Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"1884"

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

In 1884, before his wildest claims, MGA defined Inni-Mutawafeeka, wa Raffa as I shall give you full reward and shall raise you towards Me



Intro

Most Ahmadis on social media have no idea what MGA wrote, this is evident when we give counter-arguments and they quickly deflect to other topics or other lines of argumentation. They deflect for a number of reasons.  #1–they lack the ability to think independently, aka critical thinking, Ahmadis rely on their Mullah’s to give them interpretations of MGA writings and the Quran, no other sources are even trusted.  #2–they know that they are lying and choose to be argumentative and defensive, not open and clear.

When Ahmadis argue that Esa (As) is dead, and its clear in the quran
We mention that if it’s so clear, why did MGA have the opposite belief until he was roughly 50 years old, aka 1891.  We continue to argue, if it is so clear in the Quran, why did MGA not understand sooner?  Per Ahmadiyya sources, MGA was reading the quran most likely everyday from at least age 10 to age 50.  Most Ahmadi’s freeze up at this point and deflect to other silly arguments.

Per MGA, by 1884, and per the quranic verse 3:55, muta-wafeeka doesn’t mean death and Raffa, in this context means to physically raise someone to heaven, i.e. towards Allah.

In the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 4, while published in his own revelations and explaining them:

“””I shall give you full reward and shall raise you towards Me. I shall place those who follow you—that is, truly enter into the fold of the followers of Allah and the Messenger—above those who deny you until the Day of Judgment.””” Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 4, online english edition, page 398.

Mutawafeeka in 3:55 doesn’t mean FULL reward either
Another point to take notice of is the fact that MGA was already taking up the Sir Syed position as he wrote BA 1–4.  MGA claims to have written all 4 volumes of BA as early as 1879, the delay was only in publishing.  Nonetheless, we can see how MGA was slowly changing his claims, he was already asserting Mutawafeeka means something other then “capturing in fully, body and soul”.

This very same reference as recorded in Tadhkirah, 2009 online edition
Under a lengthy Arabic revelation, which starts off with “Inni-Mutawafeeka, wa rafia o ka…”

“””I shall give you full reward and shall raise you towards Me…”””

Tadhkirah, 2009 online edition refers to the Urdu version of BA-4
Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, part 4, pp. 510–521 sub-footnote 3,—Urdu
Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 1, pp. 608–623 sub-footnote 3]—Urdu

MGA refers to this issue in 1898, in his book Ayyam us Sulah
“””In the Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah I had mistakenly interpreted tawaffa as meaning ‘full reward’, which some of the maulavis cite as a criticism against me. They are not justified in this as I confess that I was mistaken in this. But there is no mistake in the revelation. I am a human being and am subject to human frailties such as mistake and forgetfulness like other human beings, though I know that God does not leave me under the influence of a mistake. I do not,
however, claim that I cannot be mistaken in an interpretation Divine revelation is free from mistake but man’s words are not free from the possibility of mistake, because forgetfulness and mistake are essential human characteristics.

[Ayyamus-Sulah, p. 41, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 14, pp. 271–272
See also Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah, vol. 5, p. 73 footnote,
Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 21, p. 93 footnote]
^^Taken from Tadhkirah, 2009 online edition, pages 118-119

The full Arabic revelation from BA-4, online english edition
اني متوفیك ورافعك اليَّ وجاعل الذین اتبعوك فوق الذین کفروا الی یوم القیٰمۃ ولا تھنوا ولا
تحزنوا و کان الّٰل بکم رءُوفًا رحیما۔ الا ان اولیاء الّٰل لا خوف علیھم ولا ھم یحزنون۔ تموت
وانا راض منك فادخلوا الجنۃ ان شاء الّٰل اٰمنین۔ سلام علیکم طبتم فادخلوھا اٰمنین۔ سلام
علیك جعلت مبارکا۔ سمع الّٰل انہ سمیع الدعاء انت مبارك في الدنیا والاخرۃ۔ امراض
الناس وبرکاتہ ان ربك فعال لما یرید۔ اذکر نعمتي التي انعمت علیك وانی فضلتك
علی العلمین۔ یاایتھا النفس المطمئنۃ ارجعی الی ربك راضیۃ مرضیۃً فادخلی فی عبادی
وادخلی جنتی۔ منَّ ربکم علیکم و احسن الی احبابکم وعلمکم مالم تکونوا تعلمون۔ وان
تعدوا نعمۃ الّٰل لا تحصوھا۔

Tafsir Ibn Kathir on 3:55
(55. And (remember) when Allah said: “O `Isa! I will take you and raise you to Myself and purify ﴿save﴾ you from those who disbelieve, and I will make those who follow you superior to those who disbelieve till the Day of Resurrection. Then you will return to Me and I will judge between you in the matters in which you used to dispute.”

Ibn Kathir goes on to write

“””I will take you) is in reference to sleep, for Allah raised `Isa while he was asleep.””

