Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"Balogan"

“Islam vs. Ahmadiyya in Nigeria” (1975) by Dr. Is’mail A.B. Balogan, B.A., PH.D. (London) University of Ibadan


Intro

There is a famous Ex-Ahmadi named Professor Dr. Is’mail A.B. Balogan, B.A., PH.D. (London) University of Ibadan, Nigeria.   He was a Professor of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the University of Ibadan, Algeria, Dr. Balogun had dedicated his life to the cause of Ahmadiyyah and had raised through the ranks to become a top spokesman and ambassador for the Movement. Throughout the years, his well articulate and emotional speeches had motivated many young Ahmadis. Similarly, his public departure and the commotion and debates that pursued caused many educated individuals to realize the truth and abandon Ahmadiyyah.  He wrote about Ahmadiyya in the early 1970’s.  He also wrote in the Sunday Times about the dangers of Ahmadiyya.  He verbally jousted with high ranking Ahmadi Murrabi’s in Nigeria.  Molvi Ajmal Shahid, then the Amir of Ahmadiyyah movement in Nigeria, provided an extremely short reply in which he expressed his dismay at the “spiritual death of a brother (ibid., p. 97)” and Moulvi Naseem Saifi, the chief Ahmadiyyah missionary for West Africa, confirmed that Dr. Balogun had been very close and high in the administration and expressed his sadness that Dr. Balogun had abandoned Ahmadiyyah in favor of Islam (ibid., p. 99); other Ahmadi missionaries questioned his public withdrawal and, in an attempt at damage control, advanced a number of unbecoming and unproved accusations.  This book seems to have been published in 1977 and from Lahore, Pakistan.

What is this book about?
It’s basically a collection of his essay’s vs. Ahmadiyya in the year 1974, as well as his correspondance with Ahmadi Murrabi’s.

Free download—Full Book
Ismail Balogun 1-41 (1)
IB, 42 to 62 (2)
IB, page 43 (2)
IB, 42 to 62 (2)

He wrote about how the Saudi Embassy refused to give Nigerian-Ahmadi’s Hajj visas for the January 1974 hajj
In the preface of his book, he himself writes:

In October 1970, the World Muslim League at Mecca passed a resolution which says among other things:

“That the Ahmadiyya (Qadiani) group founded by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a group that has veered far from the path of Islam by reasons of certain of its beliefs and practices which are clearly contradictory to the well-known view point of Islam”

Consequent upon this resolution, the Government of Royal Kingdom of Saudi Arabia decided that Ahmadi’s from all over the world must not be allowed to perform the annual Pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina because they were considered as Non-Muslims……..

In Compliance with the Government’s decision, the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Nigeria refused bluntly in December of 1973 to allow Nigerian Ahmadis to perform Hajj in January of 1974.  A hue and a cry ensued as a result of this refusal and many statements and counter statements were made in the Nigerian Press.  The situation reached a point where I sincerely felt that the nation needed necessary information and guidance on the matter.  At this point, there were indications that certain people aimed at maneuvering the situation into a governmental confrontation between Nigeria and Saudi Arabia.

As as Ahmadi then, I was naturally displeased with the attitude of the Embassy.  But as a University teacher in the field of Arabic and Islamic studies I considered it a bounden duty to present the truth based on knowledge of Islam, …..

See—Preface to the attached book

Dr. Balogan first wrote 
Dr. Baolgan was an Ahmadi until January of 1974, he unexpectedly wrote an essay vs. Ahmadiyya, we have produced much of it in the below.

1———“The fact that Ahmadis hid their true doctrine from the membership at large is] evident in the fact that when one of the young educated Nigerian Muslims, who originally invited the Movement here, went to Britain for further studies and thereby came in contact with Indian Ahmadis, who resided then in Britain, he studied them at first hand and returned home only to withdraw his membership of the Movement. This was the late al-Haj L. B. Agusto of blessed memory.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; Ibid., p. 2).

2———-“Even though Ahmadiyya has been in this country for close to sixty years, I make the bold to say that, up till now, the vast majority of the adherents of the organization, within both the Movement and the Mission, are still in the dark about the details of its teaching, as well as its purpose. For example, it was only very recently, when stiff opposition to Ahmadiyyah started to rear its head in this country, that certain high-ranking Ahmadis knew for the first time that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be a Prophet.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; ibid., p. 3)“.

3———-“I could have raised all the points in this article with them (e.g. the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadi leadership) internally without any publicity; but experience has shown that such criticisms will automatically earn the critic either a long-term boycott or an outright excommunication. With any of these, no other member will be prepared to listen to him… I have stated my point of view, God is my witness, purely because of my awareness of the responsibility incumbent on me towards my fellow Nigerian Muslims in particular, and the world Muslims at large. My intention is not to oppose Ahmadiyyah; I have lived in it long enough to have a soft spot for it in my heart. But that notwithstanding, whenever a clash of opinion arises between Islam and Ahmadiyyah, it behooves me to declare for Islam without mincing words.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; ibid., p.17).

After Ahmadi’s were declared Non-Muslim by Pakistan he wrote
1—-“In my Childhood, I was brought up to revere the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadiyyah missionaries who guided and controlled our religious activities. When the mission came to our elders and, through the elders to us, we believed all that they told us in toto, because of the implicit confidence we had in them.

Their preaching appeared plausible to us and we accepted their arguments in good faith. They made references to Islamic books in order to substantiate their claims and we accepted the references without cross-checking them because of our confidence in them.

Their method was to alienate us against the orthodox Muslims in whom they found faults in the way they practiced Islam. The missionaries claimed to present “the true Islam” to us in the name of Ahmadiyyah.

They often impressed on us that the stiff opposition, which Ahmadis suffered in India before the partition and subsequently in Pakistan, was a conclusive proof of the truth of Ahmadiyyah. After all, no prophet is readily accepted in his own town or country. This also appeared plausible to us, hence we followed them with unalloyed confidence.” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; Islam versus Ahmadiyyah in Nigeria, p. 85-86).

2———“My aim [in cross-checking the references offered by Ahmadi missionaries] was actually to strengthen myself against the gathering opposition to Ahmadiyyah. As a University scholar, I was conscious that my pronouncement in support of Ahmadiyyah must necessarily be backed with authentic references to Islamic sources.

In my cross-checking of the Ahmadiyyah missionaries’ references, however, my findings were rather disappointing.

