Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"="

From 1901 to roughly 1924 Ahmadis believed MGA=Muhammad



Intro

Ahmadiyya beliefs are always changing.  In the earlier years, they changed a lot.  After MGA died, they continued to change.  In 1914, they kept changing.  MGA’s sons did Takfir on the entire Muslim world. However, by 1924, they stopped.  Maybe it was their private meeting by the Queen of England in 1924?  Nonetheless, in the below, I have found yet another quotation from the infamous book, “Kalimat ul Fasl” (1916) wherein MGA is described as on equal footing with Muhammad (Saw) (naozobillah).  However, this is what the Qadiani-Ahmadis believed.  There are many other instances from this era which prove my assertion.  

1.  Zaheeruddin Akmal was claiming that MGA was a law-bearing prophet in 1911.
2.  MGA abrogated jihad in 1900 and was thus a law-bearing prophet.
3.  MGA=Muhammad and vice versa
4.  MGA was the person allah spoke about in the famous “Ismuhu-Ahmad” verse of the Quran.

The Quote
“Every messenger was granted accomplishments and perfections according to his capacity and performance in varying degrees, but the Promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam) was granted prophethood when he had attained all the accomplishments of the Prophethood of Muhammad(SAW) and was qualified to be called a shadow prophet. Thus, this shadow prophethood did not make the steps of the Promised Messiah lag behind, but it pushed them forward to such an extent that it brought him on equal footing with the holy Prophet(SAW). “
( Kalimat-ul-Fasl , P. 113, by Mirza Basheer Ahmad Qadiani)(1916).

Some additional quotes from this era, and from Ahmadis

1.  “His messengers (rusuluhu) is encountered in the Quran or in a declaration of faith, Ghulam Ahmad must be considered one of them.  Belief in him is a part of Islamic faith and is, as such, necessary for the attainment of salvation (madar-i najat)” (“Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor” aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” (1911) by Muhammad Zahir al-Din, see pages 8, 71 and 99)(From Friedman, page 152, 2003 edition).  

2.  “If the Promised Messiah is rejected or considered in his claim (heaven forbid!) a liar and a cheat—the inevitable result will be the loss of prophethood of Muhammad….as well”  (“Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor”: aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” (1911) by Muhammad Zahir al-Din, see page 80)(From Friedman, page 152, 2003 edition).

1901, from Khutbah Ilhamia
“One who denies that the mission of the Prophet(SAW) is related to the 6th thousand (13th century) as it was related to 5th thousand (6th century), denies the truth and the text of the Quran and is among the zalemeen (gone astray). The truth is that the spiritual power of the holy Prophet(SAW) at the end of the 6th thousand (13th century in Mirza Ghulam), i.e. these days, is MUCH STRONGER, MORE COMPLETE and STRONGER than in THOSE EARLY YEARS . Nay, it is like the fourteenth (moonlit) night (full moon).”
(Khutbah-e-Ilhamiah, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 16, P. 271-272; Khutbah-e-Ilhamiah, P. 181)

 

John Rippon rips the Ahmadiyya belief that Esa (As) =Yuz Asaph and was buried in Kashmir

The data
The shrine is first mentioned in the Waqi’at-i-Kashmir (Story of Kashmir, published 1747), also known as the Tarikh Azami (History by Azam)[13] by the Khwaja Muhammad Azam Didamari, a local Srinagar Sufi writer. Muhammed Azam states that the tomb is of a foreign prophet and prince, Yuzasuf, or in modern local Kashimiri transcription Youza Asouph. The name may derive from the Urdu “Yuzasaf” in the legend of Balauhar and Yuzasaf, Yuzasaf being a name for Gautama Buddha.[14] Yuzasaf occurs as a spelling in the Rasail Ikhwan al-Safa of the Brethren of Purity and other sources.[15] David Marshall Lang (1960) notes that the connection of the Buddhist Yuzasaf with Kashmir in part results from a printing error in the Bombay Arabic edition referencing the legend of the Wisdom of Balahvar which makes its hero prince Yuzasaf die in “Kashmir” (Arabic: كشمير) by confusion with Kushinara (Pali: كوشينر), the traditional place of the original Buddha’s death.[16][17]

Per Beskow in The Blackwell Companion to Jesus ed. Delbert Burkett 2011 “Only later did Ahmad’s disciples invent the compromise that Jesus had been twice in India. Ahmad’s primary source is a legend, known in the West as the tale of Barlaam and Josaphat. It was widely read all through the Middle Ages as an edifying… Yuzasaf as the principal character is named in Urdu, is helped on his way by the wise Bilhawar … Ahmad divided Yuzasaf in two: Yuz Asaf. He declared that Yuz signified Jesus (who is not called by that name in any”

