Intro
In a recent livestream, Maulvi Razi argued that Shah Wali Ullah had called himself the Khatam-un-Nabiyeen. However, Adnan Rashid disproved it quickly, this was a from a book called “Anfas-ul-Arifeen”, Razi was reading the Urdu translation, not the original Persian.
Intro
Check out Bro Imtiaz’s stream on this topic herein and on June-28-2025 (1:25:00 time stamp). At 24:54, Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA and other Ahmadi writers wrote that even if you perfectly follow Muhammad (Saw) via “Fana Fil Rasul”, you still cannot become Buruz. Ahmadi’s believe that the station of Buruz was exclusively reserved for MGA only. Bro Imtiaz explains (34:53 time stamp) that MGA believed that a Buruz can only be born, a person cannot achieve this. On June-28-2025, Bro Imtiaz explained (41:23 time stamp) how MGA claimed (see Majmua Ishtiharat, V-3, page 94, via “Jihad and the British Government”, page 29 of the book) that he had been given 2 Buruz’s, the Buruz of Eisa (as) and the Buruz of Muhammad (Saw). MGA called himself a “mixed paste” (Majoon e Muraqqab) of 2 people. Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA was claiming to be the Buruz of Krishna and Buddha (53:07 time stamp). In the same book, on page-1 of the announcement, MGA openly lied and said the actual soul’s of Eisa (as) and Muhammad (saw) hadn’t entered into himself, however, he gave no other explanation. A year later, in Tohfa Golarvia (1902), MGA and his team went into full detail and called MGA as the only Buruzi Nabi to ever appear.
In 1891, via Izala Auham (page 447)(See Bro Imtiaz, time stamp, 32:34), MGA argued that the ruh (soul) of other people comes into this world as a replica. MGA also called the concept of Buruz as Sunna (43:36 time stamp).
In 1892-1893, via A‘ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam (See pages 341-346)(See Bro Imtiaz, 47:55 time stamp), MGA argued that the ruh of Eisa (as) was agitated and wanted to return to Earth and thus did in the form of Buruz (replica, see Bro Imtiaz, 30:43 time stamp and found residency and gets dissolved into a new person, 32:17). At 21:47, MGA says that Buruz deals with people who have already passed away (see A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 5, page 256). MGA then says that if anyone still doesn’t believe in the concept of Buruz, MGA is ready to do a Mubahila (54:26). On page RK-5, P-254 of A‘ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, MGA argued that the soul asks for a replica (31:46 time stamp) and this was revealed to MGA via a Kashf (44:25).
On page 347 of A‘ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam (19:27 time stamp), MGA explains that for someone to become Buruz, first the predecessor must die first. The Sufi’s of Islam, the ones that are in the habit of getting spiritual benefit from grave worship are followers of this concept (46:11). All the Sufi’s are in agreement about this (45:42 time stamp).
In 1892-1893, via “A‘ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam”, RK-5, page 526 (11:19 time stamp by Bro Imtiaz), MGA argued that previous souls come back into this world again, a new person is born, thus, Buruz has to do deal with deceased people, and the person will become Buruz of the deceased person must be born. Thus, a person cannot become Buruz from following Muhammad (saw), they must be born as such. At 12:45, Bro Imtiaz explains how this totally contradicts the Ahmadiyya position on Buruz, however, this is before 1902 and thus, MGA hadn’t solidified his position on Buruz and seems to have changed in 1902 via Tohfah Golarhviyyah.
In 1893, MGA alleged that even though Jews and Christians disagree on many topics, however, they agree on the concept of Buruz (51:58 time stamp)(RK, vol. 7, p. 311, Hamamatul-Bushra).
In 1893, via “Tuhfa-e-Baghdad” (A Gift for Baghdad)(See page 61 online English edition), MGA argued that the return of Elijah through another person (Yahya [as])(MGA didn’t say Buruz), was well known to the people of the book and many prophets (50:20 time stamp).
