Intro
As we all know, Maulvi Noorudin, Maulvi Abdul Karim and MGA were all influenced by the writings of Sir Syed. Sir Syed denied all miracles in Islam by 1880, he denied the Islamic creation theory, the return of Esa (as), the arrival of the Mahdi, the physicality of the Mir’aj, all the hadith work, etc etc etc. Obviously, Noorudin and Abdul Karim knew each other in 1880 and in the below I present data which proves this fact. They would all eventually join MGA’s team of Mullahs and ghost writers, Maulvi Abdul Karim, Maulvi Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, Maulvi Sher Ali, Hakim Fazl Din of Bhera, Noorudin and many others. Some other people who came independently, yet still joined MGA’s team was Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi, who was also a member of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, in fact, uptil his job with MGA, he worked for the founder of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, Syed Nazeer Husain from Delhi and Siddiq Hasan Khan of Bhopal. Maulvi Muhammad Ali was another, however, he came via Khwaja Kamaluddin and the prominent Ahmadi’s of Lahore.
Sir Syed began publishing his commentary of the Quran in 1880, however, the section which concerns Esa (as) was published (see Nuzhat Haneef) in 1882, MGA almost immediately began calling himself as “like-esa” or “Maseel-e-Maseeh”. It’s important to note that it was Noorudin who urged MGA to do so. Later on, MGA also copied Sir Syed’s swoon theory and passed it off as his own (see Jesus in India, 1908 and Nuzhat Haneef). MGA also attracted lots of people who were already following Sir Syed’s new ideas on Islam, like Maulvi Abdul Karim and others. Sir Syed also denied the entire concept of the Mahdi in this era. The truth is that MGA knew about the new beliefs of Sir Syed as early as 1872 and began to slowly adopt them. However, he lied about his true beliefs from 1876–1890. Check out the books on Islam by Sir Syed herein from 1857-1870. Afzal Upal has revealed in his book on Ahmadiyya that MGA was actually writing letters to Sir Syed back in the early 1860’s, when he was employed in Sialkot (see page 112). Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (spelled Sir Sayyad Ahmad of Aligarh) is mentioned in detail in the ROR of June-1933.
Like I have written before, MGA and his team copied from Sir Syed on almost every single topic, except Jesus in India, that was tooo ridiculous for any human to conjure up. In this specific case, I have a scan from the writings of Sir Syed, pre–1891, wherein he says that all hadith on the Mahdi are weak and unreliable. In 1891, MGA claimed to be “jesus”, he then downgraded all hadith on the Mahdi and called them as unreliable. However, once he heard about the eclipses, he quickly found a super unreliable hadith and called it as reliable and thus made the claim of being the only Mahdi who was to come. Afzal Upal has revealed in his book on Ahmadiyya that MGA was actually writing letters to Sir Syed back in the early 1860’s, when he was employed in Sialkot (see page 112).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Some Additional data on MGA’s connection to Sir Syed
MGA basically stole Sir Syed’s ideas. In fact, the name “Ahmadiyya” came from a book that Sir Syed wrote “””Al Khutbat al Ahmadiya”” (1870), in reply to Muir”s “Life of Mahomet”. Sir William Muir’s “Life of Mahomet” (available online) made some wild allegations against the Prophet Mohammad (saw). Syed Ahmad was greatly disturbed and pained and prepared to write a detailed response in the form of the book “Khutubat-i-Ahmadiya”. He planned to collect research material in England during his trip to England. Syed Ahmad had to endure many financial difficulties for the translation and publication of the book in England. He later expanded upon these ideas in the form of “Tasanif-i-Ahmadiya”. Maulana Moudoodi declared this book as the first major scholarly work on the life of Prophet.
See—http://www.sirsyedtoday.org/books/?cid=64
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Who is Sir Syed Ahmad Khan?