John Rippon in Journal of Ecclesiastical History Volume 18, Issue 02, October 1967, pp 247–248, online “In The Wisdom of Balahvar Professor Lang assembled the evidence for the Buddhist origins of the legends of the Christian saints Barlaam and Josephat. He suggested the importance of Arabic intermediaries, showing that confusion of diacritical markings turned Budhasaf (Bodhisattva, the Buddha-to-be) into Yudasaf, Iodasaph, Yuzasaf and Josaphat. By a curious roundabout journey this error reappears in once Buddhist Kashmir where the modern Ahmadiyya Muslims, well known for their Woking mosque, claim that a tomb of Yus Asaf was the tomb of Jesus who died in Kashmir, after having been taken down live from the cross; though though the Bombay Arabic edition of the book Balahvar makes its hero die in Kashmir, by confusion with Kushinara the traditional place of the Buddha’s death.”

From 1914–1922, The Qadiani Ahmadis argued that MGA=Muhammad (saw) (nauzobillah)

Intro
The Qadiani branch of Ahmadis is very vicious and corporation like.  They have changed their beliefs many times whenever it is expedient.  In the era wherein Mahmud Ahmad stole the Khilafat, that is 1914–1922, he presented Ahmadiyya very differently then his Lahori-Ahmadi counterparts.  In fact, the Lahori’s diluted the position of MGA (see Truth Prevails, 1965) in 1912-1914 and then continued to do so until today.  However, the Qadianis were bolder…they presented MGA in his full grandeur.  Below is a quote wherein MGA is equated to Muhammad (SaW) (nauzobillah).  They also did Takfir in this era….and then stopped after 1922…..most likely in an attempt to work with the Khilafat movement in India.  

The Quote
“The entity of the promised Masih (Mirza), in the sight of Allah is the entity of the Holy Prophet (SAW). In other words, in the records of Allah there is no duality or difference between the promised Masih and the Holy Prophet (SAW). Rather they both share the same eminence, the same rank, the same status and the same name . …”. (Al-Fazl, Qadian, vol.3, No.37, dated 16th September 1915, as cited in Qadiani Mazhab page 207, 9th edition, Lahore)

In Ahmadiyya, “””Islam= the revelations of MGA+the Quran””

Intro
The Sunni-version of Islam is as follows, Hadith+Sunnah+the Quran=Islam.  It is common sense that the Quran without the hadith/sunnah is incomplete.  The Quranist has faded away into the annals of islamic thought by 1800.  However, Sir Syed revived this theory of Islam in the 1870’s. Some of his admirers were Noorudin, Abdul Kareem, MGA and Mufti Sadiq.  Sir Syed had even wrote that Esa (as) was never returning (1882) and he denied all concepts of the Mahdi.

The evidence that Ahmadis believe Islam= the revelations of MGA+the Quran
“the basis for our claim is not hadith but Quran and that wahi which comes to us.  Yes, in support we also quote those hadith which are according to Quran and do not contradict my wahi.  As for the rest of the hadiths, i throw them away like waste paper..” (See RK: vol: 19, pg. 140, 1902-1902 era).  “””Ijaz e ahmadi”””

The scan work
10298206_1111169475583589_2810213039504251042_o

Conclusions
Ahmadis have a unique system of interpreting Islam.  However, they think its a norm, or they openly lie about it just to confuse the masses.  Ahmadiyya is like selling pork.  Some people may be fooled, however, the majority will resist.

One more thing
In 1895, MGA wrote some different things on his formula of what Islam is…check this out:

“Of the other books that are accepted by us the Sahih of Bukhari ranks as the first. All its Ahadith which are not opposed to the Holy Qur’an are in our view authoritative. Next comes Sahih Muslim. We accept its authority subject to the condition that it should not be opposed to the Holy Qur’an and Sahih Bukhari. Next to them are the compilations of Tirmidhi, Ibn-e-Majah, Muattah of Imam Malik, Nassa’i, Abu Da’ud and Dar Qutni, which we regard as authoritative so long as they are not opposed to the Holy Qur’an and Bukhari and Muslim. These are our religious books and these are the conditions under which we accept them….(…)”
[Arya Dharam, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 10, pp. 86-87]

 

The Ahmadi Shura process is a sham!!!!!!!!!!

Intro
Ahmadiyya INC has a process wherein any and all topics can be discussed at the National level of any country, inside the Ahmadiyya movement that is.  This is a comical attempt to essentially sell people Chinese democracy and pass it off as democracy. The jamaat’s shura system is not an openly deliberative method of decision-making, it’s a place for older men to make minor changes at a time, method and speed of their choosing. After all, this poster and so many others (including Mirza Masroor Ahmad) have made clear so many times that the jamaat is not a democracy, but a divinely-guided institution that doesn’t really care so much about what people want.

