Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"1911"

In 1911, Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri claimed to be the leader (Khalifa) of Ahmadi’s

Intro
Abdullah Timapuri appears on the scene some time in the last years of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad‘s life.  Like other Qadiani claimants of Divine appointment, he created the fine distinction between him being the ‘Mahdi’ while Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the ‘Messiah’.  His books were published by the same [Riaz Hind Press] that used to publish the books of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. In fact, the back cover of the book presented below shows the list of his books alongside those of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, side by side, and the two columns titled ‘Ahmadi Chain’ and ‘Muhammadi Chain’. A substantial part of the rest of the book can be found in the attachments to this page.  Even the name of this book is derived from a ‘revelation’ of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in which he was given a book by this name, but he never wrote a book with this title. This book, ‘Nahj-al-Musalla’ is filled with the ‘revelations’ and ‘visions’ of Abdullah Timapuri.  Abdullah called himself, in Tafseer Asmani, one of his books, Maamoor minal Allah, Naib Rasool Allah, Muhammad Abdullah, Mazhar E Awal Qudrat e Sani Der Silsila Imam Rubani Hazrat Masih Maood Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. So Obviously he was claiming big status.  There was also a Maulvi Yar Muhammad who had similar claims.  At the same time Zahir ud Din (also spelled Zahir al_din) was also making claims of prophethood and Khilafat.  Zahir uddin or Al-Din was a clerk in the Canal Department of Gujranwala (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  Noorudin was thus dealing with 3 claimants, while he wasn’t able to walk, since his leg was amputated and he was vacillating.  It is important to note, that the first claimant of prophethood in Ahmadiyya, after MGA of course was a certain Chiragh ud Din, who was ex-communicated by MGA himself.  We are not sure as to which Yar Muhammad this was.  There were a few in Ahmadiyya history.  Furthermore, it should be noted that Noorudin didn’t care if MGA claimed to be a law-bearing prophet.

Some additional data on Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri from 
Maulvi Abdulla of Timapur (a suburb of Shorapur, in the Deccan) had been successively Sunnite Muslim, Wahhabi, and Ahmadi, before he created his own sect, declaring,

“I am the man from God : You must all follow me.. I am the real Khalifa of Qadian.”

He has about three hundred disciples at present, and is much’ more friendly to Christians than to Muslims. I am indebted for this information to Rev. N. Desai, the pastor of a self-supporting Indian Christian congregation at Shorapur (see Walter).

He is mentioned by Walter in 1916
Walter wrote his historic book about Ahmadiyya in this era.  He mentioned that there was another claimant.  See also, Al-fazl. January 1, 1935, via “Qadiyaniat: an analytical survey” by Ehsan Elahi Zaheer (1984) 21st edition.

Nur Ahmad Qadiani was another claimant of prophethood in this era
There was yet another Ahmadi who claimed prophethood after MGA, it was Nur Ahmad Qadiani (See “Qadiyaniat: an analytical survey” by Ehsan Elahi Zaheer (1984) 21st edition, page 259).  
He wrote the book, “Lekulle Ummatin Ajal”, wherein he wrote:

“There is no god but God, : Nur Ahmad is the apostle of God . I am the apostle of Allah. Whosoever obeys me, obeys Allah and whosoever disobeys me has disobeyed Allah. I have been commissioned to be the mercy for all the world as I am a synthesis of all the prophets”

He was also mentioned in the Al-Fazl of Nov. 11,1934, via “Qadiyaniat: an analytical survey” by Ehsan Elahi Zaheer (1984) 21st edition.

The Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad mentions him in 1922
In his book, “Truth About the Split” (1922), he says:

“””In the years 1911 and 1912, some tracts were published by two men named Maulawi Yar
Muhammad and Abdullah Timapuri. Each of these men claimed to be the Imam (leader) of the
Community under special authority from God. There was therefore some danger of people being deceived by their tracts and notices. Hence, Khalifatul Masih Ira was obliged to make an announcement against them in one of his speeches. But the words used by him in the announcement were general and only Abdullah Timapuri was mentioned by name. The words of the announcement were as follows:

“Again, there are young men who are in too great a hurry to write books although they possess neither the wisdom nor the insight required by an author. Mere fancies are of little avail so long as one does not get into touch with facts. Such writings give rise to dissension. If, therefore, difficulties should arise, one ought to seek help from God and have recourse to prayer.  I would warn our members to shun such people. There is a number of them who go about giving publicity to their pretensions.”  (The Badr 25th January 1912). (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

TIMELINE INFO

APRIL-1911
Zahir ud Deen’s book, “Nabi Ullah Ka Zahur” is published (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In fact, the Ahmadiyya newspaper, the Al-Badr published an advertisement for it’s sales (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

OCT–1911
The urdu version of the Review of Religions praised Zahir ud Deen’s book, in fact they even called him as a Munshi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JAN–1912
Noorudin writes a generalized announcement in the Al-Badr newspaper that some men are giving rise to dissensions.  This seems to be about Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri and Maulvi Yar Muhammad(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

JUNE–1912
Per Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad in June of 1912, Zahir Al-Din wrote a letter to the Khalifa asking whom the Jan-1912 announcement was about.  Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad reports that the Khalifa clarified that Zahir al-Din was good, the announcement was about Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JULY–1912
On July 11th, 1912, per Muhammad Ali, an announcement was published in the Al-Badr wherein Zahir Al- Din was officially ex-communicated by Noorudin (the Khalifa)(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  The Khalifa called him Zaheer ud Din Arupi.  Arupi is probably the name of the city or village that he was from in India (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

AUGUST–1912
Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

OCTOBER–1912
In the issue of 14 OCT–1912, Zahir ud Din gets published in the Al-Badr in contempt vs. the Khalifa.  He impertinently writes that he disagrees with the Khalifa on many beliefs (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

APRIL–1913
The second part of his book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad agrees that this book was published in April of 1913(See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

MAY-JUNE 1913
A newer Ahmadiyya newspaper, “Al-Haq” tells Ahmadi’s to leave Zahir ud Din, Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri alone.  The editor of this newspaper is Mir Qasim Ali.  However, there was no official letter or announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa, most likely because the Khalifa was out of commission based on his health.  Nevertheless, there is no announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa.