“””(For surely; they killed him not But Allah raised him up unto Himself. And Allah is Ever All-Powerful, All-Wise. And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) but must believe in him before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection, he ﴿`Isa﴾ will be a witness against them.) ﴿4:156-159﴾

`His death’ refers to `Isa, and the Ayah means that the People of the Book will believe in `Isa, before `Isa dies. This will occur when `Isa comes back to this world before the Day of Resurrection, as we will explain. By that time, all the People of the Book will believe in `Isa, for he will annul the Jizyah and he will only accept Islam from people. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Al-Hasan said that Allah’s statement,””””

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=535&Itemid=46

MGA stole Sir Syed’s position on the death of Esa (As) in the 1889-1891 era

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/24/noorudin-and-abdul-karim-were-influenced-by-sir-syed/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/27/sir-syeds-view-on-esa-as/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/06/in-1880-khan-published-first-volume-of-his-tafsir-and-he-asserted-that-esa-as-was-dead-mga-copied-via-nooruddin/

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was accused of claiming prophethood in the 1879–1884 era

Intro
Some new and interesting information has dug up in terms of MGA and his claim to prophethood.  As we all know, the Qadiani branch believes that MGA was a prophet from 1879 up til his death in 1908, whereas the Lahori branch denies this prophethood altogether.  Some new information, dug up by Upal (2017) proves that MGA was accused of claiming prophethood in the era of the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, i.e. 1879–1884, and his had to do with the divine revelations that MGA was claiming for himself.

Later on, in 1901, MGA officially claimed prophethood for himself
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/11/eik-ghalti-ka-izala-aka-correction-of-an-error-was-re-published-on-march-1-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/29/al-qaul-ul-fasl-by-mahmud-ahmad-1915/

In 1884, Batalvi defends MGA to the Muslims of India and assures Muslims that MGA is not claiming prophethood
See Upal (2017) page 127 and onwards:

“””Over and over again, Batalavi insists throughout his review that Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad had not made any prophetic claims (pages 175; 191; 260; 268; 269; 273; 275;
278; 279). Muslim leaders who insist that he has, are mistaken argues Batalavi. Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad is a Muslim and not a kafir, argues Batalavi. In one paragraph where
Batalavi not only foresees the group-name of Ahmadi that Ahmad was to assign to
his movement seventeen years later but also the pejorative group name of Mirzai that
their opponents were to call them by, Batalavi writes:

“””What does he [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] conclude from his revelations and miracles? Does he use them to prove his prophethood or the prophethood of Muhammad? What religion does he invite people (including many top padres, pundits, Brahmo Arya rajas, and sardars of other religions) with such bravery and boldness? Is it the Islamic religion or Ahmadi religion or Mirzai religion?

Unless you are a person whose heart has been darkened with prejudice, these arguments and
reasoning would have convinced you that he absolutely makes no claim whatsoever to his
own prophethood [emphasis in the original]. The true purpose of all of each and every one of
his claims is the proof of prophethood of Muhammad. (Batalavi, 1884: 278-279)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was considered a Kafir in 1884, before his wild claims

Intro
Ahmadis will be seen running around making many false arguments.  They are brainwashed to learn these arguments, so thus, they never listen or seek to understand why people don’t believe in Ahmadiyya, aka the Mirza family business.

New research from Upal (2017) proves that MGA was called a Kafir even before his wild claims!
All of the research work on Ahmadiyya up to 2016 indicated that MGA was only called a Kafir in 1891, as he claimed to be the second coming of Esa (as).  However, new research from Upal proves that MGA was called a Kafir as early as the 1880–1884 era (see page 126).  This was during the time that MGA was affiliated with the Ahle-Hadith aka Wahhabis of India.  However, it should be noted that in 1891, MGA also did Takfir on any and all Muslims who believe in Abrogation or that Muhammad (Saw) isn’t the final prophet.  MGA was denying a claim to prophethood in this era, in fact, he kept on denying it until Nov. of 1901, when he finally claimed prophethood and in a round about way.

Batalvi’s comments from 1884 on MGA being called a Kafir
As we know, the Ahle-hadith circles in British-India donated heavily towards MGA’s Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya.  They were not impressed, in fact, the husband of the Queen of Bhopal tore up the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya (we are not sure what year or which volume) and sent it back to Qadian in disgust.  They were offended!!!  MGA’s denied all the miracles of Esa (As) and was disrespecting a high-ranking Messenger of Allah.

