In 1884, in the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya Vol. 4, page 428 of the online english edition, MGA claims that his revelations to date, are free from satanic interference. He goes a step further and claims that 22:52 of the Quran has an alternate reading (qiraat) wherein the translation would be different. MGA’s new translation was as follows: “”Never sent We a Messenger or a Prophet or a Muhaddath before you””. Thus, MGA was asserting that a Muhaddath got the same type of satan free revelations as Messengers (Rasul’s) and Prophets (Nabi’s). MGA doesn’t seem to have ever quoted this verse ever again in his career. MGA never quoted this verse ever again to argue for the divine revelations of Muhaddath’s or Nabi’r or Rasul’s.

Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya, online english edition, page 428

“”””Now consider what conclusion follows from this. Does it not prove that the perfect followers among ummat-e-Muhammadiyyah should be more deserving to be mulham-o-muhaddath [the recipients of revelation and discourse] than those people, because according to the explanation of the Holy Quran they [the perfect followers among ummat-e-Muhammadiyyah] are Khairul-Umam? Why do you not ponder over the Holy Quran? And why are you so prone to error in your deliberations? Do you not know that the Sahihain record, about this ummah, the glad tiding of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that like the previous ummahs, many a muhaddath would be raised in this ummah as well? And the word muhaddath—in which the د [dal] is pronounced with a fathah—refers to those who are blessed with divine converse and discourse. You are also aware of Ibn-e-‘Abbas’ qira’at of the verse:

22:52, Mis-translated by MGA as: Never sent We a Messenger or a Prophet or a Muhaddath before you, but when he sought to attain what he aimed at, Satan put obstacles in the way of
what he sought after. But Allah removes the obstacles that are placed by Satan. Then Allah firmly establishes His Signs.

Thus, according to this verse, which Bukhari has also documented, it is established that a muhaddath’s revelations are certain and unequivocal, in which the interference of Satan cannot stand.”””

Other Quranic verses that MGA claimed for himself in 1884
——48:28, 61:09 and 9:32

RK, v. 3, p. 439; starts at 5th line from top; Izaalah-e-Auhaam, Part 2, Via Nuzhat Haneef

“”Revelation can be ‘Rahmaanee’ [i.e., from God] as well as ‘Shaytaanee’ [i.e., Satanic]. And when a person, with interference from his own spirit and thought, meditates for [or pays attention to] some matter to be revealed, by way of ‘istekhaarah’ [a special prayer for guidance/help regarding the future] [or in some other way]. Particularly in a state such that when there is a hidden wish in his heart that according to my preference/desire I may learn, by way of revelation, some good or bad statement about someone, then, at that time, Satan interferes in his desire and some statement begins to be uttered by his tongue and, in fact, that is a Satanic statement. And such interference sometime occurs in the revelation of prophets and messengers too but without delay it is removed. It is toward this that Allaah, with His Manifest Glory, pointsin the Noble Quraan: [Arabic text of the first part of Quraan 22:53]. Similarly, it is also stated in the Gospels that Satan, exchanging his appearance with that of radiant angels, visits certain people … “””

Hamamat al-Bushrah, Via Muhammad Ali, Prophethood in Islam, 1915

p. 81

“And this is proved by the sayings (athar) and practice (Sunnah) of the Messenger of Allah, (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), that he has said: ‘There used to be persons among those who were before you of the Israelites who were spoken to by God though they were not prophets, and if there are such persons among my followers, ‘Umar is one of them.’ He further said, ‘There used to be muhaddathin in the ummah before you and if such persons are to be found in my ummah, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab is one of them.’ It has been mentioned in Bukhari in context of the Quranic verse, ‘And We never sent a messenger or a prophet before thee but when We desired.’ Ibn ‘Abbas is reported to have added the word muhaddath in this verse i.e., he would read it: ‘and We never sent a messenger or a prophet or a muhaddath’. …”

“I have written in some of my books that the office of tahdith bears a close resemblance to that of prophethood and they differ only in the matter of potentiality and actuality. But my opponents did not understand my statement and asserted that I was a claimant to prophethood. And God knows it well that their assertion is quite false, baseless and devoid of the slightest truth. They have falsified it only to incite the people to takfir, abuses, curses, vilifications, abhorrence, animosity and violence against me, which caused dissension among the believers.”

“I declare in the name of God that I believe in Allah and His Messenger and I also believe that he is Khatam al-Nabiyyin (Seal of the Prophets). I have, however, said that all elements of prophethood are found in a muhaddath in a potential form but not in actuality. Thus a muhaddath is potentially a prophet and had not the door of prophethood been closed, he too would have been a prophet. And on this count it is permissible to say that prophet is a muhaddath, for he possesses, par excellence, all the excellences (kamalat) in their true form. Likewise, it is permissible to say that a muhaddath is a nabi in a potential form and all the excellences of nubuwwah lie hidden and concealed in his office of tahdith, but their manifestation (zuhur) and outward expression (khuruj) are limited because the door of prophethood has been closed. And the Holy Prophet, (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), has hinted at this in his saying that ‘had there been a prophet after me it would have been ‘Umar.’ And this was said because ‘Umar was a muhaddath. Thus he pointed out that the seed and substance of prophethood exist in a muhaddath.”


Muhammad Ali in his famous commentary of the Quran.

Muhammad Ali doesn’t quote MGA, nor does he mention how the divine revelations of a Muhaddath are free from satanic interference. Nor does he mention any alternate reading (qiraat). 

Malik Ghulam Farid’s (MGF) famous 5-volume commentary of the Quran.

MGF doesn’t quote MGA, nor does he mention how the divine revelations of a Muhaddath are free from satanic interference. Nor does he mention any alternate reading (qiraat).
Links and Related Essay’s

 Misconception Removed


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