MARCH–1914
Zahir ud din was made a member of the advisory committee, which was formed at Lahore after the death of Noorudin (vide the Paigham-e-Sulh of 24th March, 1914) and his articles against the family Khilafat found a place in Maulawi Muhammad Ali’s magazine called the Al-Mahdi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

1918
Zahir ud Din was present at the Lahori-Ahmadi Jalsa of this year and was even allowed to speak (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

Links and Related Essays
http://wiki.qern.org/ha-walters-the-ahmadiya-movement/chapter-ii-2-the-distinctive-claims-of-ahmad—the-expected-mahdi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

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

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mali/splitahmadiyyamovement/splitahmadiyyamovement.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/03/03/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-got-stroked-during-salaat/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/08/03/islami-qurbani-by-qazi-yar-mohammed-1920-printed-at-riaz-e-hind-press-amritsar-district-kangra/

http://wiki.qern.org/ahmadiyya/organisations/qadiani-claimants/abdullah-timapuri

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/04/nabi-ullah-ka-zahoor-aka-appearance-of-the-prophet-of-allah-1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din/

https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Truth-about-the-Split.pdf

Scan work

 
Here are more pages from his book:

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

Piggot was mentioned in the ROR of 1911

Intro
The Piggot prophecy was another failed prophecy of MGA, in fact, all of his prophecies failed.  MGA and his team of writers asserted Piggot would die in front of MGA’s eyes, i.e. in MGA’s lifetime.

The Full English-RoR for 1911
reviewreligionsenglish1911

Remember to read the index, lots of clues there.

The ROR of June 1911, pages 250-251

“”””His enemies, who did their best to bring him to nought, met with dismal failure in all of their base pursuits.  One Lekh Ram of the Lahore Ayra Samaj dared to stand against him, but was crushed to death by the deadweight of his own insolence.  His own invectives and anathemas fell upon him like a stab and consigned him to eternal doom.  He was not the only victim of the Prophet’s righteous wrath, but many others suffered the same fate.  Abdullah Atham (Athim) who entered the lists against him in a religious contest was miserably worsted in the presence of a number of his respectable co-religionists, but at last the dogged pertinacity and the wilful perversity of the former proved fatal to him.  Quite recently the Christian Europe and the New World were shaken by the arrogant pretensions of Mr. Piggot and Dr. Dowie.  Both of the false pretenders soon raised a tempest in the teapot.  One claimed to be God himself, and the other, rather less arrogant claimed to be the fore-runner of Christ.  At once wicked and blasphemous were their pretensions, the Prophet of India, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian could not let them alone.  He took time by the forelock and challenged the false claimants to make good their pretensions or prepare to die.  The bubbles speedily burst and the hubbub instantaneously subsided.  Disgrace overtook both and sent one to the grave unregretted, and the other to the fathomless abyss of oblivion.  It served them right and the world was well rid of them.  Thus we saw with these very eyes how faithfully God sided with his righteous servant.  Nature in all its totality was placed at his service and success attended him wherever he turned his face””””

The scan work

 

The Khalifa visited London in 1924, and never asked about Piggot
Another quick point to make.  In 1924, the Khalifa famously went to London, however, he seems to have never inquired as to the status of the Piggot, who living less than 50 miles from the London Mosque.  Piggot was living good in those days.

Akber C and Ak Shaikh discuss another case of Ahmadiyya editing in Tarikh e Ahmadiyya
In this video, our friends have found a serious case of academic dishonesty.

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/05/in-1907-ahmadiyya-newspapers-were-still-asserting-that-piggot-would-die-before-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/04/piggot-was-mentioned-by-the-ahmadiyya-newspaper-review-of-religions-in-1903/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/26/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-initial-writings-to-piggot-in-1902/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/reviewofreligions/raw/reviewreligionsenglish1911.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/20/dear-ahmadiyya-but-dr-alexander-dowie-changed-his-claims-after-mgas-death-challenge/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/18/abdullah-athim-never-repented-ahmadiyya-leadership-lied/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/05/fate-of-a-false-prophet-by-syed-hasanat-ahmad-the-review-of-religions-august-1984/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/16/ahmadiyya-leadership-has-been-caught-red-handed-as-they-lied-about-dr-schweisos-comments-on-piggot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/05/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-wrote-that-piggot-would-not-repent/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/22/piggot-vs-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-the-scan-work-live-from-the-discussion-forum-on-ahmadiyya-on-fb/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/24/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-wrote-to-piggot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/17/ahmadis-editing-their-books-on-piggot/

http://www.reviewofreligions.org/5593/rev-john-hugh-smyth-pigott-his-claim-prophecy-and-end/

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

“A Muslim is one who accepts all those appointed by God” by Mirza Bashir-uddin Mahmud Ahmad, April 1911

Intro
This entry is about the essay by the son of MGA, Mirza Bashir-uddin Mahmud Ahmad in his own magazine, the Tashhidhul Adhan of April 1911 (see page 91).  This is the essay that solidified the “Qadiani” concept in terms of those Muslims who have rejected Mirza Ghulam Ahmad outright.

Some quotes

1910
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/08/03/some-quotes-from-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmads-magazine-tashhiz-al-ahzan/

1911
“He (Mirza Ghulam Qadiani) has regarded him as an infidel who knows him to be truthful and does not believe him in speech but has not yet entered the fold.”  (“Tashi-ul-Azhan”, 6:4, Apr. 1911, Miyan Mahmood Qadiani – “Aqaid-e-Ahmadia”, Page 108).

1913
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/20/tasheeshazul-adhan-was-a-magazine-founded-by-mahmud-ahmad-in-1913/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/20/my-beliefs-about-non-ahmadi-muslims-dated-18-august-1911-by-khwaja-kamal-uddin/

http://alhafeez.org/rashid/abuse/abuse.htm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/08/03/some-quotes-from-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmads-magazine-tashhiz-al-ahzan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/20/tashhiz-al-azhan-was-a-magazine-founded-by-mahmud-ahmad-in-1906/

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

“My beliefs about non-Ahmadi Muslims”, dated 18 August 1911 by Khwaja Kamal-uddin

Intro
This was the essay that was written by Khwaja Kamaluddin in the summer of 1911.  It was in response to Mirza Bashir-uddin Mahmud Ahmad’s essay, “A Muslim is one who accepts all those appointed by God” which was published in April of 1911.

This is part of a bigger essay on Takfir and the Ahmadiyya Movement
I plan to populate this with more info in the future.

Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/20/tashhiz-al-azhan-was-a-magazine-founded-by-mahmud-ahmad-in-1906/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/20/a-muslim-is-one-who-accepts-all-those-appointed-by-god-by-mirza-bashir-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-april-1911/

“”Nabi Ullah Ka Zahoor”” aka “”The Appearance of the prophet of allah”” 1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din—the full book

Intro
In 1911, an Ahmadi, Muhammad Zahir Al-Din wrote a book wherein he discussed the prophethood of MGA and its implications of Kufr upon the Muslims of the world.  Mahmud Ahmad quotes this book in his 1922 book, “The truth about the split” and Muhammad Ali has quoted him quite a bit also in his books vs. Mahmud Ahmad, which was published in 1924, ‘Haqiqatul Ikhtalaf” or “Reality of our disagreement”.  Zahir ul Din, or also spelled as Zaheer ud Din was a clerk in the Canal Department in Gujranwala (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  Per Muhammad Ali, this book seems to have been written in late 1910, and published in April of 1911(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, which runs to 120 pages, Zahir ud Din or Zahir Al-Din argued that MGA was a real prophet of Allah and thus Muhammad (Saw) was not the LAST prophet and additional prophets will continue to appear.  However, he was kicked out of Ahmadiyya in June of 1912, about 14 months later and after some confusing correspondence.  However, by August 1912, Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  The second part of the book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  Zahir ud Deen also wrote two other books which were mentioned by the main Ahmadiyya newspaper, Al-Hakam, they are Vedon Ka Fatur and Radd-e-Chakrhalawi, the Al-Hakam praised these books in their official capacity (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