Born on 17 October 1817 – 27 March 1898), commonly known as Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (also Sayyid Ahmad Khan). He seems to have been a member of the growing Ahl-e-hadith movement in Northern India. However, by the 1860’s, he was a hybrid version of a Quranist. You can also listen to Mufti Mubasher Shah explaining this Tafsir herein. Syed Ahmad Khan started publishing his rationalist ideas in 1880 through the first volume of his Qurʾānic exegesis (S.S. A. Khan, 1880). In it, argued against the notion of supernatural angels that act as mediums between God and humans (Khan 1880: 29–30, 33–34, 53–57). Instead, he said that God communicates with all human beings (and animals) at the time of their conception when he decides their nature (he probably would have used the word DNA instead of nature, had DNA been discovered by 1880).
The Tafseer (commentary) was originally published, probably in parts, in the 1880’s. It does not cover the entire Quraan; it only goes up to Chapter 17, Soorah Banee Israa-eel. Sir Sayyad died
before he was able to complete the work. Chiragh Ali was a student or colleague of Sir Syed and was publishing similar material from Aligarh. Read a thorough review on this Tafsir herein, they claim that an english version is available at the Khuda Baksh Library.
The order of publishing is as follows:
Vol. I Aligarh, 1880.
Vol. II Aligarh, 1882, Agra, 1903.
Vol. III Aligarh, 1885.
Vol. IV Aligarh, 1888.
Vol. V Aligarh, 1892.
Vol. VI Aligarh, 1895.
Vol. VII Agra, 1904.
In this Tafseer, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan denied the physicality of the Miraaj, the concept of the Mahdi, the death of Eisa (as), the denial of Jinn, the denial that Adam (As) was the first human and etc etc.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
As for the war of Independence 1857 that took place because of the Muslim spirit of freedom struggle and their growing resentment towards the British, “Sir” Syed labeled it as a ‘riot’ and ‘sedition.’ In his pamphlet, ‘Asbab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind’ (Causes of the Hind Sedition), he made it clear that Muslim were guilty of sedition. In this pamphlet, he told the British that the Muslims were in favour of their rule, but rebelled because they had not been given any seat or position in government circles. So, he played along with the British plan to engage Muslims within the British rule, rather than act to uproot it and he himself took a government position.
“Sir” Syed also wrote a book called ‘Loyal Muhammadans of India’. It had three volumes and was published in the years 1860-61. Throughout the book, he proved his loyalty towards the British. In this book, he wrote, “I am extremely angry with the Muslims who rebelled and were defiant against the British and consider them bad because this outbreak by the Muslims was against the People of the Book, the who are our religious brothers, believed in the Messengers, accepted Allah’s rules and keep Allah’s revealed books with them which are part of our fundamental beliefs. Therefore, whenever Christian blood was shed, Muslim blood should have been shed too. And whoever stands against this and are ungrateful to the government, which is not tyrannical, have gone against their religion. They are extremely worthy of being angry with.”
“Sir” Syed seized every opportunity in giving a favourable opinion about the British. After the War of Independence 1857, Queen Victoria appealed to the Muslims for forgiveness and asked them to excuse the British for the mass murder that took place. “Sir” Syed told the Muslims in Muraadabad that it was absolutely necessary to thank her. So a ‘Dargah Hazrat Shah Balaqi’ was suggested and on 28 July 1859, 15,000 people were gathered. To attract more people, food arrangements were made and after ‘Asr Prayer, “Sir” Syed made a collective Dua. Some of the content of this Dua is as follows: “Oh Lord! You have shown mercy to Your people and the people of Hindustan by placing upon them just and equitable rulers and for this we thank You. In the preceding years, we had to face a curse of the absence of such rulers owing to our wicked deeds but now You have compensated it and provided us with such just and kind rulers. We thank You for this blessing of Yours from the core of our hearts. Oh Lord! Accept our gratitude! Ameen! The Indians who were caught into this unfortunate catastrophe, You molded the hearts of our rulers to be merciful to these Indians for the Queen issued an appeal seeking forgiveness just because of Your inspiration. We not only thank You but also pray for the Queen Victoria, wherever, she might be. Oh Lord! Accept our Dua! Ameen!” The cunningness, treachery and deceit against Muslims and Islam is obvious in these words. This Dua is a proof of the loyalty of “Sir” Syed to the British but the tragedy is that such a personality is presented to us as a role model to our Children in School text books while pious personality like Aurangzeb (rahimahullah) are antagonized.