In 1895, via Satt Bachan (RK-10, page 182), MGA alleged that Sufi’s agree on the concept of Buruz (46:01 time stamp).
In 1897, via Tohfaa-e-Qaysariyyah (see RK-12, page 273-Urdu)(39:19 time stamp)(See page 10 of the online English edition), MGA argued that he is that person, with whom the ruh of Yasu-Maseeh (Eisa [as]) “sukhoonat rakhtee hai” (takes residency)(37:59 time stamp). In other words, the ruh of Eisa (as) came to Earth and is now residing in MGA (naozobillah).
In 1897-1898, via Ayyam-us-Sulh, MGA alleged that the entire ummah agrees that a non-prophet becomes a substitute of a prophet by way of reflection (buruz), which view is implied in the hadith, ulama-u ummati ka anbiya bani Israel (the ‘ulama of my ummah are like the prophets of Israel). MGA also alleged that the concept of Buruz us nothing new, in fact, it appears in the earliest books of Allah (See Ayyam-us-Sulh, RK-14, p. 383)(48:01 Time stamp). MGA even said that ALL the revealed books agree on the concept of Buruz. MGA alleges that even Eisa (as) held this belief.
In 1897-1898, MGA writes that a ruh (soul) gets connected to a new ruh (soul), this is Buruz and it gets a new body (33:07 timestamp)(via Kitab-ul-Bariyyah, RK-13, p. 23)(and 36:45). At 53:09, Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA wrote that all the researchers in the past have agreed upon this (the concept of Buruz)(See Kitab-ul-Bariyyah, RK-13, page 48).
In 1900, via “Jihad and the British Government” and via an announcement therein. On page-1 (page 29 of the book) of the announcement, MGA denied that he was Buruz like reincarnation, and he wasn’t actually the souls of both these holy men have reappeared in him was not true! You can listen to Maulvi Razi read it out herein. (“Kay suchmuch indo buzurg nabiyoon kee ruhain maray under khalool kargayain” Urdu). However, a few pages later MGA alleged that he was actually a combination of 2 souls (Muhammad [saw] and Eisa [as])(See the scan in the below) and a “blended compound (Majoon e Muraqqab) of the two (See page 35). It seems that MGA was lying! MGA was purposely denying the concept, which he accepted in total in Tohfa Golarvia.
In 1901, (See Al-Hakam, vol. 5, no. 15, dated 24 April 1901, pp. 1-5, Via Malfuzat-2, online English edition, page 160) MGA claimed that the concept of Buruz in the Quran, however, he gave no references (42:20 time stamp and 28:20). MGA said the concept of Buruz is agreed upon (47:16). MGA said it was agreed upon by Quran, hadith and Sufi’s (52:33).
In 1901, via “Correction of an Error” (see page 17), MGA said that 1000’s of Muslims could become Buruz. However, just a year later, MGA said only he was the Buruz of Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah), and in Muhammad (Saw)’s second coming (Naozobillah) and there were to be no more manifestations (Buruzi) as such. This also has to do with MGA being Ahmad via 61:6.
In 1900-1902, MGA alleges in Tiryaq-ul-Qulub (page 477 of RK-15)(See Bro Imtiaz, 33:17 time stamp), that the soul of Ibrahim (as), after 2500 years, he was born again, in the house of Abdullah Bin Muttalib as Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah). And was called Muhammad (Saw). Bro Imtiaz explains (34:53 time stamp) that MGA believed that a Buruz can only be born, a person cannot achieve this (See also 22:23). This is what the Sufi’s have believe. See also Al-Hakam, vol. 5, no. 15, dated 24 April 1901, pp. 1-5, Via Malfuzat-2, online English edition, page 160. Also, MGA calls himself the Final Barooz of Adam (as)(See RK, v-15, p. 481, Tiryaqul-Qulub) MGA also alleges that the concept of Buruz is mentioned too much in hadith of Muhammad (saw)(43:16 time stamp) and whomever denies this concept is of the ignorant (53:42 too).