The full book
Nabee Allah Kaa Zahoor Mukamal

TIMELINE INFO

APRIL-1911
Zahir ud Deen’s book, “Nabi Ullah Ka Zahur” is published (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In fact, the Ahmadiyya newspaper, the Al-Badr published an advertisement for it’s sales (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

OCT–1911
The urdu version of the Review of Religions praised Zahir ud Deen’s book, in fact they even called him as a Munshi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JAN–1912
Noorudin writes a generalized announcement in the Al-Badr newspaper that some men are giving rise to dissensions.  This seems to be about Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri and Maulvi Yar Muhammad(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

JUNE–1912
Per Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad in June of 1912, Zahir Al-Din wrote a letter to the Khalifa asking whom the Jan-1912 announcement was about.  Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad reports that the Khalifa clarified that Zahir al-Din was good, the announcement was about Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JULY–1912
On July 11th, 1912, per Muhammad Ali, an announcement was published in the Al-Badr wherein Zahir Al- Din was officially ex-communicated by Noorudin (the Khalifa)(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  The Khalifa called him Zaheer ud Din Arupi.  Arupi is probably the name of the city or village that he was from in India (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

AUGUST–1912
Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

OCTOBER–1912
In the issue of 14 OCT–1912, Zahir ud Din gets published in the Al-Badr in contempt vs. the Khalifa.  He impertinently writes that he disagrees with the Khalifa on many beliefs (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

APRIL–1913
The second part of his book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad agrees that this book was published in April of 1913(See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

MAY-JUNE 1913
A newer Ahmadiyya newspaper, “Al-Haq” tells Ahmadi’s to leave Zahir ud Din, Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri alone.  The editor of this newspaper is Mir Qasim Ali.  However, there was no official letter or announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa, most likely because the Khalifa was out of commission based on his health.  Nevertheless, there is no announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa.

MARCH–1914
Zahir ud din was made a member of the advisory committee, which was formed at Lahore after the death of Noorudin (vide the Paigham-e-Sulh of 24th March, 1914) and his articles against the family Khilafat found a place in Maulawi Muhammad Ali’s magazine called the Al-Mahdi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

1918
Zahir ud Din was present at the Lahori-Ahmadi Jalsa of this year and was even allowed to speak (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/04/nabi-ullah-ka-zahoor-aka-appearance-of-the-prophet-of-allah-1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/correctionerrorekghaltikaizala/importantdocumentscorrectionerror.shtml

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

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/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

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/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

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

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

“The present Condition of Christendom calls for a prophet”—Review of Religions July 1911

Intro
This is an essay from 1911, before the prophethood of MGA was understood by Ahmadis.

See—-http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/reviewofreligions/raw/reviewreligionsenglish1911.pdf

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/images_blog/revrel-jul1911.pdf

Quotes

Page 288

“Who can then breathe life into this dead world of ours?  Who can bring back to this earth the faith that has departed from it?  The mere preaching of a book will not do.  None but a prophet can regenerate this earth.  Prophets have breathed life into dead humanity in the past and if the world is to be regenerated now, it must be regenerated by a prophet.  That prophet has already appeared.  It was Ahmad of Qadian……….”

On page 290

“In short, the present condition of Christendom called for a prophet.  The world was so sunk in error and vice that none but a prophet could regerate it.  It has even been a law of God to raise a prophet when vice and error have corrupted the world and it was in accordance with that law that He raised Ahmad in the present ages.  The very fact that the present age sorely needed a prophet is an evidence of his truth.  God spoke to him as He spoke to…………..”

On page 291

“…so God raised a prophet in this age…..”

The final paragraph of this article says:

“lastly Muhammad….”

“Nabi-ullah Ka Zahoor” aka “Appearance of the Prophet of Allah” ( April of 1911) by Muhammad Zahir al-Din

Intro
In 1911, an Ahmadi, Muhammad Zahir Al-Din wrote a book wherein he discussed the prophethood of MGA and its implications of Kufr upon the Muslims of the world.  Mahmud Ahmad quotes this book in his 1922 book, “The truth about the split” and Muhammad Ali has quoted him quite a bit also in his books vs. Mahmud Ahmad.  Nonetheless, this book is totally missing from all records and archives in 2016.  The book may still exist in the Khilafat Library at Rabwah or Qadian, or even in the UK.  Per Muhammad Ali, this book seems to have been written in late 1910, and published in April of 1911 (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, which runs to 120 pages, Zahir ud Din or Zahir Al-Din argued that MGA was a real prophet of Allah and thus Muhammad (Saw) was not the LAST prophet and additional prophets will continue to appear.  However, he was kicked out of Ahmadiyya in June of 1912, about 14 months later and after some confusing correspondence.  However, by August 1912, Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  The second part of the book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

Yohanan Friedman direct quoted this book
Friedman’s book on Ahmadiyya was published in 1985, it was published again in 1989 and then 2003.  He seems to have had access to Zahir Al-Din’s book in 1985.

The Direct Quotes
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).

TIMELINE INFO

APRIL-1911
Zahir ud Deen’s book, “Nabi Ullah Ka Zahur” is published (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In fact, the Ahmadiyya newspaper, the Al-Badr published an advertisement for it’s sales (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

OCT–1911
The urdu version of the Review of Religions praised Zahir ud Deen’s book, in fact they even called him as a Munshi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JAN–1912
Noorudin writes a generalized announcement in the Al-Badr newspaper that some men are giving rise to dissensions.  This seems to be about Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri and Maulvi Yar Muhammad(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

JUNE–1912
Per Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad in June of 1912, Zahir Al-Din wrote a letter to the Khalifa asking whom the Jan-1912 announcement was about.  Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad reports that the Khalifa clarified that Zahir al-Din was good, the announcement was about Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

JULY–1912
On July 11th, 1912, per Muhammad Ali, an announcement was published in the Al-Badr wherein Zahir Al- Din was officially ex-communicated by Noorudin (the Khalifa)(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  The Khalifa called him Zaheer ud Din Arupi.  Arupi is probably the name of the city or village that he was from in India (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

AUGUST–1912
Zahir had repented and was allowed to re-enter the Ahmadiyya Movement at the hand of Noorudin, most likely via a letter of repentance (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).

OCTOBER–1912
In the issue of 14 OCT–1912, Zahir ud Din gets published in the Al-Badr in contempt vs. the Khalifa.  He impertinently writes that he disagrees with the Khalifa on many beliefs (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

APRIL–1913
The second part of his book was published on April 20th, 1913, it was only 12 pages and entitled, “Ahmad Rasul ul Allah, Ka Zahur”, in english as : “Ahmad, the messenger of Allah, his appearance”(see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  In this book, he formulated a new Kalima for Ahmadi’s, which replaced the word “Muhammad” from the Kalima with “Ahmad”, which was a direct reference to (see Muhammad Ali, “The Split” 1994 online edition).  the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad agrees that this book was published in April of 1913(See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

MAY-JUNE 1913
A newer Ahmadiyya newspaper, “Al-Haq” tells Ahmadi’s to leave Zahir ud Din, Maulvi Yar Muhammad and Maulvi Abdullah Timapuri alone.  The editor of this newspaper is Mir Qasim Ali.  However, there was no official letter or announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa, most likely because the Khalifa was out of commission based on his health.  Nevertheless, there is no announcement of ex-communication by the Khalifa.

MARCH–1914
Zahir ud din was made a member of the advisory committee, which was formed at Lahore after the death of Noorudin (vide the Paigham-e-Sulh of 24th March, 1914) and his articles against the family Khilafat found a place in Maulawi Muhammad Ali’s magazine called the Al-Mahdi (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

1918
Zahir ud Din was present at the Lahori-Ahmadi Jalsa of this year and was even allowed to speak (See “Truth About the Split” by Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, the 2007 online english edition).

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/22/nabi-ullah-ka-zahoor-aka-the-appearance-of-the-prophet-of-allah-1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/04/nabi-ullah-ka-zahoor-aka-appearance-of-the-prophet-of-allah-1911-by-muhammad-zahir-al-din/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/books/mga/correctionerrorekghaltikaizala/importantdocumentscorrectionerror.shtml

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

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/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

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/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

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

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




Maulvi Sanaullah vs. Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib [Rajeki], Debate in Kartarpur in 1918

Intro
Maulvi Sanaullah had many debates with Ahmadi’s in British-India.  One such debate was held in Kartarpur, British India in 1918.  Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib [Rajeki] represented the Ahmadi side.

The data from Ahmadiyya sources, Taken from Al Fazl, 4 June 1918

Maulvi Sanaullah [Amritsari] took advantage of the fact that we did not obtain the books of the Promised Messiahas on the first day of the debate, and in doing so attributed a false doctrine to the Promised Messiahas. For this reason, we regretted not having the books of the Promised Messiahas and today, we have ordered many books and files containing newspapers of the Promised Messiahas from Kapurthala, which is 6-7 miles away from Kartarpur. Jamaat Kapurthala did a remarkable job in getting the literature to us.

Nonetheless, Maulvi Sanaullah Sahib did not even address those accusations and arguments, as he knew that we now had the books of the Promised Messiahas to answer from, thus able to reveal his evil plots. Otherwise, we had prepared many references that would have nullified the accusations of Maulvi Sanaullah Sahib. We could have, thus, proven that the victory of Islam is destined at the hand of the Promised Messiahas, however this Amritsari Maulvi steared clear of those subjects.

First session

The convention commenced at 9 o’clock, and instead of Maulvi Sanaullah, Maulvi Nawabuddin approached the podium. Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib [Rajeki] represented us. The first session of the debate lasted three hours long.

Ahmadiyya arguments

As the Ahmadiyya representative, Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib proved the truthfulness of the Promised Messiahas through verses of the Holy Quran …

Further, he proved Huzoor’sas victory through Huzoor’sas very own revelations.

Maulvi Nawabuddin’s response

How could Maulvi Sahib answer Quranic arguments? So instead, he stood up and began reading from Maulvi Sanaullah’s journals Aqaid-e-Mirza and Chistan-e-Mirza, from beginning to end, thereby consuming his allotted time reading these journals aloud.

Readers will be aware that a written response to Chistan-e-Mirza was published quite some time agoand Aqaid-e-Mirza is a recent publication which is based on nothing but fabrications. I do not feel the need to document each and every argument raised therein, as our readers are well-acquainted with most of them. Some, however, I shall present below …

Maulvi Sanaullah alleged: “I have a following of 150,000. 1,400 of them possess bachelor’s degrees, while 1,500 to 1,600 have master’s degrees. They are all my servants. I am a Godly saint and even if a person who sweeps my shoes rises up, no Ahmadi bears the strength to overpower them.”

The Ahmadi response: Maulvi Ghulam Rasul Sahib stated that to make such fabricated bold claims could not prove the truthfulness of anybody. “If you are indeed truthful, then surely you should be able to tell us where those people are who possess bachelor’s degrees. Otherwise, of course we will consider you a liar. And as far as your claim is concerned, that a person who sweeps your shoes is no match for any Ahmadi in argumentation, then we will have to see…”

Allegation: “Mirza Sahib[as] said that he was appointed as a prophet at the end of 1300 AH, but then in another place he states that he was appointed as a prophet in 1290 AH. Here, there is a difference of ten years. In another place he states that he was bestowed the honour of Divine discourse in 1275 AH, thereby creating a difference of 25 years. This is something that our minds cannot fathom.”

The Ahmadi response: “Maulvi Sahib, what a wonderful example of a discrepancy you have picked! But will you be so quick to reject the Quran on the basis of such a discrepancy. God states,

وَ اِ ذْ وٰعَدْنَا مُوْسيٰ اَرْبَعِيْنَ لَيْلَةً

[And remember the time when We made Moses a promise of forty nights. (Surah Al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.52)]

whereas in another place, He states,

وَوَاعَدْنَا مُوْسيٰ ثَلَاثِيْنَ لَيْلَةً

[And We made Moses a promise of thirty nights (Surah Al-A‘raf, Ch.7: V.143)]

“Here, there is a difference of 10 days. Now, will you discard the Quran?

“The fact is that the difference is not of 25 years. In one place the Promised Messiahas refers to his prophethood, whereas in the other, he refers to the time when he began sharing words with his Lord. The year he was given prophethood was 1300 AH and he began receiving Divine revelations 25 years prior. Hence, there is no discrepancy.”

Allegation: “Mirza Sahib[as] writes that he saw God flicking ink from a pen and the drops of ink from the pen fell on Mirza Sahib[as].”

The Ahmadi response: “The Holy Prophetsa also saw God, and that too in the embodiment of a young man whose hair fell to his neck. This tradition is narrated in Sahih Al-Bukhari. If anyone should have any objection in seeing the Almighty, then it should first be raised against the Holy Prophetsa. As far as the red ink is concerned, that actually happened and the red ink did fall on him. There can be no denying it. Yes, you may obtain its proof from us, should you wish.”

Allegation: “Mirza Sahib[as] claims that he saw God personified as well as in visions and dreams.”

The Ahmadi response: “Perhaps Maulvi Sahib deems personification and visions to be two opposing phenomena. The fact is, Maulvi Sahib, that personifications occur in visions, and by not knowing this, the allegation occurred to you. Perhaps you would do better if you thought before you spoke.” …

The first session came to a close and the crowds discussed Maulvi Sahib’s embarrassing ignorance among themselves, so much so that when they reached home, the chairman of the congregation said, “Today, had anyone asked me the outcome [of the debate] I would have said that Maulvi Nawabuddin Sahib lost.” Upon this, Maulvi Nawabuddin replied, “Well, that does not make me a disbeliever!”

Second session 

Before the debate commenced, participants of the event were told that if they could prove that Jesusas was raised to the heavens in bodily form, then the organisers would reject the claim of Hazrat Mirza Sahibas as the Promised Messiah and would accept that the same Jesusas was due to appear. However, if the Ahmadis were able to prove that Jesusas had passed away, then it would be accepted that Hazrat Mirza Sahib’sas claim was truthful.

Maulvi Sanaullah’s answer

Maulvi Sanaullah said to Miyan Muhammad Ismail Sahib Ahmadi, “If you wish to understand the reality about the ‘Death of Jesus’, then come with me and I shall explain this matter in private. This debate is unnecessary.”

Upon this, the response from our [the Ahmadiyya] side was, “Whatever you wish to explain in private, explain it here in front of everybody so that everyone can benefit from it. We will give you the proof of his death so that the issue is settled once and for all.” Maulvi [Sanaullah] Sahib evaded the opportunity with excuses.

Proof of Jesus’as death

At that moment, Hazrat Maulana Ghulam Rasul Sahib presented a lecture on the truthfulness of the Promised Messiahas and briefly expounded on the death of Jesusas in such a great manner that Maulvi Sanaullah Sahib was not given an opportunity to even whimper. Maulvi Sahib paid no attention to those arguments, even though he was directly questioned on them and was summoned to present a response. However, Maulvi Sahib avoided coming to those points.

Maulvi Sanaullah’s speech

As opposed to using the Quran, Maulvi Sanaullah Sahib succumbed to the prophecy pertaining to the nikah [marriage] with Muhammadi Begum instead. (As readers are aware of the sort of allegations Maulvi Sanaullah raises at this prophecy, it would be unfitting, and a means of prolonging this report, to mention each and every allegation. However, we shall present the core arguments.)

Maulvi Ghulam Rasul Sahib established the argument through the Quran that God reserves the right to abrogate or alter His signs, as He stated:

وَاِذَابَدَّلْنَا آيَةٍ مَّكَانَ آيَةٍ

[And when We bring one sign in place of another … (Surah Al-Nahl, Ch.16: V.102)]

and,

مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ

[Whatever Sign We abrogate … (Surah Al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.107)]

and … the life of anything is in the Hand of God. As He states Himself,

يَمْحُوا اللہُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَ يُثْبِتُ

[Allah effaces what He wills, and establishes what He wills. (Sural Al-Ra‘d, Ch.13: V.40)]

Thus, if any abrogation or alteration is witnessed in a sign of God, then no objection can be raised against the truthfulness of the one who received the revelation. A prophecy containing a warning is more suitable to be altered or abrogated, as was the prophecy vouchsafed to Jonahas concerning a punishment that would appear within forty days on his nation. That punishment was avoided as a result of their repentance and it is God’s promise,

وَمَا كَانَ اللہُ مُعَذِّبَهُمْ وَهُمْ يَسْتَغْفِرُوْنَ

[And Allah would not punish them while they sought forgiveness (Surah Al-Anfal, Ch.8 : V.34)]

Thus, according to the prophecy of Ahmad Baig’s demise, his son-in-law and the rest of his family witnessed the truth of the prophecy, which ultimately made them fearful and led them to repent and seek forgiveness from God. They wrote letters to the Promised Messiahas and that is why he [Ahmad Baig’s son-in-law] avoided death and Muhammadi Begum’s nikah was also abrogated.

In response, Sanaullah cited the verse,

وَعْدَ اللہِ ۖ لَا يُخْلِفُ اللہُ وَعْدَهُ وَلَـٰكِنَّ أَ كْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

[Allah has made this promise. Allah breaks not His promise, but most men know not. (Surah Al-Rum, Ch.30: V.7)]

showing his resolute belief that God never alters His promise. This is the summary of Maulvi Sahib’s argument. Readers can decide for themselves what the outcome was.

Wassalam

Umaruddin Ahmadi

City of Jalandhar 

(Al Fazl, 4 June 191

Links and Related Essays

100 Years Ago… – Report of the Debate in Kartarpur

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/10/02/who-is-maulana-sanaullah-amritsari-1868-1948/

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/05/30/who-is-maulvi-saadullah-or-saadullah-or-sadullah-of-ludhiana-died-jan-1907/

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

Tafser Sanai BY:Moulana Sanaullah Amratsari تفسیر ثنائی از مولانا ثناء اللہ امرتسری

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/14/who-is-syed-muhammad-hussain-batalvi-1840-1920/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/04/17/maulvi-sanaullah-visited-qadian/

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-4159-4160-in-the-ahmadiyya-qurans-before-the-death-of-jesus-as/

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://www.alislam.org/library/books/Ijaz-e-Ahmadi.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/02/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-disparaging-comments-on-abu-hurairah/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/14/the-final-decision-with-mawlana-sanaullah-amritsari-by-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-1907/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/20/a-muslim-is-one-who-accepts-all-those-appointed-by-god-by-mirza-bashir-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-april-1911/

Maulana Sanaullah of Amritsar

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/10/ilhamat-e-mirza-in-english-as-the-revelations-of-mirza-by-sanaullah-amritsari/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/22/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-sanaullah/

Tags

#AHMADIYYA #AHMADIYYATRUEISLAM #AHMADIAPARTHEID #AHMADIYYAT #RABWAH #QADIAN #MEETTHEKHALIFA #MUSLIMSFORPEACE #AHMADIYYAFACTCHECKBLOG #NOLIFEWITHOUTKHALIFA #AHMADIYYAPERSECUTION #TRUEISLAM

  1.  “MARKAZI JAMIAT AHLE HADEES HIND”ARCHIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL ON 2017-10-12.
  2. ^ “Biography of Shaykh Al-Islam Thanaullah Amritsari”
  3. ^ “SANAULLAH AMRITSARI – WIKI”WIKI.QERN.ORGARCHIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL ON 2016-10-02.
  4. ^ “TAFSEER SANAI (BY MOLANA SANA ULLAH AMRITSARY) — AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIC LIBRARY”AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIC LIBRARYARCHIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL ON 2016-09-30.
  5. ^ FAZ̤LURRAḤMĀN BIN MUḤAMMAD. (11 FEBRUARY 1988). “HAZRAT MAULANA SANAULLAH AMRITSARI”ARCHIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL ON 11 FEBRUARY 2018 – VIA HATHI TRUST.
  6. ^ QURESHI, AQEEL (25 APRIL 2016). “SEERAT SANAI(HAZRAT MOLANA SANAULLAH AMRITSARI RA) ~ SIQARAH PUBLIC LIBRARY ISLAM PORA JABBER”ARCHIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL ON 19 OCTOBER 2016.

Who is Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari (1868–1948)?

Intro
Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari was an Ahl-e-Hadith (Wahabi) Muslim from British India, he was born into a family of Kashmiri descent.  He was born on June 12, 1868 and died on March 15, 1948 in Sarghoda, Pakistan.  He was a major opponent of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and the early Ahmadiyya movement. Sanaullah Amritsari served as the general secretary of Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadith Hind form 1906 to 1947.  He was also the editor of the “”Ahle Hadees”” magazine.  He moved to Pakistan at the Partition, losing his son in the process, and himself dying in SargodhaPunjab, Pakistan, in 1948, after suffering from a stroke.  Syed Muhammad Hussain Batalvi was also an Ahl-e-Hadith scholar who beefed with MGA uptil about 1902, Sanaullah seems to have stepped up for the Ahl-e-Hadith of India as they battled vs. Ahmadiyya.  In 1907, he refused to enter into a Mubahila challenge vs. MGA, instead, MGA prayed that if he was a false prophet, he would die in the lifetime of Sanaullah.  He had many debates and arguments with various Ahmadi leaders, he eventually wrote many books, the most famous book in terms of his battles with Ahmadiyya is Ilhamat-e-Mirza (1928)– a critical account of the ‘revelations’ of Mirza.  He was also the main editor and owner of a monthly magazine called, “Muraqqa-Qadiani” which lasted from 1907 until MGA died in May of 1908.
Its articles were compiled in the shape of book titled “Muraqqa Qadiani” published in 1917.

1890
MGa writes in Izala Auham that a Muslim cannot have a Mubahila with another Muslim.  He contradicts himself a few months later.

1897
MGA mentions Maulvi Sanaullah by name in the Appendix of Anjam e Athim.

1899
MGA is ordered by the British Government to never do a Mubahila challenge ever again.

1902
He published his famous commentary of the Quran called Tafseer Sanai.  MGA quoted this book in 1902, as MGA called Abu Hurairah as stupid, since this commentary quotes a hadith from Sahih Bukhari wherein Abu Hurairah proved that 4:159 meant that Esa (As) hadn’t died yet.  He gets into a debate vs. some Ahmadi’s.  MGA mentions all of this in his book, Ijaz i Ahmadi.  This debate was to be held on October 29, 30, 1902. Syed Muhammad Sarwar Shah and Maulavi Abdullah Kashmiri were to represent the Ahmadis at the debate, and Maulavi Sanaullah the other party. The debate was held in the open under a banyan tree. There were only three Ahmadis at the debate and over 600 non-Ahmadis were present. Maulavi Sanaullah
Amritsari fanned the feelings of the villagers by asserting that the Ahmadis were afraid of debates.  When the terms were being settled Maulavi Sanaullah insisted that nobody should speak for more than 20 minutes despite the protest by Syed Sarwar Shah that the time fixed (20 minutes) was woefully inadequate.

1903—January
Maulvi Sanullah visits Qadian.  He writes:

‘Bismillah Al-Rehman Al-Raheem. To Janab Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Saheb, Raees-e-Qadian.
This humble self, according to your invitation mentioned in Aijaz-e-Ahmadi pp. 11-13, I am presently here in Qadian. Until now, Ramadhan prevented me from accepting your invitation, otherwise I would not have delayed it. I swear upon God that I do not have any personal grievance or animosity against you. Since according to you, you are appointed on such a high position which is for the guidance of all humanity in general and for sincere persons like me especially, therefore I firmly hope that you will not spare any effort to make me understand, and as promised, you will give me permission that I will express in front of people my thoughts about your prophecies. Once again I remind you of my sincerity and the trouble that I have taken to travel all the way, and by virtue of the grand position, please give me a chance.’ …. from Abu al-Wafa Sanaullah. dated 10th January 1903.’ (Tareekh-e-Mirza by Maulana Sanaullah Amratsari p. 61).

Mirza was stunned. He never thought in his wildest dreams that Molvi Sanaullah Saheb would ever come to Qadian. He replied, trying to avoid facing him. He wrote:

“””I have promised God that I would never debate with those people (opponents). Thus that way which is quite far away from debates is that to clear this stage you will have to promise that you will not go out of the ‘Minhaj-e-Nabuwwat – way of the prophethood’ ……. 2nd condition is that you will not be allowed to speak at all. You will only give a written objection, one line or two lines, that this is your objection. Then in the gathering, a detailed reply would be given. For objection, there is no need to write in detail, just a line or two is enough. 3rd condition is that you would raise only ONE objection per day. Since you have not informed us of your coming, rather you have sneaked in like a thief, because of lack of free time and work of printing the book, we cannot spend more than three hours. Remember that this will never be allowed that you give a long lecture like a sermon in front of public, instead you will have to absolutely keep your mouth shut, as deaf and dumb, so that the talk does not turn into a debate. First you will ask only regarding one prophecy. For three hours I can give its reply, and at each you will be cautioned that even if now you are not satisfied then write it down. It would not be your task to let (people) hear your objection. We will read ourselves, but it should not be more than two or three lines. This way, you will not suffer, since you have come to clear your doubts, this way is excellent to remove doubts. I will announce to the people that regarding this prophecy, such and such doubt has come into the heart of Molvi Saheb, and this is its reply. This way all the doubts will be cleared. But if you want that like a debate you are allowed to talk, then this will never happen. (Mirza repeated the same conditions at least two more times in the next paragraph) …. From my side, I swear upon God, that I would not go out of this, and will not hear anything, you will not dare to utter a single word from your mouth. And I bind you also with the swear of God, that if you have come with a true heart, then be bound to it and do not spend your life in creating trouble and disturbance. And whosoever among the two of us, breaks this oath, then God’s curse be on him, and may God will that he sees the fruit of this curse in his life. Ameen….. by the pen of Mirza  Ghulam Ahmad by his own hand”””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza pp.62-64). 

One would have thought that Molvi Sanaullah would have given up after reading such absurd conditions where he is not even allowed to say a single word. But Allah had given him long patience. He wrote back to Mirza Saheb:

“”””I received your long letter. Alas! what is the expectations of the whole country, same thing has happened. Respected Sir! When I have come according to your invitation mentioned in Aijaz-e-Ahmadi, and in clear words I have given reference of the same pages, then such long talk from you …. me dear Sir, it is so sad that on the one hand you invite me to come to do research, that I prove your prophecies wrong to get the cash reward Rs. 100 for each, and then in your letter you are binding me to write just one or two lines whereas for your self you propose to have three hours!!!

Is this the way of research that I write one or two lines and you make a speech for three hours? This shows clearly that you are now regretting having invited me, and is denying your own invitation, and refraining from research, for which you had invited me on page 23. Dear Sir! Did you invite me to your house write these two lines only? I could have done better sitting in Amratsir, and am doing it already. But remembering the troubles of my journey, I do not want to go empty handed, therefore I accept your injustice as well and will write only two three lines, and you can no doubt speak for three hours. However I would request this much alteration that I would read my two three lines to the audience, and after every hour of your speech, I would express my thoughts about your speech for 5 minutes, maximum 10 minutes. Since you do not like public audience, therefore the gathering from sides would be limited to 25 persons. You akin my coming without informing you to be like a thief! Is this how you greet your guests? There was no condition that you have to be informed in advance. Moreover, you would have received the news from heavens. Whatever speech you are going to make, kindly give it to me then, and proceedings will start from today. After I receive your reply, I will send you my brief question. As far as the talk about cursing is concern, it is the same which is mentioned in hadith…. from Sanaullah dated 11th January 1903″””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza p.65) (Hadith about Curse: If the person who has been cursed, does not deserve the curse, then it returns to the one who has cursed).

Mirza Ghulam A Qadiani did not reply to this letter, instead instructed his disciple Mohammed Ahsan Amrohi to write the reply:

“”””Molvi Sanaullah Saheb, your letter was read to Hazrat-e-Aqdas, Imam-uz-Zaman, Maseeh Mowood … since its contents were purely racist and hateful, which is far away from seeking the truth, therefore this reply is enough from Hazrat-e-Aqdas (Mirza) that you do not want to investigate the truth … Hazrat has sworn that he would not enter into any debate with his opponents, how can an appointee of Allah go against his promise of God?… therefore your proposals are absolutely not acceptable…. From Mohammed Ahsan by order of Hazrat Imam-uz-Zaman dated 11th January 1903″””” (Tareekh-e-Mirza p.66).

1903-1904
MGA claims that Maulvi Thana’ullah was present at the famous Karam Din case (see Haqiqatul Wahy, online english edition).

1907–March
Maulvi Sanaullah seems to have been challenging Ahmadi’s to a debate,
Ahmadi.answers.com quotes the AhleHadees newspaper as saying:

“”””Mirza’is! If you are truthful then come; and bring your people with you. The same Eid-Gah is ready where you did a mubahala with Sufi Abdul Haq Ghaznavi and were faced with heavenly disgrace And bring the man who has invited me for a Mubahalah in his book Anjam-e-Atham”””” (Ahl-e-Hadith, 29 March 1907 Page 10).

1907–April 4th
He responds to MGA’s request for a Mubahila.  He refuses to enter into a Mubahila with MGA.

1907–April 14th
“””“I give the good news to Maulvi Sanaullah that Mirza Sahib has accepted his challenge of Mubahalah. Undoubtedly(you) swear that this man  (i.e Mirza Sahib) is false in his claim and then openly state that if I am false in this claim then “May the curse of Allah be upon those who lie”. The verse of the Holy Qur’an upon which the foundation of Mubahalah is set only states that both parties should say, “May the curse of Allah be upon those who lie”””” (Badr, 14 April 1907).  

1907–April 15th
MGA publishes his famous announcement vs. Sanaullah, entitled, “The Final Judgement with Sanaullah”.  In this announcement MGA prays to his God that he should die within the lifetime of Sanaulah, if he (MGA) is indeed a liar and a false prophet.

1907–April 19th
“”“I did not invite you to a Mubahalah, I only expressed my intent to make a sworn statement. However, you call this a Mubahalah, whereas a Mubahalah is when both parties swear against each other. I have only agreed to take an oath not to engage in a Mubahalah. A sworn statement is something else and a Mubahalah is something else”””(Ahl-e-Hadith 19 April 1907).

1907–April 26th
Maulvi Sanaullah published MGA’s prayer in his newspaper (the Ahl e Hadees) to God that he should die within the lifetime of Maulvi Sanaullah if he (MGA) is indeed a false prophet.  He also wrote:

“”””Your writing is not acceptable to me and neither can any sane person accept it.”””
(Akhbar Ahli Hadees, Amratsar, 26th April, 1907).

and

“””In case I die, what argument is my death going to resolve for other people?”””
(Akhbar Ahli Hadees, Amratsar, 26th April, 1907, p. 5).

See also—The Review of Religions, February 1992

1907–May 15th
Haqiqatul Wahy is published by MGA.  Maulvi Sanaullah’s name is mentioned 9 times, however, it is spelled as Thana’ullah.  MGA connects Saadullah with Sanaullah, it seems that the two knew each other.  Saadullah died in February of 1907.

1907–August
In terms of a Mubahila Challenge, Maulvi Sanaullah wrote: 
(Moraqqai Qadiani, August 1907)

“””The Holy Prophet Muhammad, on whom be peace, in spite of being a true prophet, passed away before Maseelma Kazzab. Maseelma in spite of being a liar died after the true person but because he finally died in disappointment and frustration, therefore, there is no doubt in the authenticity of the prayer.”””

1908–May 26th
MGA dies in Lahore of cholera.

1908–June
In his magazine, “Murraqqa Qadiani”, he states:

“””The Krishan of Qadian published an announcement of Mubahalah on 15 April 1907″””(Muraqqa-e-Qadiani, June 1908, Page 18).  

1908–July
Maulvi Sanaullah is mentioned in the Ahmadi newspaper Al-Hakam, as he argued that MGA’s prophethood only lasted 6 1/2 years, since it started in 1901.

1909
Maulvi Sanaullah has a debate with top Ahmadi’s in Rampur.  Mufti Muhammad Sadiq and Maulvi Ahsan Amrohi were there representing Ahmadi’s.

1911, roughly April or May
Maulvi Sanaullah comments on Mirza Basheer ud Din’s famous essay wherein the Mirza calls all Muslims as Kafirs (see Truth about the Split).

1917
Muraqqaʻ-i Qadiani (The Qadiani Mosaic), 1917, 64 pages is published.

1918
He debated Ahmadi’s in Kartarpur, British-India.

1923
“Shahadat-e-Mirza” is published, Maulvi Sanaullah also published a 6-month challenge to all Ahmadi’s to respond.  Tarikh-i Mirza (History of Mirza), 1923, 64 pages is also published.

1924
In a 3-day conference held in Qadian on April 1-3, 1924, by non-Ahmadis, Maulavi Sanaullah boasted about his challenge and his books and claimed that no one had written a rebuttal (See Hidden Treasures).  Jalal-ud-Din Shams when writing the introduction of Hudur’s book says:  I came to know in December 1923 about the existence of this book, and when I came to Qadian I inquired whether anyone had received a copy of this book. As no one knew about it, I had to trace this book and wrote a strong rebuttal that appeared in the issue of April 1924 of the Review of Religions. Qadi Muhammed Zahooruddin Akmal, the editor of Review of Religions, in an introductory remarks to the rebuttal, said that he received the manuscript on January 31, 1924.  The daily al-Fadl in its issue of April 8, 1924, carried the news that a copy of the issue containing the rebuttal of the book was sent to Maulavi Sanaullah under registered cover.

1926
Nikat-i Mirza, 1926, 40 pages is published.

1928
ʻAqaʼid-i Mirza (Beliefs of Mirza), 1928, 8 pages is published.  “ilhamat-e-Mirza” is also published.

1929
The Lahori -Ahamdi’s would often send Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi, while that local organisation would also have obtained the services of Maulana Sanaullah.  So Maulana Sanaullah was on the same platform and in the same team representing Muslims with a well known Lahori Ahmadi scholar (who had taken the bai`at at the hands of the Promised Messiah in 1907)!  As an example, we have a booklet entitled Munazira, published by the Anjuman Nusrat-ul-Islam of Hyderabad, Sind (an orthodox Muslim body), being the account of a debate between the Arya Samaj and Muslim representatives in January 1929.

Here is the link. (Opens in new window)

On the first day, Maulana Sanaullah appeared against a Pandit (see p. 14). On the second day, Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi appeared against another pandit (see p. 24). The speeches of all the representatives are reproduced.

Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi told us (including me) many anecdotes about Sanaullah’s replies at the debates which were sometimes silly. For example, an Arya asked “Can Allah create another God like Him if He is all-powerful?”, implying of course that there would then be two Gods. Sanaullah replied: Yes, Allah can create another God like Him, but the created God will say ‘I am not the real God’, so there would still be only one God. Maulana Abdul Haq said to us: I knew what a blistering reply the Arya would give to this foolish response, and so he did. The Arya said: This means that either the first God is wrong because he didn’t manage to create a God like him, or the created God is wrong because he is saying I am not a real God! So there is a conflict between the two Gods, one saying “I have created a God like Me”, and the other saying “No, I am not the real God”!

Once Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi published a challenge addressing Sanaullah and saying: You said in a gathering in my presence: “I (Sanaullah) have made a lot of money by opposing Mirza”. Can you deny saying this?

1930’s
Maulvi Sanaullah had many public debates with an Ahmadi-Mullah named Maulana Abul ‘Ata Jallundhari.  Maulana Abul ‘Ata Jallundhari was born in district Jallundhar in 1904. At the age of eleven his father brought him to Qadian for studies, where he completed his Honours in Arabic with distinction.  For five years he served as the Missionary In-charge for Palestine, and acquired great proficiency in Arabic. He started al-Bushra magazine in 1933 and also started the magazine al- Furqan. He wrote numerous books in Urdu and Arabic.  He served as the Principal of Jami‘ah Ahmadiyyah and Jami‘atul- Mubashshirin from 1944 to 1958. He was also one of the members of the delegations of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim Jama‘at in 1953 and 1974 to the Government of Pakistan. He also served as a member of the Ifta’ [Jurisprudence] Committee for many years until his death.  He is one of the three members of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim Jama‘at who have been given the title, “Khalid-e-Ahmadiyyat” by Hadrat Musleh-e-Mau‘udra.(See Nubuwwat and Khilafat, 1966).

1933
ʻAjaʼibat Mirza risālah “ʻIlm-i Kalam-i Mirza” ka doosra hissa (The Oddities of the booklet ‘Writings of Mirza as Literature’, part two), 1933, 25 pages is published.

1944
What seems to be his final comments on Ahmadiyya were given in the Ahl-e-Hadees newspaper of 1944.  The British had just won WW-2 and the idea of a Muslim state was always in the press.

1947

“In August 1947, Amritsar was the scene of a mini-doomsday. The death-afflicting storm of rioting completely enfolded the residence of Maulana, and even though he succeeded in evacuating himself and his family out into safety, his only youthful son Ataullah was cruelly slaughtered under his very eyes and the horror of that grief minced his heart into pieces.”  (Al Aitzan June, 15 1962 page 10).  

 

And also:

 

Maulvi Abdul Majid Sohdarvi, biographer of Maulvi Sanaullah, writes: “The moment he left his house, vagabonds and looters who were waiting for the opportunity swept in and took everything, including all the household items, cash and jewelry. After looting and robbing, they put the house on fire. That was, however, not the end of it; the looters also put on fire and turned to ashes Maulana’s most precious and valuable collection of books which included some very rare publications worth thousands of rupees and which he had brought together after great pains and expense. The loss of these books was no less distressing to Maulana than the loss of his only son. Those books were the most valuable estate of his life and some of them were so rare that it was not only difficult but impossible to replace them” … “This violent grief remained with Maulana until his death and, in fact, these two tragic incidents were the major cause of his sudden death. The sudden loss of his only son and the burning of his most precious collection of books, and the affliction of both of these misfortunes over a short while claimed his life (Seerati Sanai, Maqbool Aam Press, Lahore).

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Karam

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/05/30/who-is-maulvi-saadullah-or-saadullah-or-sadullah-of-ludhiana-died-jan-1907/

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

Tafser Sanai BY:Moulana Sanaullah Amratsari تفسیر ثنائی از مولانا ثناء اللہ امرتسری

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/14/who-is-syed-muhammad-hussain-batalvi-1840-1920/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/04/17/maulvi-sanaullah-visited-qadian/

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-4159-4160-in-the-ahmadiyya-qurans-before-the-death-of-jesus-as/

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://www.alislam.org/library/books/Ijaz-e-Ahmadi.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/02/mirza-ghulam-ahmads-disparaging-comments-on-abu-hurairah/

http://alhafeez.org/rashid/death.html

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/14/the-final-decision-with-mawlana-sanaullah-amritsari-by-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-1907/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/01/20/a-muslim-is-one-who-accepts-all-those-appointed-by-god-by-mirza-bashir-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-april-1911/

Maulana Sanaullah of Amritsar

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/10/06/maulvi-sanaullah-vs-maulana-ghulam-rasul-sahib-rajeki-debate-in-kartarpur-in-1918/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/10/ilhamat-e-mirza-in-english-as-the-revelations-of-mirza-by-sanaullah-amritsari/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/22/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-vs-sanaullah/

Tags

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiyyaPersecution #trueislam

  1.  “Markazi Jamiat Ahle Hadees Hind”Archived from the original on 2017-10-12.
  2. ^ “Biography of Shaykh Al-Islam Thanaullah Amritsari”
  3. ^ “Sanaullah Amritsari – wiki”wiki.qern.orgArchived from the original on 2016-10-02.
  4. ^ “Tafseer Sanai (By Molana Sana ullah Amritsary) — Australian Islamic Library”AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIC LIBRARYArchived from the original on 2016-09-30.
  5. ^ Faz̤lurraḥmān bin Muḥammad. (11 February 1988). “Hazrat Maulana Sanaullah Amritsari”Archived from the original on 11 February 2018 – via Hathi Trust.
  6. ^ Qureshi, Aqeel (25 April 2016). “Seerat sanai(Hazrat Molana Sanaullah Amritsari RA) ~ Siqarah Public Library islam pora jabber”Archived from the original on 19 October 2016.

Up ↑