Consequent upon my first article on the Ahmadiyyah problem in Nigeria (Sunday Times, 20 January 1974), the Ahmadiyyah Mission members wrote extensive rejoinders which gave me a further opportunity to examine, independently, more Ahmadiyyah claims and views than hitherto.

I must say, before God and man, that the more I scrutinized the claims and purported references for them, the more I discovered that the Ahmadiyyah Mission is deceiving the world and playing on the ignorance of many of their followers.

In many cases, they quote authors [scholars] who are explicitly opposed to Ahmadiyyah ideas; but so cleverly do they quote that they often give the impression that the authors support Ahmadiyyah views.

Examples of such distortions abound in the quotations made by Dr. Bhutta in his rejoinder (Sunday Sketch, 8 September 1974) to my article. It may interest the readers to know that Dr. Bhutta is himself a Pakistani Ahmadiyyah medical missionary.

It is only by going to the source references and reading what the Ahmadis had quoted within the context in which they are set that the reader, and the seeker after truth, will realize how much the Pakistani Ahmadiyyah missionaries try to deceive the world.” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 86-87).

3————“In order to buttress their claim about Khatam-un-Nabiyyin, the Ahmadis often quote the mystic Shaikh Muhyiddin Ibn ‘Arabi as saying, ‘The Prophethood that was terminated with the person of the Prophet of Allah(SAW) was no other than the Law-bearing Prophethood, and not Prophethood itself.’ (Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, Vol. II, p. 3)

This quoted statement appears on page 3 of the book, which contains over 700 pages. The book does not stop at the statement concerning the matter of Prophethood. On the contrary, it explains further at length, covering eleven pages, pages 252 to 262 inclusive, in the same volume, the different aspects of the Prophethood.

He says, among other things, that Prophethood exists among both animate and inanimate objects. With regard to human beings, he classified the Prophets into two: law-bearing prophets and follower prophets. He explains the functions of each category and concludes in both cases that, with the coming of the Prophet Muhammad, both categories have ceased to appear.

He says that what would remain for Muslims after Muhammad are speculators (Mujtahids) who would strive in their own different ways to explain the Shariah to the people according to their understanding of it. Such Mujtahids, he says, will NOT be called Prophets (Ibn Arabi, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, Vol. II, pp. 254 and 255). This is certainly known to the Pakistani Ahmadi missionaries, but they hide it from their followers deliberately in order to entrench their own false idea on Prophethood…

Another example of the distortions by the Ahmadis for their selfish ends is contained in their official rejoinder to my article already mentioned.

On page 5, column 2, of Monday 11 February 1974 issues of The Truth, the Ahmadiyyah Mission quoted the following in support of the Prophethood of the Promised Messiah: ‘There is no discrepancy between the two, that he (the Messiah) will be a Prophet and a follower of the Holy Prophet(SAW) for the purpose of explaining the commandments of his Shariah, and to strengthen its way, even though he does so through his revelations.’ (Mirqat Sharh Miskat, Vol. 5, pg. 564)

This quotation has been extracted from the explanation of the Hadith in which the Prophet Muhammad had declared that there would be no other Prophet after him.

Indication. The Hadith, which is contained in Mishkat al Masabih, reports that the Messenger of God said to ‘Ali, ‘You are in the same position to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses): except that there is no prophet after me’. The Mishkat reports also that authentic books of Hadith are agreed on this tradition.

Now, in commenting on this authentic Hadith, Imam ‘Ali Qari, who was deceitfully quoted by Ahmadis, says:

“In the commentary of Muslim, some scholars say concerning his [the Prophet’s] statement ‘Except that there is no Prophet after me,’ that it is an indication that whenever ‘Isa b. Maryam [Jesus Christ] descends, he will descend as one of the arbitrators of this Community inviting people with the Law of Muhammad(SAW), and will not descend as a Prophet.I say that there is no inconsistency in his being a Prophet and being a follower to our Prophet(SAW) concerning the explanation of the rules of the Shariah and the improvement of his way even with revelation to him, as indicated by the saying of the Prophet: ‘If Moses were alive he would have no choice but to follow me.’

That is even though he is described as a Prophet and a Messenger; and in the absence of both of them (Prophethood and Messengership), there will not be any additional attainment.

Interpretation. So, the meaning is that there will not be any new Prophet after him because he is the Seal of all the Prophets that had gone before.

In it (the statement) is an allusion that, if there were to be a Prophet after him, it would have been ‘Ali; and it is not incompatible with what has clearly been related concerning the right of ‘Umar because the decision is hypothetical and suppositional.

It is as if he (the Prophet) says: ‘If there were to be a Prophet after me, a group of my Companions would have been Prophets; but there is no Prophet after me.’

This is the meaning of the Prophet’s(SAW) saying: ‘If Ibrahim had lived, he would have been a Prophet.’

As for the Hadith, which says, ‘The scholars of my Community are like the Israelites Prophets’, memorizers like Zurkashi, Asqalani, Damiri, and Suyuti have clearly said that is has no basis.”

This quotation is from the same book and on the same page referred to by the Ahmadiyyah Mission. That is: ‘Ali al-Qari, Mirqat al-Mafatih Sharh Mishkat al-Masabih, vol. 5, pg. 564.

It is clear from the quotation that the Mission has extracted what they thought would support their erroneous view from a commentary which, taken together, is explicitly opposed to the view. This is in order to give the impression that the author supports their idea.

In educated circles, such act is an errant distortion of an author’s view and thought. It contradicts the international law of copyright. It is, indeed, unacceptable as well as unbecoming of a mission that wants itself to be taken seriously.

From the Islamic point of view also, it is an abominable act. Consider, for example, Quran 2:59 [also 7:162], which says, “The transgressors changed the statement from that which was made to them; so We sent a pestilence from heaven upon the transgressors, for their having gone astray.’ A food for thought indeed for the Ahmadis!” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 91-95)

4——–“Furthermore, instead of being crossed with me, calling me names and making all sorts of conjectures about me because of my renunciation of Ahmadiyyah, let the Nigerian Ahmadis take my exposition to their Pakistani missionaries for verification or denial.

Assertions. If they deny my assertions, then demand from them the Arabic books (not Urdu translations) from which they took their quotations. Then, let independent Arabic scholars translate the relevant sections within their context.