It should be noted that in 1900-1902, via Tohfa Golarvia, (See pages 254-256 and 263, also posted in the below, check Bro Imtiaz’s video herein)(2:38:52 timestamp), MGA argued that Muhammad (Saw) died and his mission was incomplete (naozobillah) and required a Baruz to come and complete the mission. MGA said that The spirituality (ruhuniyyat) of the Holy Prophet replied, book, I am coming as Baruz, but I will come in India (page 263). MGA says that Muslims must accept that there are 2 comings of Muhammad (Saw)(MGA inferring himself as the second coming)(40:34 time stamp). MGA says that it’s really sad that the common people and Islamic scholars have no idea about the concept of Buruz (26:19 time stamp). MGA says that the Sufi saints knew about Buruz. Some of these Sufi’s believe that saints can return into this world in a Buruzi form. In other words, the ruh (soul) of a dead saint, can come into the body of person. MGA says that 100 years after the death of Bayazid Bastami, his ruh (soul), came into the body of Abu al-Hassan al-Kharaqani (10:40 time stamp). MGA says that his belief is agreed upon and accepted by all (Maqbool and Mussulum). MGA says even with all of this, some stupid people deny the concept of Buruz in the return of Eisa (as). MGA called this the sunnah of Allah. Thus, people who don’t understand this, simply don’t understand the philosophy of a Buruzi return, i.e., the ruh of a dead person coming down and residing in a new human being, this is called Buruz. MGA also argued that Eisa (as) had failed in his mission. Bro Imtiaz explains (See 38:35 time stamp) how MGA wrote in “Tohfa Golarvia” (page 284), when the last part of the 6th millennium will be left, the ruh of Eisa (as) will arrive on ground (earth, zameen in Urdu).
In 1903 (Oct-16), via Tadhkiratu-Shahadatain, page 43, older edition (See also, Maulvi Muhammad Ali, Prophethood in Islam, 1915), MGA argued that by way of buruz you have earned the name ‘prophet’ because Ahmad is a prophet (and) prophethood cannot be separated from him.”
In the Al-Hakam of July-17-1905 (vol. 9, no. 25, p. 10, 11, Malfuzat-7, English, pages 525-529), the editor (Sheikh Yaqub Ali Irfani) posted a page from an old notebook wherein MGA had written some comments about Buruz. At 45:22, Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA said that the reality of Buruz was opened (like a secret) to MGA. At 49:33, Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA said the concept of Buruz was a secret that was written in the Injil (Gospel).
In 1906-1907, via “Haqiqatul Wahi”, MGA argued that a prophet was destined to come who would be a Buruz of Muhammad (Saw)(See page 630, online English edition).
In 1908, after MGA died, Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya V-5 was published (Oct-1908) and on page 386 (Online English edition), MGA argued that Ibn Arabi wrote that Eisa (as) would return in form of some other person. MGA quotes Sufi’s and their theory of “Spiritual manifestations” as he explains how people can return into this world in another manifestation. MGA says that the Hindu’s also maintain a similar principle and they call such a person an ‘Avatar’. Interestingly, top Ahmadi scholars on True Islam UK totally avoided this quotation (see Bro Imtiaz 51:29 time stamp)(see also, 18:19 time stamp).
In 1910, via Lujjat un Nur, on page 1 of the English edition, MGA calls himself as the manifestation of 2 Buruz’s. There also seems to be a footnote which was added later by Ahmadi editors.
In 1914, (via Tashhiz al-Azhan), Ahmadi writers alleged that for the people of Kashf, the soul is born in other people (souls take new bodies). This concept is found in all revealed books and the books of the Sufi’s. The soul (ruh) takes a new body (17:23 time stamp)!