Its institutions aren’t set up to care about what people want. Anyone who actually wants to change the jamaat is going to be brow-beaten, pressured and harrangued. Anyone who’s there is really only going to be concerned with minor changes. This is a body for and by older men. If you think that separate shura for lajna and khuddam mean anything, why not agree to a separate Parliament in the UK for Muslims or a separate National Assembly in Pakistan for Ahmadis? This Ahmadi National Assembly in Pakistan could then make non-binding recommendations to the actual Assembly which it would promptly file in its circular cabinet.

All Ahmadi shuras are an attempt to give people the illusion that the jamaat is an organization with institutions that is responsive to change and open to discourse. It’s not, at least not with those who want meaningful change in how it operates. It’s interested in going through the motions of this to make some tiny, cosmetic changes, or larger ones if they’re retrograde or if they wouldn’t be out of place in late nineteenth-century Punjab.

Some examples
In the early 2001/2002 time frame, when outlandish bai’at (conversion) numbers were being announced in the tens of millions each year, it was suggested at a local Shura to submit this issue to the national shura (i.e. some kind of recount/investigation into this, to validate the numbers). The local Aamila member who made this suggestion was shot down by another Aamila member who got up incensed at the suggestion that numbers and progress relayed by Huzur in conversions, would even be questioned. It died right there. It never went to Shura for discussion, since it failed at the local level.

A year later, over in another city, this was raised at a local Jama’at meeting, and dismissed as off topic. The local Sadr then privately approached to indicate that he too, had some questions about the conversion numbers, but didn’t want to voice these in front of the flock, as that would put questions in their mind and have potentially destabilizing effects on their faith.

In 1907, Ahmadi’s were proud to be called Mirzai

Intro
It’s very true, lots of Muslims from the Indian sub-continent call Ahmadi’s as Mirzai’s.  Nowadays, Ahmadi’s hate being called Qadiani or Mirzai and cry persecution whenever someone calls them as such.  However, back in the early days of Ahmadiyya, Ahmadi’s never had a problem with word Mirzai, in fact, we have a scan from the al-Badr Qadian, 7th January 1907 during life time of Mirza Qadiani, wherein an Ahmadi proudly calls himself a Mirzai.

Summary and brief translation of this scan and reference
A follower of Muhammad a muslim was called as Mohammadan by britishers.

See the red highlighted area of this scan, a Qadiani poet says “”Hum Hain Pakke Mirzai”” (we are hardened Mirzai).

This poem was read over by Mir Qasim in Jalsa salana Qadian and published in the al-badar .

The scan

Other related essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/08/10/wonder-why-we-call-them-qadiani/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/29/qadiani-ahmadis-vs-lahori-ahmadis-sectarianism-within-ahmadiyya-2018-version/

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had an obsession with young women

Intro
Ahmadiyya is a business, a family business.  The Lahori-Ahmadi’s warned us of this issue back in 1909 at the earliest.  MGA was not a religious man at all, in fact, he lusted after young women all the time.  We know that he had an obsession with a niece of his named Muhammadi Begum, she played as a child in MGA’s home.  There was another young girl who played in MGA’s home in the late 1870’s, Nusrat Jehan Begum, he ended up marrying her in roughly 1884.  Nusrat Jehan Begum was complicit in the fraud of Ahmadiyya, she knew that MGA was a fraud, however, she remained silent.  In fact, she even covered up the sexual behaviors of MGA for many many years.  As late as 1907, Nusrat Jehan Begum knew that MGA slept separately from her and even had young women in his room all throughout the night.  She never objected to MGA and his time alone with young girls.  In 1907, her eldest son, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad was also accused of sexual misconduct, however, the Mirza family made sure that all witnesses were scared off and thus the investigation endedAfter MGA died, Nusrat Jehan claimed that she was a willing sexual-escort for Noorudin, the newly crowned Khalifa.

My team recently found some additional info
In the below, you will find an entry from Seeratul-Mahdi wherein it is recorded that MGA and his wife would allow other women to share space with them and casually laugh and etc.  As we all know, these types of behaviors were not good in British-India for Muslim men.  MGA was very casual with women and sat with them and spent lots of time alone with many many women.

Seeratul Mahdi, Quotation #1524
Translation : By the name of Allah most gracious most merciful . Respected rasooul bibi sister of Hafiz Hamid Ali sahib & kushd aman molvi Abdul rehman sahib caste jut had narrated via respected lady mother of khalifa salahuddin sahib by writing that once it happened that a lady came while wearing gold ornaments . She sat on the bed (palang) on which ummul mommineyien and Hazour was sitting .we girls started laughing to see that . we said if we had ornaments and rings we could have also been sitting on the bed of hazour sb .Hazrat ummul mominyein informed hazour sb about it (that what we had said) that girls are saying such thing . Hazour started laughing and said “come on girls , you also sit ( i.e on bed)
………………………………………..