If I am proved wrong, let my father reject and disown me, and let the Ahmadis collectively curse and “crucify” me. But if I am proved right, then it becomes incumbent on all Nigerian Ahmadis, including my relations, both by blood and affinity, to reconsider their association with Ahmadiyyah, pray fervently to God Almighty as I have done to show them the way of Islam and help them to follow it.” (Sunday Sketch, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 96).

Nigerian Ahmadis responded to Dr. Balogan
On page 5, column 2, of Monday 11 February 1974 issues of The Truth, the Ahmadiyyah Mission quoted the following in support of the Prophethood of the Promised Messiah: ‘There is no discrepancy between the two, that he (the Messiah) will be a Prophet and a follower of the Holy Prophet(SAW) for the purpose of explaining the commandments of his Shariah, and to strengthen its way, even though he does so through his revelations.’ (Mirqat Sharh Miskat, Vol. 5, pg. 564)

Mr. Al haj A. S. Olatunde vs. Ahmadiyya missionaries in Nigeria
“For some months now, I have been quiet. My quietness has come as a result of a very serious study I embarked upon in connection with a burning question.

The question began with an article published by Dr. Ismail Balogun of the University of Ibadan a few months ago. It concerned the belief of the Ahmadiyya Jamat that the founder of the organization was a kind of a prophet.

Dr. Ismail Balogun, who was born into the Ahmadiyya Community, advanced cogent arguments and reasons to support his rebuttal of the claim of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to Prophethood and the need to abandon the name Ahmadiyya to denote a class of Muslims.

A series of rejoinders came from many well-known Ahmadis. The most significant thing about the rejoinders is that they are unconvincing! They have been based on shifty premises.

Dr. Ismail Balogun came out again with a final reply to all the rejoinders. His final reply contained incontrovertible facts from various books of Islam and lexicons to support his stand that after the holy Prophet Muhammad there had not been and there would never be another prophet of any kind, at least in so far as Islam is concerned.

I want to make my personal stand clear now. I support Dr. Ismail Balogun. I agree entirely with his findings. And with him I declare that Muhammad is the last Prophet of God.

I also declare that I am not an Ahmadi. It is true that I have been closely connected with the Ahmadiyya Mission for many years. During my period of association with them, the question of another prophet after Muhammad was never a point of interest in our discussions.

I am sure with this, nobody will be in doubt any more about my stand. I want to remind all Muslims of an incident toward the close of the glorious life of the Holy Prophet Muhammad. It was the parting sermon he delivered on the Arafat in his last pilgrimage.

He said: “I am leaving unto you two noble things. So long as you will cling to them, you will never go astray. One of them is the Book of Allah and the other is the Tradition of His Apostle. Let him that is present tell unto him that is absent. Haply he that shall be told may remember better than he who has heard it.”

With me, the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet are sufficient. I am a Muslim and anything that will tarnish my Islam is rejected with all my heart.

If there is any person or any group of persons who have been showing me any favor because they thought that I was an Ahmadi, I pray, they should now withhold or withdraw their favors. I shall be satisfied with whatever favors it will please Allah to bestow on me as a Muslim, pure and simple. May Allah open our hearts to His Truth. Amen.” (Daily Sketch, Friday, Nov. 8, 1974; ibid. p. 118-119).

 

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/24/ahmadiyya-a-study-in-contemporary-islam-on-the-west-african-coast-by-humphrey-j-fisher-1963/

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/22/ahmadiyya-in-gambia/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/19/dr-balogan-the-famous-african-ahmadi-who-left-ahmadiyya-in-1974/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/01/who-is-farimang-mamadi-singhateh-the-governor-general-of-the-gambia-and-an-ahmadi/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/01/who-is-humphrey-j-fisher-the-writer-who-wrote-extensively-about-ahmadiyya-in-africa/

Tags

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

Dr. Balogan, the famous African-Ahmadi who left Ahmadiyya in 1974

http://www.islamawareness.net/Deviant/Qadiyani/balogun.html

Why did I Renounce Ahmadiyyah

by Dr. Ismail A. B. Balogun
A former high level Ahmadi

“…I must say, before God and man, that the more I scrutinized the claims and purported
references for them, the more I discovered that the Ahmadiyyah Mission is deceiving
the world and playing on the ignorance of many of their followers.”

In a series of articles published in Nigeria during 1974, Dr. Ismail A. B. Balogun, a high level Ahmadi leader, refuted the tenets of Ahmadiyyah and publicly denounced the Movement he had been born and raised in. A Professor of Islamic and Arabic Studies at the University of Ibadan, Algeria, Dr. Balogun had dedicated his life to the cause of Ahmadiyyah and had raised through the ranks to become a top spokesman and ambassador for the Movement. Throughout the years, his well articulate and emotional speeches had motivated many young Ahmadis. Similarly, his public departure and the commotion and debates that pursued caused many educated individuals to realize the truth and abandon Ahmadiyyah.

Allah accept the repentance of those who do evil in ignorance and repent soon afterwards; to them will Allah turn in mercy: For Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom.
(The holy Quran, An-Nisa, 4:17)

Subsequently, Dr. Balogun documented the reasons for his withdrawal from the Movement and included some of the ensuing debates in a book entitled “Islam versus Ahmadiyyah in Nigeria”. In this book, Dr. Balogun disclosed how he, as many other highly educated individuals, had blindly accepted Ahmadiyyah out of loyalty to his parents, misinformation disseminated by the Ahmadi leadership, divisive methods of the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadi missionaries, and other subjective reasons having more to do with propaganda and cultural habits than the truthfulness of any movement.

Dr. Balogun recounts his upbringing and his blind faith in the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadi missionaries in the following passage:

“In my Childhood, I was brought up to revere the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadiyyah missionaries who guided and controlled our religious activities. When the mission came to our elders and, through the elders to us, we believed all that they told us in toto, because of the implicit confidence we had in them.Their preaching appeared plausible to us and we accepted their arguments in good faith. They made references to Islamic books in order to substantiate their claims and we accepted the references without cross-checking them because of our confidence in them.

Their method was to alienate us against the orthodox Muslims in whom they found faults in the way they practiced Islam. The missionaries claimed to present “the true Islam” to us in the name of Ahmadiyyah.