At the 46:30 timestamp, Bro Imtiaz explains how in Maktubat-e-Ahmad, V-2 (page 187), MGA argued that the Sufi’s, who worship at graves believe in the concept of Buruz (and benefit from this)(wherein a ruh comes back to Earth and enters someone else’s body.
In 1915-1916, via Kalimatul Fasl (page 117), Bro Imtiaz explains how Mirza Bashir Ahmad stated that in the revelations of MGA, Allah has never used the words Zilli and Buruzi, instead, Allah only said Nabi or Rasul (55:20).
In 1916, via the Urdu Review of Religions (page 439), Bro Imtiaz explains (35:55 time stamp) how Ahmadi’s stated that Yuz Asaf (aka Jesus [as]), came into this world a second time, after living in India for 78 years, and then went to Allah. Jesus (as) reappeared in the wujud (vessel) of MGA. In other words, Eisa (as)’s ruh (soul) came into the body of MGA and lived until May-26-1908.
In 1931, on June-28-2025, on a Bro Imtiaz live stream (13:48 time stamp), Bro Imtiaz quoted an article from the Al-Fazl of Oct-20-1931 (pages 5-6). The article is entitled, “The Reality of the Returning Buruz” by unknown. It is also entitled, “The difference between Fana fil Rasul and Buruz”. K-2 argued that when a person has been clothed with the cloak of the Muhammadan prophethood, it is then reflected in him. Being Fana Fil Rasul is not Buruz, Buruz is only when someone has attained prophethood. K2 argues that 1000’s of Muslims have reached the stage of “Fana Fil Rasul”. K2 argues that in terms of Buruz, it was exclusively reserved for MGA only. K2 even mentions that the Messiah to come was specifically called “Nabi Ullah”. At 18:00, Bro Imtiaz explains how MGA called this hadith as inauthentic, and Bukhari didn’t record it. MGA even argued that this hadith was against Sharia and against Islam and etc. etc. MGA raised so many objections on this hadith, and now in 1931, his own son is authenticating it, the irony! The article has another heading in it, “What is the difference between Maseel and Buruz?”. In this sub heading, K2 is arguing that Maseel is not like Buruz. MGA was also called the Buruz of all prophets. K2 also argues that Buruz and Avatar are the same (20:08).
In June of 2025, Maulvi Razi and his team of paid Maulvi’s got caught lying by Adnan Rashid (2:44:40 timestamp) and Bro Imtiaz about many things (see the clips on TikTok and twitter). Maulvi Razi got caught mispresenting Ahmad Reza Khan and Shah Wali Ullah. Buruz was also discussed.
On June 20-2025, Bro Imtiaz explained how MGA claimed to be the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” via Buruz on the True Islam Uk Urdu stream.
On June-28-2025, Bro Imtiaz explained (41:23 time stamp) how MGA claimed (see Majmua Ishtiharat, V-3, page 94) that he had been given 2 Buruz’s, Buruz of Eisa (as) and Buruz of Muhammad (Saw). MGA called himself a “mixed paste” (Majoon e Muraqqab) of 2 people.
In 2026, Bro Imtiaz streamed multiple times about Khawaja Ghulam Farid of Chachran and was even asked about Farid’s usage of the word “Buruz” and Farid’s usage of (as) for the Mahdi (he also streamed on Feb 1, 2026)(also on on Jan 27, 2026).
In 2026 (March), Bro Imtiaz streamed on TikTok about the Ahmadiyya concept of Buruz.
In 2026 (Apr), during the great debate (#Qadianismundertrial), Bro Imtiaz explained how MGA said that the soul of Muhammad (Saw) had entered into himself (naozobillah).