Upal (2017) writes
Page 126

“””While Nawab Sidiq Khan had criticized Braheen because of its anti-Christian
views, a number of other Muslim leaders saw in it claims that ran counter to their
understanding of Islamic doctrine. These included Amritsar and Ludhiana’s Muslim
leaders who issued a fatwa of kufr against Ahmad and went around India to collect
signatures from other Muslims to the same effect (Batalavi, 1884: 170). Ahmad’s friend,
Muhammad Hussain Batalavi, took upon himself to reply to this criticism through
his Ishat-us-Sunnah magazine. He devoted a whopping one hundred and fifty three
pages of Issue Nine and Ten to respond to each of these criticisms with well researched
arguments. The amount of time, effort, money, and his personal capital, Batalavi spent
on defending Ahmad reveals the extent of their ideological and social connections.
The review also reveals Batalavi’s perceptions of Ahmad. Batalavi clearly identifies
with Ahmad as a fellow Punjabi Ahl-e-Hadith who is willing to spend considerable
resources to defend Islam. He also sees Ahmad as more rural, less educated, less
sophisticated, and less successful than himself. He sees Ahmad as “a Punjabi who has
never had the opportunity” to live in the cosmopolitan cultural centers of Hindustan,
“who hasn’t had the occasion to read Urdu literature” and therefore is not able to write
“refined Urdu vernacular” (Batalavi, 1884: 346). There are also hints of a noble savage in
Batalavi’s perceptions of Ahmad as he sees Ahmad as someone who is so overcome with
religious fervor and zeal that “he’s unable to hold back” from including his unrelated
revelations in the Braheen (thereby lengthening it and “increasing publication
costs”), and someone who doesn’t understand that the “current civilization” demands
refraining from crudely attacking one’s enemies (Batalavi, 1884: 346).
Batalavi touts his personal knowledge of Ahmad’s beliefs beyond the words
written in Braheen to defend Ahmad. Answering the accusation that some of Ahmad’s
English revelations are grammatically incorrect, Batalavi says, “When I met the
author who visited the city of Batala, where I am now, I asked him, ‘when you receive
revelations in English, are you shown English alphabets or Persian alphabets?’ He
responded that he is shown English sentences written in Farsi script. That’s when
I became sure of my suggestion that the mistake lies in the author’s perception…
and not the divine revelation” (Batalavi, 1884: 291). Ahmad’s ignorance of English
and his miracle of English revelations will attract English speaking Christians and
Hindus to Islam argues Batalavi. It’s clear that Batalavi sees the younger Ahmad as
his junior, albeit more zealous, friend in need of assistance. Batalavi sees himself
as heroically defending Ahmad with his superior knowledge of Quran, Hadith, and
Islamic traditions. Since Batalavi does not see Ahmad as his competitor, he holds
nothing back in defending him.”””

In the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 3, 1883, MGA claimed that 9:32 was revealed to himself
In this era, MGA began faking revelations onto himself in great abundance.  In fact, he applied 9:32 onto himself and without a commentary, later on in 1901, he would claim that the word Messenger in this verse and subsequently to the revelation of MGA in 1883, was an indication of MGA’s prophethood.

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/17/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-quoted-and-commented-on-178-in-1884-in-the-braheen-e-ahmadiyya-vol-4-he-then-connected-178-with-the-return-of-the-messiah/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/03/in-1884-before-his-wildest-claims-mga-defined-inni-mutawafeeka-wa-raffa-as-i-shall-give-you-full-reward-and-shall-raise-you-towards-me/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/muhammad-hussain-batalvi-gave-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-a-glowing-review-in-1884/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/17/nooruddin-urged-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-to-make-the-claim-of-being-like-the-messiah-1882-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/25/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-molana-muhammad-hussain-batalvi-and-muslims-leaders-in-british-india-in-august-of-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-queen-of-the-princely-state-of-bhopal-invested-heavily-1878-into-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-his-braheen-they-were-disappointed-by-the-product/

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

 

Muhammad Hussain Batalvi gave Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a glowing review in 1884

Intro
Batalvi and MGA were close friends up to 1891, they were both the same age and had shared some of the same teachers, further, MGA’s father knew Batalvi’s father and etc etc etc.  In 1884, A fatwa of Kufr landed on MGA’s head from many Muslims in India, this was in response to MGA’s Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya Vol. 4 which was published in the early summer of 1884.  MGA had went the Sir Syed-route and denied all of the miracles of Esa (As), however MGA was a a Ahle-Hadith (aka Wahabbi) affiliated person, in fact, his friend Noorudin was also Ahle-Hadith, as was his future wife, Nusrat Jehan and her father and Batalvi, who helped MGA arrange this marriage.

The quotes
See Upal(2017), page 125 and onward

“””In our opinion, it is in this time and in the present circumstances, a book the like of which has not been written up to this time in Islam, and nothing can be said about the future; Allah may bring about another affair after this. Its author, too, has proved himself firm in helping the cause of Islam, with his property, his person, his pen, his tongue and his personal religious experience, to such an extent that it is rarely seen among Muslims who have gone before. If someone thinks that my words are Asian exaggeration then show me at least one such book that confronts opponents of Islam especially the Arya Samaj with such gusto and enthusiasm. And point out such supporters of Islam who have taken upon themselves to help the cause of Islam with their property, their person, their treasure, their pen, and their tongue. And who has successfully challenged, with all his manly courage, opponents of Islam and deniers of revelation that if they doubt divine revelation to visit him and experience, observe and taste it. (Batalavi, 1884: 169-170).”””

“””Perhaps some of our critics will place me in the same category as the author of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya and slap the fatwa of kufr on me as well. They may say that I have raised the author of Braheen to the level of prophet Muhammad and I have declared his revelations to be innocent similar to the revelations of the Prophet but I am not afraid of their fatwa of kufr… (Batalavi, 1884: 284)”””

:”””What does he [Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] conclude from his revelations and miracles? Does he use them to prove his prophethood or the prophethood of Muhammad? What religion does he invite people (including many top padres, pundits, Brahmo Arya rajas, and sardars of other religions) with such bravery and boldness? Is it the Islamic religion or Ahmadi religion or Mirzai religion? Unless you are a person whose heart has been darkened with prejudice, these arguments and reasoning would have convinced you that he absolutely makes no claim whatsoever to his own prophethood [emphasis in the original]. The true purpose of all of each and every one of his claims is the proof of prophethood of Muhammad. (Batalavi, 1884: 278-279).