They often impressed on us that the stiff opposition, which Ahmadis suffered in India before the partition and subsequently in Pakistan, was a conclusive proof of the truth of Ahmadiyyah. After all, no prophet is readily accepted in his own town or country. This also appeared plausible to us, hence we followed them with unalloyed confidence.” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; Islam versus Ahmadiyyah in Nigeria, p. 85-86)

Over a quarter of century ago, Dr. Balogun had accurately identified the strategy employed by high level Ahmadi missionaries to misguide the uninformed. Not only the missionaries do not publicize a complete picture of their doctrine and history, but also they distort the teachings of Islam and attempt to exasperate and capitalize upon sectarian division among few ignorant Muslims.

Dr. Balogun testified:

“Even though Ahmadiyya has been in this country for close to sixty years, I make the bold to say that, up till now, the vast majority of the adherents of the organization, within both the Movement and the Mission, are still in the dark about the details of its teaching, as well as its purpose. For example, it was only very recently, when stiff opposition to Ahmadiyyah started to rear its head in this country, that certain high-ranking Ahmadis knew for the first time that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be a Prophet.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; ibid., p. 3)“[The fact that Ahmadis hid their true doctrine from the membership at large is] evident in the fact that when one of the young educated Nigerian Muslims, who originally invited the Movement here, went to Britain for further studies and thereby came in contact with Indian Ahmadis, who resided then in Britain, he studied them at first hand and returned home only to withdraw his membership of the Movement. This was the late al-Haj L. B. Agusto of blessed memory.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; Ibid., p. 2)

Indeed, since its very inception, the Ahmadi leadership has relied upon the well-proven methods of the Christian Missionaries to alienate the uninformed individuals from knowledgeable and sincere Muslims and selfishly increase their membership. They know only too well that the descendants of individuals somehow tricked into joining their organization are generally less likely to renounce their membership, even after they discover the truth.

Truly they found their fathers on the wrong Path;
So they (too) were rushed down on their footsteps!
And truly before them, many of the ancients went astray;-

(The holy Quran, As-Saaffat, 37:69-71)

Dr. Balogun records that, when in 1974, the Pakistani Government and the Muslim World League both declared the Ahmadiyyah to be a non-Muslim group, he set out in earnest to defend the Movement he was born into and prove its truthfulness. However, his scholarly and thorough research into the teachings of Ahmadi leadership untangled a disturbing web of deceit and left him with no alternative but to denounce the Mission. This finding is even more significant since Dr. Balogun, even though a high level Ahmadi and a Professor of Islamic Studies, had himself been kept in the dark for over forty years.

Regarding the authenticity of the alleged references and interpretations provided by the Ahmadi Missionaries, from the Holy Quran, books of Hadith, and the writings of Muslim personalities, to lend the appearance of support to their various claims, Dr. Balogun wrote:

“My aim [in cross-checking the references offered by Ahmadi missionaries] was actually to strengthen myself against the gathering opposition to Ahmadiyyah. As a University scholar, I was conscious that my pronouncement in support of Ahmadiyyah must necessarily be backed with authentic references to Islamic sources.In my cross-checking of the Ahmadiyyah missionaries’ references, however, my findings were rather disappointing.

Consequent upon my first article on the Ahmadiyyah problem in Nigeria (Sunday Times, 20 January 1974), the Ahmadiyyah Mission members wrote extensive rejoinders which gave me a further opportunity to examine, independently, more Ahmadiyyah claims and views than hitherto.

I must say, before God and man, that the more I scrutinized the claims and purported references for them, the more I discovered that the Ahmadiyyah Mission is deceiving the world and playing on the ignorance of many of their followers.

In many cases, they quote authors [scholars] who are explicitly opposed to Ahmadiyyah ideas; but so cleverly do they quote that they often give the impression that the authors support Ahmadiyyah views.

Examples of such distortions abound in the quotations made by Dr. Bhutta in his rejoinder (Sunday Sketch, 8 September 1974) to my article. It may interest the readers to know that Dr. Bhutta is himself a Pakistani Ahmadiyyah medical missionary.

It is only by going to the source references and reading what the Ahmadis had quoted within the context in which they are set that the reader, and the seeker after truth, will realize how much the Pakistani Ahmadiyyah missionaries try to deceive the world.” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 86-87)

In support of his statements, Dr. Balogun researched, exposed, and refuted many of the deceptive and false arguments used by the Ahmadi missionaries to deceive the uninformed. For instance, he wrote:

“In order to buttress their claim about Khatam-un-Nabiyyin, the Ahmadis often quote the mystic Shaikh Muhyiddin Ibn ‘Arabi as saying, ‘The Prophethood that was terminated with the person of the Prophet of Allah(SAW) was no other than the Law-bearing Prophethood, and not Prophethood itself.’ (Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, Vol. II, p. 3)This quoted statement appears on page 3 of the book, which contains over 700 pages. The book does not stop at the statement concerning the matter of Prophethood. On the contrary, it explains further at length, covering eleven pages, pages 252 to 262 inclusive, in the same volume, the different aspects of the Prophethood.

He says, among other things, that Prophethood exists among both animate and inanimate objects. With regard to human beings, he classified the Prophets into two: law-bearing prophets and follower prophets. He explains the functions of each category and concludes in both cases that, with the coming of the Prophet Muhammad, both categories have ceased to appear.

He says that what would remain for Muslims after Muhammad are speculators (Mujtahids) who would strive in their own different ways to explain the Shariah to the people according to their understanding of it. Such Mujtahids, he says, will NOT be called Prophets (Ibn Arabi, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah, Vol. II, pp. 254 and 255). This is certainly known to the Pakistani Ahmadi missionaries, but they hide it from their followers deliberately in order to entrench their own false idea on Prophethood…

Another example of the distortions by the Ahmadis for their selfish ends is contained in their official rejoinder to my article already mentioned.

On page 5, column 2, of Monday 11 February 1974 issues of The Truth, the Ahmadiyyah Mission quoted the following in support of the Prophethood of the Promised Messiah: ‘There is no discrepancy between the two, that he (the Messiah) will be a Prophet and a follower of the Holy Prophet(SAW) for the purpose of explaining the commandments of his Shariah, and to strengthen its way, even though he does so through his revelations.’ (Mirqat Sharh Miskat, Vol. 5, pg. 564)

This quotation has been extracted from the explanation of the Hadith in which the Prophet Muhammad had declared that there would be no other Prophet after him.

Indication. The Hadith, which is contained in Mishkat al Masabih, reports that the Messenger of God said to ‘Ali, ‘You are in the same position to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses): except that there is no prophet after me’. The Mishkat reports also that authentic books of Hadith are agreed on this tradition.

Now, in commenting on this authentic Hadith, Imam ‘Ali Qari, who was deceitfully quoted by Ahmadis, says:

“In the commentary of Muslim, some scholars say concerning his [the Prophet’s] statement ‘Except that there is no Prophet after me,’ that it is an indication that whenever ‘Isa b. Maryam [Jesus Christ] descends, he will descend as one of the arbitrators of this Community inviting people with the Law of Muhammad(SAW), and will not descend as a Prophet.I say that there is no inconsistency in his being a Prophet and being a follower to our Prophet(SAW) concerning the explanation of the rules of the Shariah and the improvement of his way even with revelation to him, as indicated by the saying of the Prophet: ‘If Moses were alive he would have no choice but to follow me.’

That is even though he is described as a Prophet and a Messenger; and in the absence of both of them (Prophethood and Messengership), there will not be any additional attainment.

Interpretation. So, the meaning is that there will not be any new Prophet after him because he is the Seal of all the Prophets that had gone before.

In it (the statement) is an allusion that, if there were to be a Prophet after him, it would have been ‘Ali; and it is not incompatible with what has clearly been related concerning the right of ‘Umar because the decision is hypothetical and suppositional.

It is as if he (the Prophet) says: ‘If there were to be a Prophet after me, a group of my Companions would have been Prophets; but there is no Prophet after me.’

This is the meaning of the Prophet’s(SAW) saying: ‘If Ibrahim had lived, he would have been a Prophet.’

As for the Hadith, which says, ‘The scholars of my Community are like the Israelites Prophets’, memorizers like Zurkashi, Asqalani, Damiri, and Suyuti have clearly said that is has no basis.”

This quotation is from the same book and on the same page referred to by the Ahmadiyyah Mission. That is: ‘Ali al-Qari, Mirqat al-Mafatih Sharh Mishkat al-Masabih, vol. 5, pg. 564.

It is clear from the quotation that the Mission has extracted what they thought would support their erroneous view from a commentary which, taken together, is explicitly opposed to the view. This is in order to give the impression that the author supports their idea.

In educated circles, such act is an errant distortion of an author’s view and thought. It contradicts the international law of copyright. It is, indeed, unacceptable as well as unbecoming of a mission that wants itself to be taken seriously.

From the Islamic point of view also, it is an abominable act. Consider, for example, Quran 2:59 [also 7:162], which says, “The transgressors changed the statement from that which was made to them; so We sent a pestilence from heaven upon the transgressors, for their having gone astray.’ A food for thought indeed for the Ahmadis!” (Sunday Sketch, Nigeria, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 91-95)

It is those who do not believe in the Signs of Allah that forge falsehood: it is they who lie!
(The Holy Quran, An-Nahl, 16:105)

No sooner had Dr. Balogun unearth such evidence and discovered that the doctrine of Ahmadiyyah was contrary to the authentic teachings of Islam, that he and many others abandoned the Mission and embraced Islam. These fortunate individuals were blessed with the capacity to differentiate the Truth from Falsehood and the sincere faith to prefer Allah(SWT) and His Messenger(SAW) to the position, prestige, and life-style they had achieved within the Organization. Truly, they were the recipients of guidance from Allah(SWT).

Subsequent to such public expositions, Dr. Balogun became the subject of personal attacks by many senior Ahmadi missionaries. For instance, Molvi Ajmal Shahid, then the Amir of Ahmadiyyah movement in Nigeria, provided an extremely short reply in which he expressed his dismay at the “spiritual death of a brother (ibid., p. 97)” and Moulvi Naseem Saifi, the chief Ahmadiyyah missionary for West Africa, confirmed that Dr. Balogun had been very close and high in the administration and expressed his sadness that Dr. Balogun had abandoned Ahmadiyyah in favor of Islam (ibid., p. 99); other Ahmadi missionaries questioned his public withdrawal and, in an attempt at damage control, advanced a number of unbecoming and unproved accusations. In clarification, Dr. Balogun responded:

“I could have raised all the points in this article with them (e.g. the Indo-Pakistani Ahmadi leadership) internally without any publicity; but experience has shown that such criticisms will automatically earn the critic either a long-term boycott or an outright excommunication. With any of these, no other member will be prepared to listen to him… I have stated my point of view, God is my witness, purely because of my awareness of the responsibility incumbent on me towards my fellow Nigerian Muslims in particular, and the world Muslims at large. My intention is not to oppose Ahmadiyyah; I have lived in it long enough to have a soft spot for it in my heart. But that notwithstanding, whenever a clash of opinion arises between Islam and Ahmadiyyah, it behooves me to declare for Islam without mincing words.” (Sunday Times, Nigeria, Jan. 20, 1974; ibid., p.17)“Furthermore, instead of being crossed with me, calling me names and making all sorts of conjectures about me because of my renunciation of Ahmadiyyah, let the Nigerian Ahmadis take my exposition to their Pakistani missionaries for verification or denial.

Assertions. If they deny my assertions, then demand from them the Arabic books (not Urdu translations) from which they took their quotations. Then, let independent Arabic scholars translate the relevant sections within their context.

If I am proved wrong, let my father reject and disown me, and let the Ahmadis collectively curse and “crucify” me. But if I am proved right, then it becomes incumbent on all Nigerian Ahmadis, including my relations, both by blood and affinity, to reconsider their association with Ahmadiyyah, pray fervently to God Almighty as I have done to show them the way of Islam and help them to follow it.” (Sunday Sketch, Sept. 29, 1974; ibid., p. 96)

Naturally, the personal attacks levied against Dr. Balogun had nothing to do with the issue at hand and had been orchestrated solely to confuse the naive. In truth, the deceptive methods of the Mission had been exposed and independently verified by a number of individuals. The damage done to the Mission was so great that it had to disband. Many Ahmadis reorganized under the name of “Anwar-ul-Islam Movement” and rejected the unIslamic doctrines which the Ahmadi leadership and missionaries had propagated and sustained through their distortions and misrepresentations of the authentic teachings of Islam (Daily Times, Monday, Nov. 25, 1974; ibid., p. 121). May Allah(SWT) guide every sincere Ahmadi to Islam.

Among the individuals, who witnessed the written public debates between Dr. Balogun and the high level Ahmadi missionaries and recognized the falsehood of the Mission, was a well-known gentleman by the name of Mr. Alhaj A. S. Olatunde. To save face and mislead their naive followers, Ahmadi missionaries apparently had began a rumor that Br. Olatunde had recognized their “truth” and accepted Ahmadiyyah!  In response, Br. Olatunde issued a public statement, which is reproduced below:

“For some months now, I have been quiet. My quietness has come as a result of a very serious study I embarked upon in connection with a burning question.The question began with an article published by Dr. Ismail Balogun of the University of Ibadan a few months ago. It concerned the belief of the Ahmadiyya Jamat that the founder of the organization was a kind of a prophet.

Dr. Ismail Balogun, who was born into the Ahmadiyya Community, advanced cogent arguments and reasons to support his rebuttal of the claim of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to Prophethood and the need to abandon the name Ahmadiyya to denote a class of Muslims.

A series of rejoinders came from many well-known Ahmadis. The most significant thing about the rejoinders is that they are unconvincing! They have been based on shifty premises.

Dr. Ismail Balogun came out again with a final reply to all the rejoinders. His final reply contained incontrovertible facts from various books of Islam and lexicons to support his stand that after the holy Prophet Muhammad there had not been and there would never be another prophet of any kind, at least in so far as Islam is concerned.

I want to make my personal stand clear now. I support Dr. Ismail Balogun. I agree entirely with his findings. And with him I declare that Muhammad is the last Prophet of God.

I also declare that I am not an Ahmadi. It is true that I have been closely connected with the Ahmadiyya Mission for many years. During my period of association with them, the question of another prophet after Muhammad was never a point of interest in our discussions.

I am sure with this, nobody will be in doubt any more about my stand. I want to remind all Muslims of an incident toward the close of the glorious life of the Holy Prophet Muhammad. It was the parting sermon he delivered on the Arafat in his last pilgrimage.

He said: “I am leaving unto you two noble things. So long as you will cling to them, you will never go astray. One of them is the Book of Allah and the other is the Tradition of His Apostle. Let him that is present tell unto him that is absent. Haply he that shall be told may remember better than he who has heard it.”

With me, the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet are sufficient. I am a Muslim and anything that will tarnish my Islam is rejected with all my heart.

If there is any person or any group of persons who have been showing me any favor because they thought that I was an Ahmadi, I pray, they should now withhold or withdraw their favors. I shall be satisfied with whatever favors it will please Allah to bestow on me as a Muslim, pure and simple. May Allah open our hearts to His Truth. Amen.” (Daily Sketch, Friday, Nov. 8, 1974; ibid. p. 118-119)

Obviously, a movement whose very leaders and founders have used such deceptive methods to misguide the uninformed, for a hundred years, can not be taken seriously nor viewed as a divine organization. Each one of the arguments Ahmadi leaders have advanced in support of their organization is similarly based on deceptive claims or pure conjecture and has been solely invented to keep their unfortunate followers confused and entrapped.

We hope that individuals who have mistakenly followed Ahmadiyyah reconsider their standing in the light of all the evidence uncovered by Dr. Balogun. Should those, who have been touched by the miracles of the Holy Quran and the teachings of the last Prophet Muhammad(SAW), exhibit loyalty and obedience to Allah(SWT) and His last Messenger(SAW) or to individuals whose deception and falsehood has been continually exposed?

Those who reject Allah, hinder (men) from the Path of Allah, and resist the Messenger, after Guidance has been clearly shown to them, will not injure Allah in the least, but He will make their deeds of no effect.
(The holy Quran, Muhammad, 47:32)

Quotes taken from: “Islam versus Ahmadiyyah in Nigeria”, Published by Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore, Pakistan

May Yacoob, “Ahmadiyya and Urbanization: Easing the Integration of Rural Women in Abidjan

Intro
We have scanned the relevant pages from “Rural and Urban Islam in West Africa edited by Nehemia Levtzion and Humphrey J. Fisher.  We will write a full evaluation later.  In the meantime, read some relevant essays herein:  https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Balogan

The scans


Atif Mian was accidentally invited to Mecca, Arabia in 2016



Intro
Be sure to read our writings on the Atif Mian controversy here.  It seems that the Saudi government was unaware that Atif Mian was an Ahmadi, and invited him to this “International Conference on Islamic Banking and Finance” in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.  Saudi Arabia banned Ahmadi’s in the early 1970’s and encourages other Islamic countries to do the same.  The Saudi embassy in Nigeria flatly refused to give Ahmadi’s visas in 1973.

Atif Mian visited Mecca in 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuiidoHxGYg

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/20/islam-vs-ahmadiyya-in-nigeria-1975-by-dr-ismail-a-b-balogan-b-a-ph-d-london-university-of-ibadan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/03/abdul-sami-zafar-tells-the-inside-story-on-the-may-29th-1974-rabwah-train-attacks/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Atif+Mian

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/15/sind-holdings-was-owned-by-mirza-muzzafar-ahmad/

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

Ahmadi’s keep trespassing Arabia, Mecca and Medina specifically



Intro

Ahmadi’s do not follow the law of the land wherever they live, they only say this as a form of political correctness.  In reality, they only follow whatever their Khalifa tells them.  Nevertheless, the Saudi Arabian government and specifically King Faisal told the Muslim world in the early 1970’s that Ahmadi’s weren’t to be trusted.  Zafrullah Khan and the Mirza family seem to have fell out of favor with King Faisal and the entire Muslim world in this era.  It was most likely a result of OPEC and how the Arab states were trying to fight off Israel and even enacted a crushing oil embargo on the USA for supporting Israel.  Ahmadi’s were finally seen as pro-British, Pro-USA and anti-Muslim world.  Subsequently, Arabia asked Bhutto to declare Ahmadi’s as Non-Muslims and thus prevent them from performing Hajj or even entering Saudi.  Nowaday’s, in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, if anyone is suspected of being an Ahmadi, they are immediately deported.

Why are Ahmadi’s not allowed in Mecca, but the Nation of Islam are?
https://www.quora.com/Why-are-Ahmadi-Muslims-not-allowed-in-Mecca-but-the-Nation-of-Islam-Muslims-are

Iqbal called Ahmadi’s as traitors 70 years ago

The 1974 Declaration of Muslim World League
https://nabuwat.com/en/fatwa-about-qadianis

2nd Islam Summit in Lahore

Ahmadiyya in Saudi Arabia

There are no accurate figures for the number of Ahmadis in Saudi Arabia.[1] However, Ahmadi Muslims are a small community, primarily foreign workers from India and Pakistan and some from other countries. There is an increasing number of Saudi citizens who belong to the movement. Since the Ahmadiyya faith is banned in the country, there are no Ahmadi mosques. Ahmadis generally gather together in private properties for their daily prayers,[10] thereby limiting exposure to the local authorities.

In a 2006–2007 nationwide campaign to track down and deport Ahmadi Muslim foreign workers, the Saudi religious police arrested 56–60[11] Ahmadi Muslims of Indian, Pakistani and Syrian origin from major cities across the country. In late December 2006, several dozen Saudi police raided a private guest house in Jeddah in Western Saudi Arabia, and detained 49 Ahmadi Muslims, including women, children and infants. A fortnight later, in early January 2007, the police arrested 5 Ahmadis from major industrial cities of Jubail and Dammam in the Eastern Province. The police failed to arrest the leader of the movement in Dammam, because he was out of the country at the time. In February of the same year, two more Ahmadi guest workers were arrested from the capital of the country Riyadh, in central Saudi Arabia.[12] The arrests came under the orders of Minister of Interior Prince Nayef, and targeted Ahmadis solely because of their faith.[10] Despite calls from international human rights groups, by April 2007, 58 Ahmadi Muslims were deported to their country of origin.[13]

In May 2012, Saudi authorities arrested two Saudi citizens because of their conversion to the Ahmadiyya movement. Saudi officials encouraged them to abandon their beliefs, and three months later, they were detained. They have not been released since then.[1]

Related Essay’s and Links
https://www.hrw.org/news/2007/01/23/saudi-arabia-stop-religious-persecution-ahmadis

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/17/ahmadis-were-declared-non-muslim-on-april-24-1973-in-azad-kashmir-through-efforts-of-sardar-abdul-qayyum/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/03/abdul-sami-zafar-tells-the-inside-story-on-the-may-29th-1974-rabwah-train-attacks/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/20/1974-declaration-by-world-muslim-league-rabita-al-alam-al-islami/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/20/islam-vs-ahmadiyya-in-nigeria-1975-by-dr-ismail-a-b-balogan-b-a-ph-d-london-university-of-ibadan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=1974

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/12/jalsa-germany-2018-is-fast-approaching/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-ahmadiyya-jalsausa-is-a-marketing-event-nothing-else/

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

An Ahmadiyya homeopathy clinic in Ghana

Intro
It seems that the Ahmadiyya movement is selling fake medicines en-masse in Ghana as well as all over the world.

A quote from Hanson’s book on Ahmadiyya in Africa
“The Ahmadiyya added the provision of health care into its local operations. With funds from the global community, the Ahmadiyya in Ghana has established seven hospitals, all accredited by the Ghanian government. Most are staffed by Ahmadi medical missionaries from South Asia, but a few Ghanaian Muslim physicians have served, and scores more worked as other medical staff. Other initiatives of Ahmadiyya include homeopathic medicine; the movement opened a clinic in Kumasi, the first homeopathic clinic run by the Ahmadiyya anywhere in the world, to produce medicines and to train homeopathic doctors. Herbal medicine also is promoted by Ghanaian Ahmadi Muslims who produce and sell herbal compounds to address a range of illnesses. The combination of biomedical, homeopathic, and herbal approaches to healing is a distinctive medical presence and widens access to a broad range of users, both Ahmadi Muslims and others.”

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

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=homeopathy

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/20/islam-vs-ahmadiyya-in-nigeria-1975-by-dr-ismail-a-b-balogan-b-a-ph-d-london-university-of-ibadan/

Professor Joseph Schacht’s comments on Ahmadiyya in Africa

Intro
He was the British-German professor of Islamic studies at Columbia University.  He wrote about Ahmadiyya in Ghana.  He specifically reviewed the work by Fisher.  His review was published in the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (1964).  We haven’t found his book as of yet, however, we have found quotes from an Ahmadiyya website.

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/20/islam-vs-ahmadiyya-in-nigeria-1975-by-dr-ismail-a-b-balogan-b-a-ph-d-london-university-of-ibadan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/24/ahmadiyya-a-study-in-contemporary-islam-on-the-west-african-coast-by-humphrey-j-fisher-1963/

Some quotes

“I have, however, some reservations to make… Firstly: Mr Fisher is, of course, aware of the differences which divide the two branches of the Ahmadiyya, the Qadian branch and the Lahore branch, but I do not find a clear distinction made in the book…

“I cannot accept some of Mr Fisher’s statements and assumptions, e.g. his assumption that the first aim of orthodox West African islam should be ‘gradual growth within a pagan setting’, as opposed to the ‘reforming energies’ of the Ahmadiyya (p. X); several of his explicit or implied assertions as to the teaching of orthodox Islam as opposed to the doctrine of the Ahmadiyya (pp. 35 ff); or his apparent lack of understanding of the issue involved in the teaching of the so-called Quranic People (p. 92)…

“I also regret that the spread of Ahmadiyya is not set more against the background of the spread of ‘orthodox’ Islam; it comes as a surprise to read on p. 97, without having been prepared for it in any way, that at a certain, not clearly identified period, the Muslims constituted ‘already nearly half of the Lagos population’ (p. 97)…

“My third reservation concerns the validity of Mr Fisher’s method of collecting information on the spot. It appears from Mr Fisher’s account that the effort of the Ahmadiyya in Sierra Leone has been practically unsuccessful (pp. 121-5) and, we must infer from other passages in his book, rejected by orthodox Muslims; now imam Abd al-Karim Ghazali of Sierra Leone speaks highly of the Ahmadi mission which came to his country in 1945, whereas according to Mr Fisher, ‘it was about 1948 that Ahmadiyyah finally found a noticeable foothold in Freetown… but thus far progress has been very slow’. I merely state this difference. Appendix II (p. 191) is concerned with the Ahmadiyya in East Africa; in these two pages, too, I found a few inaccuracies, and I should have liked to see a reference to Damman’s paper on the Swahili translation of the Quran…”

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

Mirza Nasir Ahmad claims that he was not in Rabwah during the train attacks of May 29th, 1974

Intro
The Mirza family planned the Rabwah Train attacks perfectly.  Mirza Tahir Ahmad is totally missing from the scene.  They did this as a first step to moving out of Pakistan.  Mirza Nasir Ahmad claims that he was 12 miles away and didn’t even ask any Ahmadi about the attack.  Mirza Tahir Ahmad doesn’t have an alibi in terms of his whereabouts.

Mirza Nasir Ahmad’s explanation as given to the Samdani Commission
“””Mirza Nasir Ahmed, head of the Ahmadiyya Community, told the tribunal holding inquiry into the Rabwah Railway Station Incident during his statement that on May 29, when the incident took place he was not present in Rabwah and had gone to his lands about 12 miles away.  On his return the same day, he received reports of the incident and from the them came to believe that the Jamaat-i-Ahmadiyya had no hand in the incident.

The statement of Mirza Nasir Ahmad and that of Agha Shorish Kashmiri, chief of the Anjuman-i-Tahafuz-i-Khatmi-Nubuwwat, which were recorded in camera by the Tribunal were later, allowed to be published.

Mirza Nasir Ahmad said that the Jamaat-i-Ahmadiya’s involvement in such an incident was impossible.  He said neither Jamaat-i-Ahmadiya, nor any of its sub-organization or some group of persons attached to them could plan such an incident.  He felt that the plan of the incident might have been prepared by the united opposition parties or by a group of opportunist elements of the ruling party.

According to witness (Mirza Nasir Ahmad), the responsibility of the incident lay with the Provincial government and not the federal government.  The witness added that certain persons of Rabwah were also involved in the May 29 incident.  However, they had not done so under the directions from any party of organization.

He admitted that in his congregational address on May 31, he had said that the May 29 incident was pre-planned.  He said, he said so in view of some subsequent happenings specially the disturbances that took place at Lyallpur.

On a question from the Tribunal as to why he did not bother to get information about the incident, the witness (Mirza Nasir Ahmad) said because he did not attach much importance to it as such happenings had become common during the last three years.

According to the witness (mirza nasir Ahmad), the police had made indiscriminate arrests in connection with the Rabwah incident and even some Non-Ahmadi’s had also been arrested.  He said he could not say if some foreign power also was behind the incident.

Asked about his interview to correspondent of the Associated Press of America, the Ahmadiyya Chief said his interview had been somewhat misreported.  He said it was not true that the Pakistan Air Force planes had given a salute at the last annual convention of the Jamaat-i-Ahmadiyya at Rabwah.

Mirza Nasir Ahmed said it was not true that he wanted to purchase a Canadian radio transmitter having a range from 2500 to 3000 miles.

However, he said the Jamaat-i-Ahmadiyya intended to install a broadcasting station in Nigeria and for this purpose the Ahmadi’s all over the world had made contributions.

Agha Shorish Kashmiri, in his statement, said said that on May 29, Mr. Afzal Saeed, Private Secretary to the Prime Minister had contacted him on telephone to give a message from the Prime Minister.  In his message Mr. Bhutto had told the witness (agha shorish) that some foreign powers were out to disintegrate the country.  The Premier expressed the desire that the opposition leaders should help the Government maintain law and order situation so as to foil the evil designs of the enemies—PPI.””””

Newspaper scan, From the Pakistan Times, Aug-1st, 1974

Full newspaper
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/25/pakistan-times-newspaper-clippings-may-sep-1974/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/03/mirza-nasir-ahmad-mirza-tahir-ahmad-and-mirza-masroor-are-all-missing-on-may-31st-1974/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/03/mirza-nasir-ahmad-mirza-tahir-ahmad-and-mirza-masroor-are-all-missing-on-may-31st-1974/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/07/07/kashifs-twitter-meltdown-american-journalist-cynthia-d-ritchie-harassed-and-called-isi-whore-after-she-refuses-to-let-ahmadiyya-hijack-her-reputation-as-a-respected-journalist-and-retweet-the/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/06/05/the-rational-reasons-behind-declaring-ahmadiyya-ahmadis-a-non-muslim-minority-in-the-constitution-of-pakistan-statistics-showing-systematic-over-representation-of-ahmadis-in-the-bureaucracy-of-pakist/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/an-ahmadi-spills-the-beans-on-the-rabwah-train-attack/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/16/ahmadis-are-wrong-from-birth/

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/06/atif-mians-conversion-to-ahmadiyya-story/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/the-mirza-family-loved-the-persecution-they-call-is-free-press/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=1974

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/04/mirza-tahir-ahmad-lied-about-ordinance-xx-and-his-exodus-from-pakistan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=King+Faisal

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

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/07/26/fauzia-faizi-confirms-that-the-mirza-family-is-full-of-incest-and-rapists/

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

The Ahmadiyya playbook in Africa



Intro

See Fisher (1963) for all references and Lavan.  Ahmadiyya was given free reign and access to Africa by the British Govt., and as early as 1903. Officially, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad, the Khalifa worked with the British govt in the 40’s and 50’s.  What they did was open up schools and hospitals, and with the backing of the Govt., then, after the British left, most of the countries in Africa became free (or outwardly free), however, they were still obliged to allow Ahmadis to run their schools and hospitals.

In the Gambia
Again…the British govt paved the way for Mirza Nasir Ahmad to visit the Gambia and set up shop.  They opened schools and hospitals and then charged people to attend the schools and get medical treatment.  However, if any poor african wished to go to school for free, they only had to sign a ba’it and join Ahmadiyya, which many poor and ignorant Africans did.
See here—https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Africa-Speaks.pdf

Schools were a business for Ahmadiyya
They would send their Mullahs to any country in Africa to teach english and etc.  This is how Ahmadiyya spread in Africa, there is no reason for any right minded person to join Ahmadiyya, it normally came down to a financial decision.

Mirza Nasir Ahmad made a whirlwind tour in 1970
Mirza Nasir Ahmad travelled the world for free, on the backs of chanda money, as well as government aid, from the British and sometimes the French government.  See here–https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Africa-Speaks.pdf

Nowadays…the average African-Ahmadi
I have engaged upwards of 100+ African-Ahmadis on FB over the past 2 years, they are all brainwashed and mindless.  They memorized many arguments and repeat them over and over again.  They are unable to question any part of Ahmadiyya and see all Muslims as terrorists and Kafirs.

Additional readings
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/22/ahmadiyya-in-gambia/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/19/dr-balogan-the-famous-african-ahmadi-who-left-ahmadiyya-in-1974/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/01/who-is-farimang-mamadi-singhateh-the-governor-general-of-the-gambia-and-an-ahmadi/

Up ↑