In reality, the decline of the Muslims began with a decline in the comprehension of Islam and its wrong implementation. “Sir” Syed suggested a wrong way to come out of this decline. In his flawed understanding, the Muslims can make progress only by following the British blindly in science, inventions and their thoughts related to life, without adopting the systems springing from the complete Deen of Islam. In fact, we fell behind West, because we did not adopt Islam as a complete way of life. Therefore, if we want to be a progressive Ummah, we must first revive by holding fast onto our Islamic Aqeedah, instead of following the West. Moreover, if science and technology is the only way to success and if Islam mandates that the path to enlightenment is progress and evolution as envisaged by ‘Sir” Syed, then why didn’t Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم spread Islam and conquer through science and technology?? How did the Khulafa-e-Rashideen establish the golden era of Islam without the inventions and discoveries of the Industrial Revolution?? If science was so central to human existence, then wouldn’t the prophets and messengers have been scientists, or at least invented something for mankind??
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Upal quoted “Tafseer-ul-Quraan ma` Usool-e-Tafseer” by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1880) in 2021, in his book, “The Handbook of Islamic Sects and Movements”
“This proves that that the prophetic capability that God produced in prophets (anbia) is named Gabriel” (Khan 1880: Tafsīr-ul-Qurʾān wa howa alhuda wal furqan. Vol. 1. Lahore: Rifahe-
Aam Steam Press).
“”The angels that Qurʾān mentions cannot physically exist but the manifestations of God’s infinite powers and those capabilities that God created his creation with are called angel (malak) and angels (malaika). One of them is Satan or Iblis. The rise of the mountains, water’s flow, power of the trees to grow, electricity’s powers of attraction and repulsion etc., all capabilities that are present in the creation are the very angels mentioned in the Qurʾān.”” (Khan 1880: Tafsīr-ul-Qurʾān wa howa alhuda wal furqan. Vol. 1. Lahore: Rifahe-
Aam Steam Press).
“””Jesus was taken down from the cross after three or four hours and it is completely possible to believe that he was still alive. At night, he was taken out of the shroud and he secretly stayed under the protection of his disciples. The disciples saw him and met him. And he died later at some unknown location. Undoubtedly, because of the Jewish enmity, he was secretly buried at an unknown location that is unknown to this day. And they popularized the idea that he has been lifted to the heavens”””. Khan 1880: Tafsīr-ul-Qurʾān wa howa alhuda wal furqan. Vol. 1. Lahore: Rifahe-Aam Steam Press).
“””All creation whether it be humans or animals or plants, God has put a nature into everything. Things happen according to that nature without any teacher’s teachings. This blessing of nature has been labeled by some ʿulamāʾ of Islam as ilhamat (revelations). But the High Lord has called it wahi … This wahi was not delivered to the honeybee by Gabriel or another angel of God but God himself put it into it …According to the ranks of their nature there will be people who will be born from among them whom Shāh Waliullah Sahib has labeled as perfects, hakims, khalifas, aided by the Holy Spirit (ruh-ul-qudus) guides, imams, munazir (warners), nabī (prophets). Today’s faithless people call them reformers … A guide who has a perfect nature of guidance is a prophet (nabī) (Khan 1885: 16–17, Vol. III Aligarh, 1885).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Scans from Sir Syed’s Tafsir
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Nuzhat Haneef
Now I provide my English translation of Sir Sayyad’s Urdu translation of Quraan 3:56 and some excerpts from his commentary on this verse, shown in the original Urdu text in the page images above.
