Intro
In the below, we have chronologically catalogued how MGA did Takfir against Muslims and vice versa. It should be noted that MGA never quoted 4:94 (4:95 in the Qadiani Quran), thus, his comments on this verse are unknown. Obviously, this verse and the hadith of this nature refer to war time and how a Muslim shouldn’t suspect that a new Muslim had fake converted to Islam. Check out Bro Imtiaz’s extensive video on the topic.
In 1884, MGA is called a Kafir by the Ahl-e-Hadith ulema of Ludhiana. Since MGA claimed to have fulfilled all the conditions of the second coming of Eisa (As) in his own person. Syed Muhammad Hussain Batlavi famously defends him in his review. Interestingly, Muslims of Amritsar declared MGA’s revelations to be unauthentic, impossible and unacceptable, and the others from Ludhiana declare it categorical kufr [infidelity]. The reason presented by the first party (Amritsari Muslims) is that the divine revelation (which is equivalent to wahi) cannot be – and has not been till this day – received by anyone except Prophets. […] Whereas the reason presented by the second party (Muslims of Ludhiana) behind their edict of kufr is that the author has claimed to be a prophet in these revelations (Ishaat-us-Sunnah, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp. 171-172).
In 1891, MGA did Takfir in 1891 (of Muslims who believe in abrogation). MGA also alleged that all Muslims who believe in the physical descent of Eisa (as)(which constitutes 99% of Muslims in the world) were guilty of breaking the seal of prophethood as described in 33:40.
In 1892-1893, MGA and his team of writers wrote vs. Sir Syed that Allah had opened secrets of prophethood, messenger ship and wahi to MGA and thus, MGA’s deniers are Kafir and destined for Hell (See A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, online English edition, page 293).
In 1899-1902, in Tiryaq ul Qulub, MGA said Kafirs are only those who deny law-bearing prophets, and since MGA wasn’t a law-bearing prophet, his deniers were not Kafir. However, MGA claimed prophethood in 1900-1901 and his attitude changed (See Tiryaq ul Qulub, p. 130, via Muhammad Ali, “Prophethood in Islam“).
In 1902, MGA did Takfir on Shia’s and called their beliefs as shirk.
In 1902, via Tohfa Tun Nadwah (see page 16, online english edition), MGA said Muslims are accountable for denying him.
In 1902, MGA prophesied that Allah would destroy Muslim mosques and Muslims would lose their masjids and Ahmadi’s would take them! (See Malfuzat, 2022 edition online-Urdu, V-3, page 411, Nov-1902). The topic of MGA’s discussion was “Reading prayers in the mosque of non’s”. This was related by Nur Bakhsh. Nur Bakhsh says that he was reading the Al-Hakam and read that there was an advisory to not read prayers in non-Ahmadi masjids. In the Al-Hakam, MGA had said that his God advised Ahmadi’s to not pray in non-Ahmadi masjids. MGA said that an Ahmadi should read their prayers at home instead of reading them at a non-Ahmadi mosque (See Bro Imtiaz 54:17 timestamp in 2026)(See scan in below).
In 1903, MGA ordered Ahmadi’s to refuse the Salaam (greeting of peace) to any level of rejector (mukafir) and those that cuss (galee) at Ahmadiyya, those who are silent, they are the rejectors (mukafir). MGA also said don’t eat with them, buying and selling with them is allowed. Do not perform funeral prayers for them! (See Malfuzat-3, older Urdu edition, page 215, April 10, 1903, Al-Hakam, pages 13-14 and via Bro Imtiaz showed a quote (1:18:37 timestamp)(Dec-2025).
In 1905, Ahmadiyya sources allege that on Oct-27-1905, while in Delhi, on Friday, MGA was allegedly asked by a student many questions about his wahi and status. MGA was also asked as to why his deniers were called Kafir. MGA replied and said that Kufr means to reject. When
these people do not accept one appointed by Allah and abuse and deny, then the matter does not stop there. Rather, a door opens, and the tongue is set loose, and gradually, one is deprived
of the ability to do good deeds. MGA also called himself a prophet, without qualification (See Malfuzat-8, online English edition, pages 52-64, via Badr, vol. 1, no. 33, p. 2–4, dated 6 November 1905).
In 1905, MGA argued that it was mandatory to accept him (See the al-Badr, vol. 1, no. 36, p. 3–5, dated 17 November 1905, via Malfuzat-8, online English edition, page 69).
In 1905 (Nov-17), MGA and his team of writers argued that the denial of a prophet leads to Kufr. They also quoted a hadith from Bukhari wherein it is stated that Allah has a war with those who deny a Wali (See Malfuzat-8, online English edition, page 9, via Al-Hakam, vol. 9, no. 40, p. 10, dated 17 November 1905).
In 1905 (Dec), two men took Bai‘at [the Pledge of Allegiance] with MGA at Qadian. One asked whether it is permissible to offer Prayer behind a non-Ahmadi or not. MGA said, They call us kafirs [disbelievers]. If we are not kafirs, that kufr [disbelief ] reverts upon them. The one calling a Muslim a kafir, is himself a kafir. For this reason, it is not permissible to offer Prayer behind such people. Moreover, those in their midst who remain silent [regarding us being Muslim or kafir] are also included among them. It is not permissible to offer Prayer behind them either because they harbour some opposing religious belief in their hearts which prevents them from openly joining us (See Malfuzat-8, online English edition, page 192, via Badr, vol. 1, no. 39, p. 2, dated 15 December 1905).