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/24/batalvi-calls-mga-a-drunkard/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/30/out-of-fear-from-ahmadis-and-mgas-fake-prophecies-batalvi-registered-to-buy-a-gun-1898-1899-but-was-denied/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/did-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claim-to-be-the-messiah-in-1889/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/25/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-molana-muhammad-hussain-batalvi-and-muslims-leaders-in-british-india-in-august-of-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/30/nikama-nabi-or-the-useless-prophet-by-babu-ghulam-mustafa-sb-son-of-muhammad-hussain-batalvi/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/01/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-batalvi-1891-1892-era-mga-sent-10-lanats-on-batalvi/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/10/the-fatwa-e-kufr-vs-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/03/in-1884-before-his-wildest-claims-mga-defined-inni-mutawafeeka-wa-raffa-as-i-shall-give-you-full-reward-and-shall-raise-you-towards-me/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/muhammad-hussain-batalvi-gave-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-a-glowing-review-in-1884/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/17/nooruddin-urged-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-to-make-the-claim-of-being-like-the-messiah-1882-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/25/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-molana-muhammad-hussain-batalvi-and-muslims-leaders-in-british-india-in-august-of-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/25/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-that-the-rule-british-government-in-india-will-end-in-8-years/

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Nooruddin urged Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to make the claim of being “like the messiah” (1882-1884 era)

Intro
As we all know, it was Nooruddin who pressured MGA to make his crazy claims, in fact, he wrote mostly all the books that were ascribed to MGA, he also organized the team of writers and imams that surrounded MGA and made MGA look like a scholar and an Imam.  They gave all the speeches on MGA’s behalf, they wrote and edited all the books, thats probably why there are soooo many contradictions, and further, they all lived with MGA in his palace, which seems to be a triple story mansion, that was built by MGA’s father.  In this quote, we are proving that MGA and Noorudin planned everything….enjoy the quote…

Maktubat-e-Ahmadiyyah Volume 5: Part II

 ” whatever has been written by Amakhdoum ( I.e hakeem molvi nooruddin ist qadyani khalifa ) that if we leave aside truthfulness Hadith of Damascus , and I be presented to be a maseeelll Masseh , there is no loss in it ”

More data about this edition of Maktubat
This edition contains One hundred and twenty-eight pages, published in Urdu, is a collection of 88 letters written by MGA from March 8, 1885 to August 26, 1892 to Maulavi Hakim Nur-ud-Din. These letters are in his own hand and relate to the efficacy of prayers and specially those made at the eleventh hour. Mention has also been made of some of his revelations specially about the Promised Reformer and also contain suggestions about the printing of the magazines.

The scan work


However, in 1890, MGA also wrote
“I have claimed to be Maseel Maseeh, which stupid people think that it is The Promised Messiah.  I have never claimed to be the Messiah ibne Maryam. Anyone who accuses me of it, he is absolutely a liar and fabricator. For the last eight years, I have been announcing that I am only Maseel Maseeh; By that I mean that certain spiritual properties and nature and habits and virtues of Jesus(AS) has been given to me as well by God Almighty.” [Ruhani Khazain: Volume 3, Page # 192], (direct link to the page)(Izala Auham P190-191)

Conclusions
As is evident….MGA lied all the time about his claims…he was being pressured by his team of writers and imams to make these audacious claims, most likely because it would increase their respective payrolls.

Who is Muhammadi Begum? 1875–1966

Intro
Per Ahmadiyya sources she was a triple-niece of MGA.  MGA was her uncle in 3 ways and maybe more, MGA’s sister was married to her paternal big uncles.  Per Ahmadiyya sources, she was born in 1874/75 (see Dard, page 330).  She was thus 13-14 when MGA was asking to marry her per Ahmadiyya sources, however, she was most likely 9-10.  MGA had most likely seen her as an infant, since he was her uncle in 3-4 ways, thus, he had seen her a lot.  MGA and Mirza Ahmad Baig seem to have been friendly to each other even after MGA had his war with his cousins over land.  Nevertheless, in 1888, Mirza Ahmad Baig met with MGA and asked MGA to sign over “lucrative” property rights which belonged to MGA’s cousin, Mirza Ghulam Hussain, who had went missing around 1865, and was co-incidentally married to Mirza Ahmad Baig’s sister.  MGA responded by asking to marry Mirza Ahmad Baig’s 13-14-year old daughter, Mirza Ahmad Baig immediately refused.  This kicked off a public war wherein the entire Mirza family was opposed to MGA.  In fact, it is not too far-fetched to say that the life and career of MGA was shaped by his love of Muhammadi Begum.  Birth of sons, death threats against others, Batalvi feud, Christian feud (Christian paper published letters to Muhammadi Begum family) which led to the Atham saga, which then led to the maseel maseeh and maseeh mauood stuff.  MGA kept upping the ante.  The whole ‘promised son’ seems like a ruse to get Muhammadi Begum’s dad interested in him, implying that if Muhammadi Begum marries MGA, the son would be the inheritor to all of his spiritual and worldly legacy.