In 2026 (May-8)(18:15 time stamp), Bro Imtiaz streamed with Ak Shaikh and discussed the concept of Buruz. Bro Imtiaz explained how Mirza Bashir Ahmad wrote in the Review of Religions-Urdu of 1915-1916, (later called Kalimatul Fasl) that MGA used the words “zilli” and “buruzi” interchangeably. Mirza Bashir Ahmad argued that this “zilli-nubuwwat” didn’t hold MGA back in terms of rank, in fact, it pushed MGA forward (in-rank), it pushed MGA forward so much so that it brought MGA on equal footing with Muhammad (Saw)(Naozobillah)(Kalimat-ul-Fasl, P. 113). Bro Imtiaz also explained how Ahmadi’s refused to take a position at the #Londondebate, however, all Maulvi’s refused to take a position. In his recent video’s, Maulvi Razi said that he was the questioner in this debate, that’s why he didn’t answer any question.
Continue reading “The concept of Buruz in the books of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad”
Intro
Ahmadi’s will argue that Islam was under attack and MGA showed up and saved Muslims from Christianity, however, this is a total lie. Technically, about 90% of Pakistani Christians are Dalits from the Chuhra caste and at least 9% of Indian Christians are Dalits, categorised thus by the greater societal practices in various parts of the Indian subcontinent.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
Even in the 1930’s, Ahmadiyya sources were alleging that Christianity was growing in British-India (see page V).
Intro
In this video, a youtuber who is also a physicist named Ray Fleming talks about how the Nobel Prize won by Steven Weinberg in 1979 was disproven as pseudo-science, and a cheap way to get a Nobel Prize. However, he doesn’t mention Dr. Abdus Salam or Sheldon Glashow. Ray Fleming seems to echo the same sentiment as Norman Dombey, Qaiser Raja, Sheldon Glashow and many others, i.e., that the Nobel Prize of 1979 was a total sham-job. It also further proves that Dr. Abdus Salam was schmoozing Steven Weinberg (and many others) and was able to get included into this Bad-Nobel Prize which was issued in 1979. Ray Fleming called this fictitious physics!
In this video, Ray Fleming explains how Steven Weinberg alleged that a WZ boson (a WZ particle pair) is released when a Quark is converted to an Electron when you change from a Neutron to a Proton during decay. However, this violates the “Principle of Conversation of Energy”. Steven Weinberg also failed to explain as to what causes the initial beta decay, which discredits the entire theory. Steven Weinberg also failed to explain as to why there are different half-lives of these sub-atomic particles, nor did he explain the beta energy curve. Ray Fleming also explains how the WZ boson doesn’t exist long enough (and thus can’t be measured) to prove anything and a fallacy to use. Unzicker alleges that Steven Weinberg pushed a couple of fancy concepts “weak neutral currents” etc, which do not make sense from a fundamental perspective.
Ray Fleming famously wrote “The 100 Greatest Lies in Physics” in 2017.
Continue reading “Ray Fleming accuses Dr. Abdus Salam and Weinberg of lying to get a Nobel Prize”
Intro
In “Tazkiratul Mahdi” by Pir Siraj ul haq Nu’mani (published in 1915)(see pages 476-477), the 2nd Qadiani Ahmadi Khalifa famously said that during the Khilafat of Noorudin (1908-1914), in the Ahmadiyya school at Qadian, when people went mad and crazy, based on his own experience, they also begin to claim prophethood or become Saints. The 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa says that there was one such student by the name of Muhammad Bakhsh, who had a problem in his brain and started receiving revelations. The 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa then relates another story from the life of MGA wherein something similar happened.
In June of 2025, Bro Imtiaz showed that Ahmadi’s don’t believe in the continuance of any prophethood on the True Islam Uk Urdu stream and how any claimant of prophethood within Ahmadiya is called “crazy”.
Continue reading “In Ahmadiyya, only crazy Ahmadi’s claim prophethood”
Intro
In 1899-1902 era, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad called himself the Final Adam (as) to be born on this earth and the final Mahdi (See Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 15, p. 477-479, Tiryaqul-Qulub). This book was discussed heavily during the split, in fact, the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa argued in “Qaul al Fasl” (Jan-1915) that all books of MGA published before Tiryaqul-Qulub were abrogated in terms of prophethood.