In 1906, an Ahmadi from Jhelum came to Qadian and told MGA that there was an Ahmadi in Jhelum who prays behind Muslims and sometimes, leads the Ahmadi’s in prayers. Is this permissible? MGA said when those people call us kafir and say that if we are wrong in calling them kafir, then we ourselves are kafir, then how can it be permissible to pray behind them? Similarly, if an Ahmadi prays behind them, do not pray behind him until he offers taubah [repentance] (See Malfuzat-8, online English edition, pages 430-431, via Badr, vol. 6, nos. 1 and 2, p. 18, dated 10 January 1907).
In 1906-1907 (via Haqiqatul Wahy), MGA denied write a letter to Dr. Khan wherein he did Takfir, however, a few pages later, MGA called Muslim’s who believe that Eisa (As) hasn’t died yet as committing shirk. Thus, MGA was basically doing Takfir 3-4 different ways in 1906-1907.
In 1906 (Oct-25), via the Al-Badr, in MGA’s presence, an Ahmadi named Qazi Muhammad Zahuruddin Akmal, who was recently hired to work as an editor for the Al-Badr, recited a poem wherein he alleged that MGA was greater than Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah)(Al-Badr, Oct-25, 1906 and the Al-Fazl of Aug-13-1944, See also the 1974 NA proceedings page 785, pdf page 410). This poem was originally recited in presence of MGA in 1906 and MGA was very happy to hear it and praised with words ‘Jazak-Allah’. Further, the Al-fazl wrote that this poem written in calligraphic handwriting was presented to MGA and he took it with him to his home to show it to his family. In the Al-Fazl article, a case was built that (elders of LAM including) Maulana Muhammad Ali, Khawaja Kamal ud Din, Shaikh Rehmatullah, Mirza Yaqub Baig, Syed Muhammad Hussain…..held the same opinion, and it was translated from Persian (original language of poem) into Urdu. And that Maulana Muhammad Ali was present in gathering when poem was recited to MGA.
In 1907, allegedly at the 1907 Jalsa at Qadian, MGA argued that simply professing to be a Muslim is not good enough, a person must prove it (See Al-Badr, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 7, dated 9 January 1908, via Malfuzat-10, online English edition, pages 32-96). MGA complained about being declared Kafir by the Muslims of India and said that Ahmadi’s have the same Qibla, the same salat and that “Qadiani’s” did fast in the month of Ramadan in the same fashion; and that there was no difference with regard to Hajj [the Pilgrimage] and Zakat [almsgiving]. Still, for reasons unknown, they declared us to be even worse than the Christians and the Jews, and it was considered [by them] worthy of reward to abuse us day and night.
In 1908 (Mar), MGA was asked about Ali (ra) and whether he did Taqiyya or not. Firstly, MGA argued that Shias incorrectly accuse Sunni’s of altering the Quran, MGA says that this isn’t possible. MGA infers that the Shias accuse Ali (ra) of disingenuously praying behind 3 Khalifa’s and called it Taqiyya, MGA says this is not possible. MGA then says that his own followers are thus not allowed to pray behind non-Ahmadi’s (See the Ahmadiyya Takfir timeline)(See Malfuzat-10, online English edition, pages 215-221, via Al-Hakam, vol. 12, no. 20, p. 7–8, dated 18 March 1908). MGA compared Taqiyya with Ahmadi’s praying behind non-Ahmadi’s.
In 1908 (Mar), Maulvi Sanaullah admitted that he was confused on prayers behind common Ahmadi’s, that’s why he seeks opinions of other scholars on this matter. But he was not confused on takfeer of Qadianies he has written clearly that fatwa of kufr is still binding and there is no reduction on severity of their kufr in the same essay (See scans in the below).
In 1908 (Dec), Mufti Muhammad Sadiq published portions of his correspondence with an Ahmadi in Baluchistan. This letter was addressed to MGA, however, opened and read by Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, which is normal. In this letter, the Ahmadi is asking if it is OK to pray behind non-Ahmadi’s? The Ahmadi in the letter complains about a local Ahmadi named Nur Muhammad who seems to like to pray behind Muslims. This Ahmadi explains that this Nur Muhammad is a dear friend of his and is a pious man of repute. This Ahmadi explains that Nur Muhammad was the one who introduced him to Ahmadiyya in the first place, thus the irony and confusion. MGA allegedly dictated a response via Mufti Muhammad Sadiq. In this response, MGA said that if there are such people who would tender a public announcement to evidence their good faith that they do not follow those maulawis [Muslim clergymen] who have declared me a disbeliever, it would be acceptable to pray with them. Otherwise, the one who declares Muslims to be kafir becomes a kafir himself, so how can we offer our Prayer behind him? Verily, this is not permissible according to the Noble Law [of Islam](See Malfuzat-10, pages 221-223, via al-Badr, vol. 8, no. 7–9, p. 5, dated 24 to 31 December 1908).
By 1911, MGA’s son, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad was authenticating the letter to Dr. Khan and thus contradicted MGA.
In 1913, Mirza Bashir Ahmad argued that we can reconcile with venomous snakes and scorpions, but not with Ghair-Ahmadis (Muslims)(See Al-Fazl, 23-May-1913).
In 1914 (May-16), Mirza Bashir Ahmad was listed as the editor of the Al-Fazl (see Bro Imtiaz, 1:21:35 time stamp)(see scan in the below). Mirza Bashir Ahmad wrote an article wherein he accused Khwaja Kamaluddin of starting this dispute on Takfir and now as a result of that, there are 2 sects. Mirza Bashir Ahmad alleges that it was only Abdul Hakim Khan who didn’t agree with the Takfir of MGA in 1906-1907, i.e., that every person who has heard of MGA and has refused to accept MGA, he is not a Muslim. Mirza Bashir Ahmad says that Abdul Hakim Khan was kicked out of Ahmadiyya for the crime of not agreeing with MGA’s takfir.