January 1886
In 1888 MGA claims that he mentioned a prophecy to Mirza Ahmad Baig a few years back (See Dard, page 172).  However, this is lie.  MGA was on good relations with Mirza Ahmad Baig until his father died and court cases were issued between the Mirza family in terms of land disbursement wherein MGA lost (1884).

Feb, 20th 1886
MGA publishes his famous announcement vs. Lekh Ram and about the Promised Son.  By 1888, MGA was connecting his proposed marriage with Muhammadi Begum to this prophecy also.  

June 8th, 1886
MGA writes letters to Noorudin wherein he claims that his God is ordering him to marry again for a 3rd time, and to thus have 3 wives.  These were published after MGA died , hence, they are tampered with.

June 20th, 1886
MGA writes another letter to Nooruddin wherein he says that he is afraid that he is commanded by his God to marry a 3rd time, and this is unavoidable (See Dard pages 173-174) .

February of 1888
Ahmadiyya sources tell us that in roughly February of 1888, Mirza Ahmad Baig seems to have came to Qadian and asked MGA to make a deal.  The issue was that Mirza Ahmad Baig’s sister (Imam Bibi) had been married to MGA’s cousin: Mirza Ghulam Hussain.  Mirza Ghulam Hussain had went missing for roughly 25 years.  He had lots of land in his and his wife’s possession, his wife possessed it for 25 years, however, per the rules of the Mirza family (Not Islam), if a person died with no heir, his land would revert to other family members.  However, this is unislamic, we are unsure where this tradition came from, however, the Mirza family was always playing his land-grabbing game.  Mirza Ahmad Baig and his sister (Imam Bibi) knew that when Imam Bibi would die, the land would revert to MGA at 50% (+Mirza Sultan Ahmad) and 50% to his cousins (see Nuzul ul Masih, via the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, pages 190-191) .  MGA knew that Mirza Ahmad Baig was desperate for concessions.  MGA then asked for his daughter in exchange for signing over the property to Mirza Ahmad Baig’s sister.

May 10th, 1888
The maternal uncles of Muhammadi Begum, Mirza Nizam-ud-Din and Mirza Imam-ud-Din, and also others of their party, not only publicized this matter verbally but also had Hazrat Mirza’s letters printed in newspapers to ensure the widest publicity.  Thus, the Nur Afshan published a letter from MGA to Ahmad Baig (See Dard, page 172).

June 1888
The Arya Patrika, Lahore, page 5 also covered the story (See Dard, page 172).

July 10th, 1888
In his Ishtihar he declared that if she was not married to MGA her father would die within three years of her marriage to anyone else, and her husband would die within 30 months and that other calamities would also overtake the family. This was to be a sign for MGA’s cousins and relations, who dared to flout the authority of the Supreme Being (See Dard, page 330).

July 15th, 1888
MGA publishes another announcement about his cousins and their upcoming deaths.

August 1888
By August of 1888, the entire Mirza family was against MGA and his marriage proposal for his niece.  The list includes all family members of MGA, which includes both of his sons, and all of his cousins (see Mujadid e Azim, online abridged version, pages 228-268, specifically page 253).

Aug 1888 to July 1890
2 years of total silence on this topic.

July 17th, 1890
MGA wrote a letter to Mirza Ahmad Baig offering him condolence at the death of his son, Mahmud (See Dard, page 331).

April 7th, 1892
Muhammedi Begum was married to Sultan Muhammad (see Dard, page 334).

July 1892
MGA was dreaming about multiple women, this may have been an indication of the eventual fate of Muhammadi Begum (see the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, see pages 256-257).

September 30, 1892
Mirza Ahmad Baig dies (See the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, page 188).

February 1893
Ainah Kamalat-e-Islam is published which contains MGA’s prophecy about Mirza Ahmad Baig and Muhammadi Begum.  

The winter of 1893
MGA and his team of writers mentions the death of Mirza Ahmad Baig as a sign of MGA’s truth.  See “Shahada-tul Quran”, in english as “Testimony of the Quran”, see here a link to the english translation by the Lahori-Ahmadi’s.

“””(1) Mirza Ahmad Baig of Hoshiarpur should die within the limit of three years; (2) then his son-in-law, the husband of his elder daughter, should die within two and a half years; (3) Mirza Ahmad Baig should not die before the day of his daughter’s wedding; (4) the daughter too must not die before she is married, and then widowed, and then married a second time; (5) my humble self too should not die till all these events take place; (6) and then she should be married to myself. Obviously these events are not in human control. [Note 6]”””””

1894
Via the Ishaat us Sunnah magazine, Mirza Sultan Muhammad (the husband of Muhammadi Begum) called MGA a liar and a Kafir.

1897
In Anjam-e-Athim, MGA mentions his prophecy vs. his cousins and other close relations.

1901
MGA mentions the faliure of the Muhammadi Begum prophecy but claims that he will marry her as widow.

1902
Ahmadiyya newspapers report on 18 August 1902: Mirza Ahsan Baig formally requested to be part of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat. He was the grandson of Mirza Ahmad Baig, son-in-law of Mirza Ahmad Baig and brother-in-law of Muhammadi Begum.  He was married to one of the younger sisters of Muhammadi Begum.

Oct-1902
“””About eighteen years ago, I had an opportunity to visit Maulavi Muhammad Husain Batalavi, Editor of Isha‘atus- Sunnah at his house. He asked me whether I had received any revelation lately and I mentioned to him the revelation, which I had already mentioned several times to my friends:

[Arabic] A virgin and a widow.

I interpreted this to him and to all others to mean that: God has intended to bring two women to me in marriage—the first time a virgin and the second time a widow. The first part of the revelation, relating to a virgin, has been fulfilled By Allah’s grace, I have four sons from that wife. I await fulfilment of the part about the widow. “””[Tiryaqul-Qulub, p. 34, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 15, p. 201](See Also, the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, pages 50-51).

1907
In “Haqiqatul Wahy”, MGA mentions Mirza Ahmad Baig on pages, 219-220, 231, 233, 237, 238, 280, 492, 493, 576, 577, 696, 697, 710, 714, 715.  MGA basically says that even though Muhammadi Begum was still alive and married with children, the prophecy was conditional and thus fulfilled.

June-July 1908, Nooruddin comments on the failed prophecy of Muhammadi Begum
“””Now, I would like to remind all the Muslims who have had and still have faith in the Noble Qur’an that since those addressed in it include also their offsprings, successors and those like them, then, can this prophecy not include the daughter, of Ahmad Beg, or the daughter of that daughter ? Does your law of inheritance not apply the regulations regarding daughters to their daughters ? And are the offsprings of the Mirza not his agnates ? I had often told dear Mian Mahmood (Mian Bashiruddin Mahmood, a son of the Mirza and the second head of the Qadiani movement after Hakim Nuruddin. ) that even if the Mirza were to die and this girl did hot enter into his wedlock, my adoration of him would remain unshaken.”””” (Review of Religions, Vol. VII, no. 726, June and July, 1908, p. 279 (cited from Qadiani Mazhab).

October 1908
Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya Vol. 5 is published.  MGA mentions Ahmad Baig on pages, 254, 255, 494, 495.

1947
Muhammadi Begum, her husband, family and extended family move to Lahore by force.

1948
Mirza Sultan Muhammad dies.

1966
Muhammadi Begum died on 19 November, 1966, at Lahore, her funeral prayer was led by Molana Shahabuddin of Chowburji who was a disciple of Shaikhul Hind Molana Mahmoodul Hasan. She was buried in Qabrustan Miyani Sahib Lahore.

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/10/new-data-on-muhammadi-begum-found-2017/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/who-is-mirza-ghulam-hussain/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/barahin-e-ahmadiyya-part-v/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/02/03/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-famous-announcement-of-20-february-1886/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/22/in-1893-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-made-6-predictions-about-muhammadi-begum/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/haqiqatul-wahi/

http://aaiil.org/text/books/mga/testimonyholyquran/proofpromisedmessiah.shtml#sst

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/who-is-mirza-ghulam-haidar/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/who-is-mirza-ghulam-hussain/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/09/who-is-mirza-ghulam-muhi-ud-din-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-paternal-uncle-died-in-1866/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/11/who-is-mirza-nizam-ud-din-1845-the-first-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/24/mirza-imam-ud-din-the-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-punjab-chiefs-by-lepel-griffin-1890-edition-doesnt-even-mention-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=muhammadi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/16/who-is-murad-bibi/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawab_ud_din_Ramdasi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/22/in-1885-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-published-a-31-month-prophecy-vs-his-own-extended-family/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/02/03/who-is-mirza-ahmad-baig-hoshiarpuri/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/barahin-e-ahmadiyya-part-v/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/02/03/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-famous-announcement-of-20-february-1886/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/22/in-1893-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-made-6-predictions-about-muhammadi-begum/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/haqiqatul-wahi/

http://aaiil.org/text/books/mga/testimonyholyquran/proofpromisedmessiah.shtml#sst

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/who-is-mirza-ghulam-haidar/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/who-is-mirza-ghulam-hussain/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/09/who-is-mirza-ghulam-muhi-ud-din-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-paternal-uncle-died-in-1866/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/11/who-is-mirza-nizam-ud-din-1845-the-first-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/24/mirza-imam-ud-din-the-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-punjab-chiefs-by-lepel-griffin-1890-edition-doesnt-even-mention-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=muhammadi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/16/who-is-murad-bibi/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawab_ud_din_Ramdasi

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Who is the British Military Officer Captain Montague William Douglas?