[Quraan 3:56, numbered by Sir Sayyad as verse 48] When God said: O `Eesaa [Jesus], indeed I am going to kill you [‘mayn tujh koe maarnay waalaa hoon’] and am going to raise you to Myself and am going to purify you, from those people who became disbelievers, and am going to make those who followed you superior to those who became disbelievers, till the Day of Resurrection. Then you have to come to Me again. Then I will made a decision/judgment in the matter in which you differed. [SIR-SAYYAD, Part 2, p. 403] …
[Commentary on 3:56:] …
A person does not die due to being put on a cross because only the palms of his hands, and sometimes the palms and feet, got wounded. The reason for death used to be that [the person] was kept hanging on the cross for four or five days and [due to] the holes in his hands and feet and by suffering the impact of hunger and thirst and the heat and glare of the sun, [he] used to die in several days. … [SIR-SAYYAD, Part 2, p. 424] …
Upon the end of the day of the Fasah festival [the Pesach or Passover festival96], the Jewish Sabbath was about to begin and, according to the Jewish religion, it was necessary that the corpse of the killed or crucified person be buried prior to the end of the day, that is, prior to the start of the Sabbath. But a person cannot die so soon on the cross. Therefore, the Jews requested that Hadrat Maseeh’s legs be broken so that he would die immediately but Hadrat `Eesaa’s legs were not broken and people thought that he died within that much time [i.e., within the short time]. …
When people erroneously thought that Hadrat `Eesaa has actually died, then Yoosuf [Joseph of
Arimathea] requested the governor [Pilate] to have him buried; he [Pilate] was very astonished that he [Jesus] had died so quickly. The report of [Jesus] having died so quickly not only caused astonishment to the governor but the Christians too used to consider it impossible and, therefore, in the 3rd Christian century [i.e., 3rd century AD] the Christian scholars [of that period] eventually declared Hadrat `Eesaa’s swift death on the cross to be a miracle. [SIR-SAYYAD, Part 2, p. 425] ……
Upon taking a historical view of this whole incident [of Jesus’ crucifixion] it clearly becomes
obvious that Hadrat `Eesaa had not died on the cross; rather, he went into a condition such that people thought him to be dead. … Hadrat `Eesaa was taken down from the cross after three or four hours and one can be sure in every respect that he was alive. At night he was taken out of the grave and he stayed hidden in the protection of his disciples. The disciples saw him and met him and then, at some [later] time, [he] died a natural death. Without a doubt, due to fear of the enmity of the Jews, he must have been buried, in extreme secrecy, at some unknown location, which is unknown up till now and it became publicized [i.e., the word spread] that he had gone to the heavens [or the sky]. [SIR-SAYYAD, Part 2, pp. 426-427]
As you can see, Sir Sayyad presents the theory, later adopted by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, that Jesus did not die on the cross but rather was taken down alive and died a natural death later on. He also provides the same explanation that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad later provided for why Jesus was able to survive, viz., that he was taken down from the cross within a few hours.
Now that you have read a part of Sir Sayyad’s explanation of the crucifixion incident which was published in the early 1880’s97, I present below a few excerpts from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s book Maseeh Hindustaan Mayn (whose preface is dated 1899 but which was published in 1908) which he wrote after declaring in 1891 that God had told him that Jesus was dead. Instead of translating myself from Urdu, I have used the Ahmadiyya Movement’s translation available in the book Jesus in India but I have provided the corresponding Urdu reference as well. In this quotation, see if you can notice the similarities between Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s writing and Sir Sayyad’s explanation of how Jesus could have come down alive from the cross (see Jesus in India).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan scans and data from 5:117
_____________________________________________________________________________________________The Quotes
i. “Now we must turn to the Holy Quran to see what it says. The Quran makes mention of Jesus’ death in four places … Firstly in Sura Aal Imran, secondly in Sura Ma’ida, … thirdly in Sura Maryam … fourthly in Sura Nisa’. Jesus was not killed by the Jews, either by stoning or by crucifixion, but he died his natural death, and God raised him in rank and status … From the first three verses it is clear that Jesus died a natural death. However, as the Ulama of Islam had followed the Christians, in accepting that Jesus had gone up to heaven alive, before looking at the Quran, so they have tried to interpret some of the words in these verses to accord with their unsound belief.”
(Tafsir Ahmadi by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, vol. ii, p.48)
ii. Referring to the expression ‘in this’ (Arabic: bi-hi) in the verse: ‘And there is none of the People of the Book but will believe in this before his death’ (4:159), which is generally taken to mean in him (i.e. in Jesus) Sir Syed writes:
“This points to the words ‘And their saying: we have killed the Messiah’ [4:157], and to their saying, and not to the Messiah. So this means: ‘All the People of the Book, before their death, will believe that Jesus was killed’. After this it is said: ‘And on the day of Judgment he, i.e. Jesus, will be a witness against them’. The word ‘ala [‘against’] is used to indicate loss or harm. So the meaning is that on the day of Judgment Jesus will be a witness against their belief.”