The scan

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad quoted and commented on 17:8 in 1884 in the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, he then connected 17:8 with the return of the Messiah

Intro
My team and I have across some interesting information in terms of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and 17:8 of the Quran.  The urdu reference for this is RK, vol. 1, page 601.

All throughout the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya (1–4), MGA was quoting and attributing verses of the Quran onto himself
In this particular section of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 4,  MGA is quoting his own revelations (ilham), many of which are in Arabic. Many of these use and contain words and verses that occur in the Holy Quran. He writes this on p. 577: “I receive most revelations (ilham) in Arabic, particularly verses of the Quran … these are given below with translation.” This continues much beyond p. 601.

The quotation from Barahin-i Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, is as follows:

See, Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, online edition, page 382

‘asā rabbu-kum an yarḥama ‘alai-kum wa in ‘ud-tum ‘ud-nā wa ja‘al-nā jahannama lil-kāfirīna ḥaṣīra.

MGA was trying to quote 17:8 as he projected it onto himself
17:8 actually says: 

‘asā rabbu-kum an yarḥama-kum wa in ‘ud-tum ‘ud-nā wa ja‘al-nā jahannama lil-kāfirīna ḥaṣīra (17:8)

What are the difference between the two?
Just that the quotation in Barahin-i Ahmadiyya reads yarḥama ‘alai-kum while the verse in the Quran reads yarḥama-kum. The extra ‘alai in Barahin-i Ahmadiyya means ‘on’, while in the verse of the Quran the same ‘on’ is understood. Every English translation of the Quran renders the first part of this verse using “on”, as in : “It may be that your Lord will have mercy on you” (Pickthall).

The same verse, (17:8) quoted by MGA in his later books
It may be added that the same ilham has been written by MGA sahib in two later books. In both of these its wording is exactly that of the verse of the Quran (‘asā rabbu-kum an yarḥama-kum …). See the book Arba‘in number 2, published 1900 (Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 17, p. 352, lines 7-8) and the book Haqiqat-ul-Wahy, published 1907 (Ruhani Khaza’in, v. 22, p. 85, lines 11-16).

MGA connected 17:8 with the return of the Messiah
Just beneath the revelation, MGA gives his commentary:

“””This verse here indicates the glorious coming of Hadrat Masih. That is to say that if [people] would not accept [the divine message] through mildness, gentleness, kindness, and graciousness and would rebel against the truth that has been made manifest through conclusive arguments and manifest Signs, then a time is about to come when God Almighty would treat the sinners with severity, sternness, wrath, and harshness. And Hadrat Masih, may peace be on him, would descend in the world with great glory and would cleanse all paths and roads of rubbish, and no trace of the perverted and the crooked would remain [in the world], and divine glory would obliterate the seed of misguidance through its severe manifestation.”””

In the same book, 60 pages forward, MGA asserts that Esa (as) is dead

Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, Vol-4, page 434
MGA writes out a revelation that he claims came from his GOD to him, this revelation that MGA received is actually 3:55 of the Quran.  MGA claimed over 30+ revelations from his God which were actually verses of the Quran, this behavior of MGA caused him to be declared as a Kafir by the ulema.

یا عیسٰی انی متوفیك و رافعك اليَّ )و مطھرك من الذین كفروا( 2۔ وجاعل الذین اتبعوك
فوق الذین كفروا الٰی یوم القیٰمة۔ ثلۃ من الاولین و ثلۃ من الاٰخرين۔

“”O ‘Isa, I shall give you full reward or cause you to die and shall raise you towards Me, meaning that I shall raise your status or will raise you from the life on earth towards Me, and I shall
grant predominance to your followers over those who disbelieve, until the Day of Judgment.””

See Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 4, online english, page 434, edition, https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya-Part-4.pdf

 

The scan with the referencing error
This quote is from BA4, not BA1.

Read additional essays on the BA here: 
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=1884

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad promised 300 arguments for his Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, but only delivered one argument

Intro
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the classic punjabi fraudster.  He had promised the Muslims of the Indian sub-continent 50 volumes/300 arguments in favor of Islam in roughly 1878.  However, he only delivered one argument, and that argument was his claim of prophethood, which immediately got him declared as a Kafir by the ulema in India.

A summary of the quotation of Seeratul Mahdi- Number 123
It says that 300 arguments were Written on 2500 pages but in fact Only One Incomplete argument could be printed in Braheenay Ahmadia in total of 4 volumes . He says he heard that earlier writings were burned.

The scans

Up ↑