Intro
Captain Montague William Douglas also known as M.W. Douglas, District Magistrate, District Gurdaspur in 1897.   Lt. Col Montagu William Douglas CSI, CIE. (1863 – February 1957) was a British soldier and colonial administrator in India. As the Assistant District Commissioner in the Punjab, he investigated the attempted murder allegation made by Henry Martyn Clark against Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement. Ahmad later declared him to be the “Pilate of our time”, superior to the original. In his later life he was a noted advocate of the Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship and was president of the Shakespeare Fellowship for many years.  In 1939, he met with the Ahmadi mullah JD Shams and even presided on a Jalsa in the UK, hence he proved that he colluded with MGA to exonerate him.  In 1897, he was a captain in the British Military as well as a judge, in fact, all British officers doubled as corrupt Judges.

He was born to Edward Douglas, (1831–1867) and Annie Arbuthnot, (b. 1831). In February 1884 he joined the 1st Battalion, North Staffordshire Regiment, switching to the Indian army in 1887. He was promoted to captain in 1895.

In 1891, Douglas married Helen Mary Isabelle Downer (b. 1863). They had three children, Edward Montagu Douglas (b. 1891), Major Archibald Stair Montagu Douglas, MM, (1897–1974),[1] and Helen Elizabeth Douglas (b. 1893).[2][3]

1897

In 1897, having been appointed assistant district commissioner in the Punjab, Douglas was required to investigate the allegations of Henry Martyn Clark against Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Clark, a Christian missionary, had been approached by a youth named Abdul Hamid, who claimed that Ahmad had sent him to kill Clark. Douglas found Hamid’s claims to be implausible, and that there was evidence that Hamid had been coached. He had also repeatedly changed and even retracted his story. Douglas dismissed the charges. Even after more than forty years he vividly remembered the case and its details. He wrote to J. D. Shams, an Ahmadiyya missionary in London on 29 July 1939, “… the evidence was false and thus I acquitted Mirza Ghulam Ahmad”.[4] The aftermath was presented by Ahmad’s supporters as a triumph, and as evidence of Ahmad’s divine mission.[5] Subsequently, Ahmad compared Douglas favourably with Pontius Pilate, declaring him to be a man of much superior character, stating,

“”””In my opinion, Captain Douglas outshines Pilate in imparting judgment fearlessly and in showing determination and steadfastness … Pilate showed cowardice due to fear of the High Priest and the Elders, and acted in a cowardly manner. But Captain Douglas showed no sign of weakness … Those who are blessed with honour from above do not hanker after worldly honours. This commendable courtesy by the ‘Pilate’ of our time shall be remembered by all my followers when I am gone. He shall be remembered till the end of the world with love and respect.””””[6][7]

In his book Kitab ul Baryyah (An Account of Exoneration) Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has narrated the details of the case.[8]

 

Later career and retirement

Douglas was appointed Deputy Commissioner in 1899, and was promoted to Major on 6 February 1902.[9] He was on the executive committee for the Coronation Durbar at Delhi in 1903. From 1910-1913 he was Deputy Commissioner of the Lylpur District. He then served as Chief Commissioner of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands from 1913–1920.[10][11]

Douglas was honoured as Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire (CIE) in 1903 and as Companion of the Order of the Star of India (CSI) in 1919.

In his retirement he was an advocate of Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship and wrote The Earl of Oxford as “Shakespeare”; an outline of the case (1931).[12] In 1928 he became president of The Shakespeare Fellowship, after the death of its founder George Greenwood. He held the post until 1945. Douglas advocated a “group theory” of Shakespeare authorship with Oxford as the “master mind”.[13] In Lord Oxford and the Shakespeare Group (1952) he expanded his theory, asserting that Oxford’s fellow-contributors were Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, the Earl of Derby, John Lyly and Robert Greene.[14] According to James S. Shapiro Douglas also believed that “Queen Elizabeth had entrusted Oxford to oversee a propaganda department that would produce patriotic plays and pamphlets”.[15]

In his later life he also painted and was among amateurs exhibited at the Royal Academy.

References

  1.  Biographical history of Gonville and Caius College Ernest Stewart Roberts, Edward John Gross – 1948 p169 “Douglas, Archibald Stair Montagu: son of Lieut. -Colonel Montagu William Douglas, CI.E., of Port Blair, Andaman Islands; and Helen Mary ..”
  2. ^ The Douglas Archives
  3. ^ Portraits in the India Office Library and Records p63 India Office Library and Records, Pauline Rohatgi – 1983 “Douglas, Montagu William (1863–1957) Lieut -Colonel. Deputy Commissioner, Punjab 1910-13 FL seated in Delhi Planning Committee group. Photo 206 x 271mm “
  4. ^ Letter dated 29 July 1939 to J D Shams
  5. ^ Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, Ahmadiyyat: the renaissance of Islam, Tabshir Publications, 1978, p.189.
  6. ^ Tadhkirat-ush-Shahadatain, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 20, pp. 30-41.
  7. ^ Tadh-Kiratushaha-Datain online
  8. ^ Kitab ul Baryyah
  9. ^ “No. 27428”The London Gazette. 25 April 1902. p. 2795.
  10. ^ List of Rulers Provinces British India
  11. ^ David P. Henige, Colonial governors from the fifteenth century to the present, 1970, p.84
  12. ^ H. N. Gibson, The Shakespeare Claimants: A Critical Survey of the Four Principal Theories Concerning the Authorship of the Shakespearean Plays, Taylor & Francis, 1962, p.73.
  13. ^ R. C. Churchill, Shakespeare and His Betters: A History and a Criticism of the Attempts Which Have Been Made to Prove That Shakespeare’s Works Were Written by Others, Max Reinhardt, London, 1938, p. 51
  14. ^ Schoenbaum, Sam, Shakespeare’s Lives, Oxford University Press, 1991, p.435.
  15. ^ James Shapiro, Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?, Faber & Faber, 2011, p.216.