In terms of claiming to be the final Adam (as)(naozobillah). MGA had been claiming to be the second coming of Adam (as) as early as “Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya” V-4 (see page 64) and even quoted 25:54 (25:55 in the Qadiani Quran). On page 368 MGA fabricates revelations from his God, which seem to be similar to 2:29 (2:30 in the Qadiani Quran) and gives out the impression that he has been told that he (MGA) is a Khalifa, just like Adam (as) was called a Khalifa in 2:29 (2:30 in the Qadiani Quran). MGA clarifies that his Khilafat is only spiritual, not governmental. MGA even says that Governmental Khilafat can only be given to the Quraish. MGA says, “this is a grand prophecy predicting the establishment of a spiritual movement at a time when no sign of this movement exists”. MGA then quotes a few words from 2:35 (2:36 in the Qadiani Quran) then fabricated a revelation to himself which gives the impression that MGA was Adam (as)(naozobillah), Maryam (as)(naozobillah) and Ahmad (saw)(this refers to Muhammad [saw]) and even alleged that Allah breathed his “Ruh-Al-Sadiq” (spirit of Truth) into himself (MGA) via revelation.
In terms of claiming to be the Final Mahdi, this is interesting, because in 1891, MGA clearly said that other Mahdi’s could come. (See Izala Auham, Ruhani Khuzain V-3, Page 379). However, by the 1899-1902 era, and via Tiryaqul-Qulub (See pages 478-481), MGA called himself the Final Mahdi.
Continue reading “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad called himself the last Adam (as) and the last Mahdi”
Intro
In a recent live stream, Maulvi Razi said the 73rd sect (jannati) didn’t come into existence until MGA made his claim! Maulvi Razi was asked by a keen questioner (27:13 time-stamp) about what sect MGA belonged to before his claims (was it pre-1891, pre-1889, pre-1884 or pre-1879, any scenario would have worked), this question was never asked to Maulvi Razi in his whole life. Nevertheless, Maulvi Razi didn’t specify and found himself in a quandary.
The questioner remains anonymous as “Indian Muslim”, he came on at 22:50. Maulvi Razi initially argued that MGA was in the same firqa (sect) as Muhammad (saw) and the sahaba (ra)(30:30 time stamp). Maulvi Razi insinuated that Muhammad (saw) and the sahaba (ra) were in a firqa (sect). Maulvi Razi then said that whomever entered into MGA’s bait (1889) they were amongst the 73rd sect (jannati) and everyone else was hell bound (jahanumee). At 39:30, Maulvi Razi says that the 73rd sect (jannati) didn’t appear until MGA made his claims. Check out the clip on twitter, and tik tok. Listen to Amir Haq giving his commentary herein. The full stream with Bro Imtiaz, Adnan and Amir Haq can be found herein. At 47:50 Razi says that all Muslims before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad were in firqas. At 52:06, Maulvi Razi is stuck, he has to explain how Abu Bakr (ra) was in the 73rd sect, however, it hadn’t appeared yet, since he said earlier that it appeared when MGA made his claims. At 55:43, Maulvi Razi gets caught saying that there is a hadith which mentions the 73rd sect as those that would accept the Mahdi/Messiah in the latter days. At 1:05:50 Razi is caught in another huge contradiction, he read a hadith which stated that when Eisa (as) would arrive there would be a jamaat and an Ameer, this contradicts Razi’s previous arguments on the 73rd sect not being in existence until the arrival of the Messiah.
Intro
Allegedly, while MGA was in Sialkot from 1860-1868, MGA allegedly spoke to Reverend Elisha P. Swift. However, there are no records of Reverend Elisha P. Swift ever being in India.
Intro
Per Fiqqa Ahmadiyya page 65, Alfazal, 17 October 1946, Qadiani women can offer prayers even in shorts (nikr) and underwear.
Continue reading “Qadiani women can offer prayers even in shorts (nikr) and underwear”