(Maktub Sir Syed, No. 2, p. 48)
iii. “Jesus spent his early life migrating from one place to another. His later life was not very long, for he was 33 years of age when he died, and at that time there were only 70 people who believed in him.”
(The Ali Garh Magazine, Intikhab No. 1971, p. 48)
See the lahori website. I copy and pasted from there.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________The scan work
______________________________________________________________________________________________
The scan from tahdheeb al ikhlaaq, vol -7, August 1877
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1857–1870
As for the war of Independence 1857 that took place because of the Muslim spirit of freedom struggle and their growing resentment towards the British, “Sir” Syed labeled it as a ‘riot’ and ‘sedition.’ In his pamphlet, ‘Asbab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind’ (Causes of the Hind Sedition), he made it clear that Muslim were guilty of sedition. In this pamphlet, he told the British that the Muslims were in favour of their rule, but rebelled because they had not been given any seat or position in government circles. So, he played along with the British plan to engage Muslims within the British rule, rather than act to uproot it and he himself took a government position.
“Sir” Syed also wrote a book called ‘Loyal Muhammadans of India’. It had three volumes and was published in the years 1860-61. Throughout the book, he proved his loyalty towards the British. In this book, he wrote, “I am extremely angry with the Muslims who rebelled and were defiant against the British and consider them bad because this outbreak by the Muslims was against the People of the Book, the who are our religious brothers, believed in the Messengers, accepted Allah’s rules and keep Allah’s revealed books with them which are part of our fundamental beliefs. Therefore, whenever Christian blood was shed, Muslim blood should have been shed too. And whoever stands against this and are ungrateful to the government, which is not tyrannical, have gone against their religion. They are extremely worthy of being angry with.”
“Sir” Syed seized every opportunity in giving a favourable opinion about the British. After the War of Independence 1857, Queen Victoria appealed to the Muslims for forgiveness and asked them to excuse the British for the mass murder that took place. “Sir” Syed told the Muslims in Muraadabad that it was absolutely necessary to thank her. So a ‘Dargah Hazrat Shah Balaqi’ was suggested and on 28 July 1859, 15,000 people were gathered. To attract more people, food arrangements were made and after ‘Asr Prayer, “Sir” Syed made a collective Dua. Some of the content of this Dua is as follows: “Oh Lord! You have shown mercy to Your people and the people of Hindustan by placing upon them just and equitable rulers and for this we thank You. In the preceding years, we had to face a curse of the absence of such rulers owing to our wicked deeds but now You have compensated it and provided us with such just and kind rulers. We thank You for this blessing of Yours from the core of our hearts. Oh Lord! Accept our gratitude! Ameen! The Indians who were caught into this unfortunate catastrophe, You molded the hearts of our rulers to be merciful to these Indians for the Queen issued an appeal seeking forgiveness just because of Your inspiration. We not only thank You but also pray for the Queen Victoria, wherever, she might be. Oh Lord! Accept our Dua! Ameen!” The cunningness, treachery and deceit against Muslims and Islam is obvious in these words. This Dua is a proof of the loyalty of “Sir” Syed to the British but the tragedy is that such a personality is presented to us as a role model to our Children in School text books while pious personality like Aurangzeb (rahimahullah) are antagonized.
In reality, the decline of the Muslims began with a decline in the comprehension of Islam and its wrong implementation. “Sir” Syed suggested a wrong way to come out of this decline. In his flawed understanding, the Muslims can make progress only by following the British blindly in science, inventions and their thoughts related to life, without adopting the systems springing from the complete Deen of Islam. In fact, we fell behind West, because we did not adopt Islam as a complete way of life. Therefore, if we want to be a progressive Ummah, we must first revive by holding fast onto our Islamic Aqeedah, instead of following the West. Moreover, if science and technology is the only way to success and if Islam mandates that the path to enlightenment is progress and evolution as envisaged by ‘Sir” Syed, then why didn’t Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم spread Islam and conquer through science and technology?? How did the Khulafa-e-Rashideen establish the golden era of Islam without the inventions and discoveries of the Industrial Revolution?? If science was so central to human existence, then wouldn’t the prophets and messengers have been scientists, or at least invented something for mankind??
