isolation so that no one could come to see him without their permission. But there was a risk that he might fall down from these table and get injured seriously in shifting upstair. Secondly there was not any kitchen for food arrangement there.

The news of this dangerous plan came to the knowledge of Mirza Sharif Ahmad. So by the time the palanquin reached there Molvi sb asked the carrier with a sad voice so you want to keep me here. Mirza Sharif somehow managed to reach there in time and he said in a loud voice, huzur we are going to the house of Nawab sb and they have stopped here to take a little rest only. In this way he foiled this evil attempt. To cover up this Paigham e Suleh brought out the story that huzur wanted to rest at the upper story of boarding house but due to sickness could not reach there and decided to stay at the house of Nawab sb for few days.

Dost Muhammad Shahid says Hazrat Mirza Mahmoud sb also moved there and would always keep himself present at the service of Khalifa-1. Then khalifa sb asked Molvi Sarwar to bring paper and pen and wrote his will in a state of lying on bed. Molvi Nuruddin wrote on the will that my children are small and I am leaving no riches. They may not be fed from the funds of orphans ( Yatama Masakin) rather a convenient loan be arranged which is to be paid by them after getting resources. As per order of Khalifa sb this will was read over thrice to all present.

The will was signed by Huzur and Molana Muhammad Ali, Nawab Muhammad Ali Khan, Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig, Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmoud signed it as witness. Huzur Molvi sb handed over the will to Nawab Muhammad Ali Khan sb for safe custody.

After signing of will the opponents started fanning the disputes and made personal attacks on Mirza Mahmoud who published an Ishtihar requesting his opponents to make peace at this critical juncture. Nuruddin died at about 2.PM on 13 March 1914. Next day after Asr prayer Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmoud was appointed his predecessor. At one side was the dead body of Molvi Nuruddin on the other side were the opponents of Khilafat, conspiracies were being cooked every where.

Molvi Muhammad Ali has made an Ishtihar ready before the death of Nuruddin. It was distributed already and packets were ready for sending to distant places. This Ishtihar says that Jamaat does not need khilafat but it needs Anjuman . To honour the will of Nuruddin some one can be made Khalifa but Anjuman would not be under his administrative control. This Ishtihar was on 21 pages contained detailed explanation regarding the importance of Anjuman and requested the ahmadis not to accept khilafat after the death of Molvi Nuruddin.

To counter this a brief note was made by Mirza Bashiruddin telling people to go with the khalifa which is necessary for Jamaat,s well being. Next day a meeting was held at Nawab sb,s house. But no agreement could be reached. Another meeting was held at Masjid Noor next day after Asr prayer where Molvi Ahsan Amrohi announced that Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmoud would be the next Khalifa. Muhmaad Ali Lahori tried to oppose this but no body paid a heed to him. Here a heated debate was ensued between Muhammad Ali Lahori and Syed Hamid Ali Shah.

Now the people start asking for bayat, Mirza Bashir said give me time I have to recall the baiyat words as these are not coming to my mind. Again Molvi Ahsan Amrohi came to his rescue and said I will speak out the words of Baiyat and Mahmoud would repeat them for baiyat seekers. In this way Mahhoud ascended the throne of Qadiani Family and company.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________The scans from Dost Muhammad Shahid in Tareekh Ahmadiat Vol-4 pages 467

Image may contain: 1 person, hat and beard
Image may contain: 1 person, sitting and beard
Image may contain: text
Image may contain: text
Image may contain: text
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essay’s

The Ahmadiyya newspaper, Al-Fazl, quotes and data

The Paigham-e-Sulh magazine, background info and some important quotes


#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #Ahmadiyyat #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiyyaPersecution #trueislam
#yuzasaf #rozabal #jesusinindia #messiahhascome #BewareOfFalseMessiah