We have found a new reference in terms of the famous insult that MGA gave to all Muslims who rejected him in 1893: “”dhurriyyatul baghaya””. It comes from the ROR of March-1935. In early 1935, K. L. Gauba proposed to put the Qadiani-Ahmadi’s on the stand in a case with the Punjab Assembly. The case would revolved around MGA’s insults to Muslims, specifically, the Zurrayatul Baghaya quote. The National League at Qadian responded in the ROR of March 1935 and explained that MGA didn’t mean children of prostitutes, instead they allege that MGA meant, “Children, followers and supporters”=Zurrayatul and Baghaya meant “Slave girls, immoral women and the advance guard of an army”. They go to allege that this quote meant “followers of the vanguard of the party which was out to crush the Ahmadiyya Movement”, or as “low and ill mannered people like the children of bondwomen”.
In 1891, in Ludhiana, MGA had a written debate with Batalvi and Maulvi Saadulah and a few others. This was MGA and his teams second written debate of their careers, MGA never had any oral debates. In 1892-1893, he used the term “Zurrayatul Baghaya” (children of prostitutes) as he described in Arabic those who had rejected his claims of Messiah-ship (See A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam). It should be remembered that there were barely 300 Ahmadi’s in those days. He even wrote out 1000 “lanaats” in 1894 as he was raging out of control in Nurul Haq, Nur ul Haq was an Arabic only book, there seems to have also been an urdu translation given with the original book. Our Arabic ex-Ahmadi friends like Hani Tahir and Ikrima Najami have been going through MGA’s arabic books and giving us some quotes which have never been given to the world ever before. These quotes are vulgar, you have been warned. Some other publications are also quoted. Additional quotes from Nurul-Haq can be found here. MGA also called his opponents’ women as bitches in 1898 in Najmul Huda (in a poem). It seems that in 1897, MGA and his team called Sa’dullah as a son of prostitutes. MGA also discussed the insult “Zurrayatul Baghaya” in his book “Khutbah ilhamiya”. In terms of the Quran, the word Baghaya was used in the Quran twice, once in 19:20 and once in 19:28. In both cases, these are loose women or it could be used as prostitutes.
However, after Sa’dullah died in 1907, MGA refused to even mention that part of his poetry from 10 years earlier. Interestingly enough, Mirza Bashir Ahmad tells us that Muhammad Ali ( one of MGA’s lawyer’s and employees) told MGA not to mention how he had called Sa’dullah as the son of prostitutes, since Muhammad Ali feared legal recourse. This would be defamation, MGA had narrowly escaped a defamation case in 1904, Dard tells us it was Khwaja Kamaluddin and not Muhammad Ali however. However, by 1935, Mirza Bashir Ahmad said: The lawyer was Khwajah Kamal-ud-Din. In al-Hakam, volume 38, number 7, February 28, 1935, pages 3–4, narrating the eye-witness accounts of Maulavi Muhammad Ibrahim Baqapuri (see the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah). We have recently found an old urdu book by Ahmadiyya writers which specifically discusses this issue. In 1907, MGA and his team of ghost writers issued a clarification on the word Ibn Bagha or “Zarrayatul baghaya”. They were scared of a legal case against MGA via defamation. Thus, MGA’s team issued a correction via Al-Hakam Volume 11, page 7 (February 1907). I found it on the old thecult.info message boards, See page 3, about half way down the page. The MTA team also gave the same explanation, i.e., that MGA only meant “an arrogant person” when he used these words.
ROR March 1935
Links and Related Essay’s
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism