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.

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).

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.

What is Maktubat-e-Ahmadiyyah?

Intro
It seems that after MGA died, Nooruddin began collecting all the letters that MGA and his team wrote and published them into book form, not all of them were published however, nor is it clear as to how many copies were made and if the originals still exist, we are sure of Ahmadiyya editing, so we are careful.  As we all know, Pir Siraj ul Haq Nomani wrote most of MGA’s letters, and on MGA’s behalf, MGA most likely dictated what needed to be written.

The reference is from Hidden Treasures, which is a book that summarizes the writings of MGA and his team
https://www.alislam.org/library/book/hidden-treasures-of-islam/

See the introduction section

Maktubat-e-Ahmadiyyah

“””Letters written by the Promised Messiahas from 1883 to 1908 to various personalities and some of these letters relate to the importance of the Khilafat and about the Companions of the Holy Prophetsa are collected in these volumes.

There are seven volumes of letters. The fifth volume comprises five parts. Details of these volumes are given as:

Volume 1
One hundred and sixteen pages, published in 1908, in Urdu. This comprises a collection of letters that the Promised Messiah had written to Mir ‘Abbas ‘Ali Shah Ludhianvi from October 1882 to June 1885.

Volume 2
Ninety pages, published in Lahore in 1912, in Urdu. This comprises a collection of letters written by the Promised Messiah from 1878 to 1903 to various Hindus and the leaders of the Aryah Samaj, including Indarman Muradabadi, Pandit Dyanand, Pandit Lekh Ram, Bawa Shiv Nara’in and Ram Charan, in which the Promised Messiahas explained the truth of Islam and fixed a period of one year for anyone of them to come and stay with him in order to witness a Divine sign and he also drew a comparison of the teachings of the Holy Quran with the Vedas.

Volume 3
One hundred and twenty-two pages, published in Lahore in 1914, in Urdu, is a collection of letters written by the Promised Messiahas from 1884 to 1903 to Christian missionaries, including Alexander Dowie.  He asked the Christian missionaries to produce a comparable
observation about Jesus as the one made about the Holy Prophetsa by the King of Ethiopia in his time. He offered them a reward of Rs. 1,000 for it. The Promised Messiahas effectively answered all objections raised by Christians about the Holy Prophetsa and established the truth of the Holy Prophetsa with cogent arguments. An Introduction to the hidden Treasures of Islam

Volume 4
Forty pages, published in Qadian, in Urdu, comprises a collection of the letters written by the Promised Messiahas to Maulavi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi, in which he marshalled arguments about his truth and adduced and enumerated signs which had taken place in his favour to establish his truth.

Volume 5: Part I
Fifty-six pages, published in 1918, in Urdu, is a collection of 96 letters written by the Promised Messiahas from 1892 to 1905 to Seth ‘Abdur Rehman of Madras.

Volume 5: Part II
One hundred and twenty-eight pages, published in Urdu, is a collection of 88 letters written by the Promised Messiahas from March 8, 1885 to August 26, 1892 to Hadrat 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.

Volume 5: Part III
One hundred and seventy-six pages, published in 1929, in Amritsar, in Urdu, is a collection of 278 letters written from 1884 to 1902 to Ch. Rustam ‘Ali, in which he praised the financial assistance rendered by him and other matters.

Volume 5: Part IV
One hundred and forty-four pages, published in 1935, in Amritsar, in Urdu, is a collection of 62 letters written from 1890 to 1906 to Nawab Muhammad ‘Ali Khan in which a number of different subjects have been discussed, including the importance of bai‘at, signs of the Promised Messiah, the method of Istikharah, unreasonable wavering of the people on the prophecy of ‘Abdullah Atham and the true significance of Khatm-e-Nubuwwat.

Volume 5: Part V
Thirty-two pages, published on June 10, 1944, in Hyderabad Deccan, in Urdu, is a collection of 270 letters addressed to Munshi Ahmad Jan Ludhianvi, and other friends in Kapurthala, Hadrat Nawab Muhammad ‘Ali Khan of Jhajjar, Munshi Habibur Rehman, Munshi Dafar Ahmad, Khan Sahib ‘Abdul Majid and Maulavi ‘Abdullah Sanauri, and some other letters written in his own hand.

Volume 6
It is a collection of 23 letters written by the Promised Messiahas to Hadrat Maulavi Hakim Nur-ud-Din and a number of different non Ahmdi scholars. This collection was edited by Sheikh Ya‘qub ‘Ali Khan ‘Irfani.