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1933
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (spelled Sir Sayyad Ahmad of Aligarh) is mentioned in detail in the ROR of June-1933.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1936
The ROR of March-1936 mentions Sir Syed.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
1937
The ROR of March-1937 mentions Sir Sayyad.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
1943
The ROR of July-1943 gives a testimony by Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) wherein he tells about a story with Maulvi Abdul Kareem leading prayers at Qadian. After the prayer, Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) was introduced to MGA via Maulvi Abdul Kareem as a naturi, a person who was following Sir Syed and etc. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad then asked Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) if he had read the books of Sir Syed Ahmad and Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) confirmed it. Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) said that he came from an educated family and thus had read the books of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. MGA then asked him if he had the books of MGA? Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) confirmed that he had read all of MGA’s urdu books. MGA then asked as to what books of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan appealed to Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) and he replied with “Khutbat-i-Ahmadiyya” (Which was written by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan while he was in London in 1870). Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) also mentioned “Tabyeenul Kalam” as a favorite book of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. MGA then asked Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) what difference was between MGA’s books and Sir Syed Ahmad Khan’s books? Sh. Karam ilahee (from Patiala) responded with a metaphor. MGA then said that the difference can be seen in terms of the Miraj, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan called it a dream, whereas MGA called it a spiritual vision (Kashf).
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1946
In the ROR of Oct-1946, MGA’s mubahila with Lekh Ram and the Arya Samaj is mentioned, as well as MGA’s correspondance with Sir Syed Ahmad Khan in this regard.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1947
Per the ROR of Feb-1947, a photo of Maulvi Jalal ud Din Shams is posted. The ROR also has an essay by him entitled, “Preaching of Islam in Europe” by J.D. Shams (for imam of the London mosque). In this essay, he talks down on Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Maulvi Chiragh Din and Syed Amir Ali and claims that they fabricated all of their beliefs to please the colonists. For example, Shams states that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan denied the existence of angels. He also mentions how a white man named Dixon (also mentioned in Nuzul ul Masih, 1909)(income tax case) came to Qadian once and MGA walked him out to the canal bridge, which is 2.5 miles outside of Qadian. He also mentioned MGA’s famous fake dream of 1890-1891 which was written in Izala Auham (See Izala-e-Auham, pp. 515–516, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 3, p. 377) wherein MGA said that white birds would join Ahmadiyya (See the ROR of June-1917). Shams also mentioned Mufti Muhammad Sadiq and the Piggot. Shams also wrote how Sir Fazl-i-Hussain praised the efforts of Ahmadiyya in London (in 1927). Sir Fazl-i-Hussain mentioned how Khwaja Kamaluddin had travelled to London in 1913 and started this mission of MGA. Shams made disparaging remarks about Khwaja Kamaluddin.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
(Shahid, 1958: 97). See Shahid, Dost Muhammad (1958). Tareekh-e-Ahmadiyyat. Rabwah: Idarat-ul-Musanifeen.
“””Since Mirza Sahib liked to debate Christian clerics, Murad Beg who used the nom de guerre
of Mirza Shikasta (and later on Muwahid) and was a resident of Jallandhar, told him, “Syed
Ahmad Khan has written an exegesis of Torah and Injil. If you write to him it may be helpful.”
Thus Mirza Sahib wrote a letter to Sir Syed in Arabic”””.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad totally copied Sir Syed Ahmad Khan of Aligarh
The life and death of Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti (1858–1905)
Nooruddin urged Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to make the claim of being “like the messiah” (1882-1884 era)
MGA explains how he misunderstood his prophethood in 1880 and was confused for 20+ years
Sir Syed was the first Muslim in India to ever say that all hadith on the Mahdi were weak…MGA copied
Sir Syed was the first Muslim in India to ever say that all hadith on the Mahdi were weak…MGA copied
https://www.alislam.org/library/book/heavenly-sign/
Nooruddin urged Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to make the claim of being “like the messiah” (1882-1884 era)
Friedman errs on Ishaat us Sunnah volume numbers and the corresponding year
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism
13 Pingback