 

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/13/who-is-jalal-ud-din-shams/

 

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/06/who-is-maulvi-burhanuddin-of-jhelum-1830-1905/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/05/the-statement-of-dr-clarke-on-solemn-affirmation-on-12th-august-1897-vs-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/bar180-201-frm.htm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/26/the-mirza-family-was-above-the-law-in-british-india/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Lekh

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Athim

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/bar180-201-frm.htm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-sent-abdul-hameed-to-murder-dr-clark-after-lekh-ram-was-murdered/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-sent-abdul-hameed-to-murder-dr-clark-after-lekh-ram-was-murdered/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/04/05/when-the-athim-prophecy-was-about-to-expire/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/17/lekh-rams-murder-the-details-aryasamaj-lekhram/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/03/19/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-had-5-written-debates-no-oral-debates/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/04/03/the-punjab-mission-news-and-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-death-prophecy-vs-athim/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/06/anjam-e-athim-1897-quotes/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/16/mgas-nasty-poetry-vs-the-christian-abdullah-athim/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/13/after-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-lost-the-debate-with-athim-3-of-his-followers-left-ahmadiyya/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/17/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-athim-through-the-lens-of-asif-m-basit-review-of-religions-2013/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/06/anjam-e-athim-1897-quotes/

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Pictures with JD Shams from 1939

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was dreaming about multiple women all the time

Intro
We have already shown how MGA was surrounded by women in closed quarters at Qadian and how this was unislamic in every way.  As soon as he got some money (1884) he arranged for his marriage, however, he wasn’t done, by 1886-1888, he was looking to take on another wife, and thus bring his total wive count to 3, he was also claiming that maybe his “Promised Son” would come from a 3rd marriage.  This seems to be a wet-dream or something.  It is important to note that Muhammadi Begum had just gotten married and thus MGA lost her, however, MGA was praying and openly claiming that Muhammadi Begum would eventually get married to MGA as a widow.  One interesting point, we are not sure what the Register of Miscellaneous Memoranda is, nothing of this nature was ever published by Ahmadiyya.  This reference also exists in the Urdu and 2004 english edition of Tadhkirah.  This story proves that MGA was in-fact a bon-vivant and womanized as soon as he got some money.

The quote from the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, see pages 256-257
July 25, 1892

“””This morning before dawn at 4:30 a.m. I saw a large house where my wife (Mahmud’s mother) and another woman were sitting. I filled a white water-skin with water and carried it into the house and poured the water into an earthen vessel of mine. When I had finished pouring the water, the other woman suddenly came over to me wearing a beautiful red dress. I saw that she was a young woman and was clad in red from top to toe. Perhaps it was netting
material. I thought to myself that this was the woman about whom I had published the announcement, but she appeared to me to have the features of my wife. It seemed that she
said or thought: ‘I have arrived.’ I responded: ‘O Allah, may she come.’ Then she embraced me and thereupon I woke up. [Allah be praised for all this.]  Two to four days before I had seen in a dream that [a woman of the name] Raushan Bibi [Lady of light] had come and was standing outside the door of my verandah and I was sitting inside. I said to her: ‘Come, Raushan Bibi,
do come in.””” [Register of Miscellaneous Memoranda by the Promised Messiahas, p. 33].

The quote from the 2004 english edition of Tadhkirah
“”””Translation: This morning at dawn I saw myself in a house where my wife (Mahmud’s mother) and another woman were sitting. I filled a white water-skin with water and carried it into the house and poured the water into an earthen vessel. When I had finished, the other woman came over to me suddenly wearing a beautiful red dress. I saw that she was a young woman and was clad in red from top to toe. The cloth was possibly knitted. I thought to myself that this was the woman for whom I had advertised but she appeared to me to have the features of my wife. She said or perhaps she thought: I have arrived; and I responded with: May Allah cause her to arrive. Then she embraced me and I woke up. Allah be praised for all this.

Two or three days before I had seen that a woman of the name Raushan Bibi (Lady of light) had come and was standing outside my door and I was sitting inside. I said to her: Come Raushan Bibi, do come in.”””” (Register of Miscellaneous Memoranda p. 33).

The scan from the urdu edition of Tadhkirah

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/02/04/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-walked-around-qadian-at-times-with-10-15-ladies-and-another-case-of-ahmadiyya-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/17/was-mirza-mubarak-ahmad-the-musleh-maud/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/24/mirza-tahir-ahmad-tells-us-whether-or-not-ahmadi-men-need-their-1st-wifes-permission-to-pursue-additional-wives/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/30/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-criteria-for-selecting-a-wife/

Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Mosqueattack #trueislam #atifmian

Up ↑