Volume 7
This collection was compiled in 1954 by Malik Salah-ud-Din, M.A. This has 51 letters, 36 of them were addressed to Nawab Muhammad ‘Ali Khan of Maler Kotla between 1892 to April 1908, and some others addressed to a number of different personalities including Bhai ‘Abdur Rahman Sahib Qadiani and Muhammad Ibrahim Khan (Sindh).

Note: Nazarat Isha‘at has combined all the above letters (and some more letters which could not be included in the seven volumes) into three volumes and published them in 2008.

MGA forced Noorudin to pretend to be Hanafi, even though he was a Wahabbi aka Ahl-e-Hadith

Intro
Nooruddin and MGA were both Ahl-e-Hadith (aka Wahabbi) type of Muslims before 1889.  In fact, MGA’s nikkah was read out by the top Ahl-e-Hadith mullah in North India in 1884.  Wahabbi’s or Ahl-e-Hadith don’t follow any of the 4 schools of Sunni Islam.

You can read about Noorudin’s affiliation to the Ahl-e-Hadith here:  https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/07/maulvi-nooruddin-was-an-ahle-a-hadith-aka-wahhabi-type-of-muslim/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/19/the-ulama-of-dar-al-uloom-deoband-and-noorudin/

The data

In his book  “Siratul Mahdi”  Mirza Bashir Ahmad, son of MGA Qadiani, wrote:

“””[In the name of Allah, The Merciful. Hafiz Roshan Ali told me saying: At a time, the promised messiah (MGAQ) asked, for a religious necessity, from Maulvi Noor Uddin to announce that he is belonging to Hanafi Madhab despite he (MGAQ) was knowing that he (Noor Uddin) was belonging to Ahle Hadith. In response to him, Maulvi Noor Uddin wrote, on a paper, a verse of Persian poetry its literal meaning is: If your guide commanded you to dye your place of prayer with wine, you should do; as the guide doesn’t ignore the etiquette of love ways and its traditions. He wrote under it “Hanafi Noor Uddin”]   Siratul Mahdi, narration no. 359.”””

The scan work

Related essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/05/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-embarrassed-noorudin-in-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/24/amatul-hayee-or-amtul-hai-the-daughter-of-nooruddin-and-the-wife-of-the-2nd-khalifa-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-and-her-mysterious-death/

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #drsalam #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #Sialkot #Mosqueattack

In 1891, when MGA made his big claims, he denied prophethood–Mufti Sadiq was heavily involved

Intro
MGA denied prophethood as early as 1884, some ulema of India had already issued a Fatwa of Kufr.  As we have recently learned, MGA was already claiming to be the Messiah in 1889, Ahmadiyya leadership has always suppressed this data, the Ahmadi-mullahs lie about almost everything in their pursuit of gainful employment.  We can come across some additional data about MGA’s denial of prophethood in 1891, it is posted in the below.  This is a longer story…MGA and his team denied prophethood until November of 1901, and even a bit earlier to the summer of 1900.  A reader would have to be very well versed in the dynamic of the split to fully understand the brevity of this data.  Finally, it should be noted that MGA and his team vehemently denied prophethood using the argument that the word prophet should be replaces in all of MGA’s books and revelations to muhaddas.

Summary

In 1891 Mirza Qadiani had to flee from Ludhiana to Amritsar after a complaint was lodged against him for creating Law and order situation.From Ludhiana he came to Amritsar. Peoples of this city were against him too.

Mirza was so petrified that he sent Mufti Sadiq to offer prayer in the Masjid of Ghaznavi Scholars, Where Mufti Sadiq managed to have a meeting of Mirza Qadiani with Ahle Hadis Scholar Molvi Ahmadullah.

Mufti Sadiq a, close disciple of Mirza Qadiani writes in his book ZIKR E HABIB (screen shot attached), that:-

“During meeting Molvi Ahmadullah said to Mirza Qadiani that some of your writings reveal that you are a claimant of prophethood that is why peoples have turned against you. Hazrat SAHIB (MGQ) explained the actual meaning of his claim (ie he do not at all means actual prophethood). Molvi Ahmadullah sahib said ok you give us in writing that wherever the word nabuwwat appears in your writings, it does not mean Nabuwwat it means MOHADDISIYAT AND IN NO WAY IT IS AGAINST THE FAITH OF KHATM E NABUWWAT. Hazrat sahib immediately wrote this on a piece of paper and handed it over to Molvi Ahmadullah Sahib which was kept by Molvi sahib for showing to ulema who were to excommunicate MGQ because of his claims.”

Scans


https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/03/19/mga-lost-the-debate-with-molvi-muhammad-bashir-bhopali-1891/

#ahmadiyya

Up ↑