Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"Braheen e Ahmadiyya vol 5"

Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 5 was mentioned in 1907

Intro
MGA and his team had thought about writing BA-5 in 1907, this quotation seems to be the final word on the book-series.  This was found by Hani Tahir and posted.

The Scan
16681489_731433183686412_4419116164666868518_n

Transliteration
“””Is maslehat se khuda ne Quraan sharif ko 23 baras tak nazil kia ta k us muddat tak mouda nishanat bhi zahir ho jawen. So main yaqeen rakhta hoon k kitab baraheen e ahmadiya ki takhir par abhi 23 wan baras khatam nahi goga k is ka panchwan hissa mulk main shaiy ho jaiga aur khuda taala ne baraheen ahmadiya mein 23 baras ki taraf ishara bhi kia hai..”””

Rough translation
He means if Allah swt took 23 years to complete the revelation of Quraan then barheen ahmadiya will also be complete and published within 23 years and it part 5 will come in that period as this has been told to him by Allah swt.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad didn’t write Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya; vol. 5

Intro
The Ahmadi mullah team is vicious.  They will do whatever it takes in terms of job security. They are ready to edit the books of MGA and they even published many with MGA’s name on it.
Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 5 is another case of MGA’s ghost writers in action.

When was Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya vol. 5 published?
It was published Posthumously on October 15, 1908 (See Muhammad Ali, “Prophethood in Islam [1915], the supplement, see for the years of 1908).  However, Qadiani sources are purposely vague.  In a new book wherein they summarize the books of MGA, they simply give the year of 1908 (see page 395), and they claim that the book was written in 1905. However, that is a lie.  A blatant lie.

MGA’s on the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya series
In 1900, MGA and his team wrote: 

[RK, v 17, pp. 448-458; Arba`een Number 4]. The article is dated
December 1900. In this he censures his critics and claims that he has Divine support etc. Toward the end of the article is the following:

“””If I have received from you the payment for the price of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya then I invoke the oath of God Almighty upon you, in Whose presence you will be made to appear, that [you should] return all those four parts of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya to my custody and take your money back. Look, I make this open announcement that after this if you demand the price [refund] of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya and, having shown [those parts] to some friend of mine, send [return] all four parts to me, as value payable, and if I, after receiving the four parts, do not pay their price, then [may] the curse of God [be] upon me. … And prior to this I have published three announcements, regarding the price [refund] of Baraaheen, which had the same content that I am prepared to return the price. [These people] should return all the four parts of my book and receive from me the few paltry coins that they are dying for. … [Dated] December 15, 1900 AD [RK, v 17, pp. 457-458; starts at last line of p. 457, above the marginal note; Arba`een Number 4].”””

MGA and his teams final words on the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya series

In 1907, in Haqiqatul Wahy:

16681489_731433183686412_4419116164666868518_n

 

Transliteration
“””Is maslehat se khuda ne Quraan sharif ko 23 baras tak nazil kia ta k us muddat tak mouda nishanat bhi zahir ho jawen. So main yaqeen rakhta hoon k kitab baraheen e ahmadiya ki takhir par abhi 23 wan baras khatam nahi goga k is ka panchwan hissa mulk main shaiy ho jaiga aur khuda taala ne baraheen ahmadiya mein 23 baras ki taraf ishara bhi kia hai..”””

Rough translation
He means if Allah swt took 23 years to complete the revelation of Quraan then barheen ahmadiya will also be complete and published within 23 years and it part 5 will come in that period as this has been told to him by Allah swt.

 

 

Where do Ahmadis get the 1905 date from then?
Nooruddin and Muhammad Ali must have came across a book that MGA and his team were working on in 1905….they then called it Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya and decided to publish it. Ahmadis have already admitted that this book (BA-vol.5) was altogether a new book, it carried none of the themes of the Braheen-e-Ahmadiya series (See Treasures of Islam, page 395).  The Ahmadi mullah team have been notorious for writing books on behalf of MGA and his sons, in fact, Mahmud Ahmad admitted that he stopped writing essays for his newspaper (Tashishazul Adhan) as early as 1911 (see Truth about the split), however, the editors kept using his name in an attempt to get sales.

Conclusions
MGA’s team was very keen, they were all in on the con-job, the main characters were Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, Nooruddin, Maulvi Abdul Karim, Muhammad Ali and a few others.

“Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Review of Religions, Part 1 thru 4, October -1914 to February 1915

Intro
Dear readers, we have found another interesting series of articles from the English version of the ROR of 1914, this comes from an essay series entitled, “Ahmad and Jesus as Prophets”, which seems to go back to 1911.  We had published an entry referring to an essay of 1913 which had a similar title. In April of 1913, they changed the title to simply “Ahmad as a Prophet” Part-1.   By February of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet* came out Part-2).  Muhammad Ali added an asterisks and claimed that MGA was only a prophet in the Arabic sense of the word, thus laying the foundation for the split that happened just a month later.  In March of 1914, Part-3 of the series was published, this was specifically covering the age prophecy of MGA which had failed.  In April of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet Part-4” was published.  In September of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet Part-4” was published, this edition covered MGA’s prophecies about his sons, namely the Musleh Maud Prophecy, of Feb 20th, 1886, which is quoted herein, for this entire series of essays, no author is names, Maulvi Sher Ali was the main editor, since Muhammad Ali had moved to Lahore.

“Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Review of Religions, Part 1 thru 4, October -1914 to February 1915
Another similar series of essays was started in Oct-1914.  The writer is M. Ata-Ur-Rahman Rajshahi (Bengal), he is relatively unknown in the history of Ahmadiyya scholars, the Ahmadiyya Jamaat in Bengal was also very small at that time, it would be amazing for a Bengali to have learned so much about Ahmadiyya by 1914.  This was a 4-part series entitled, “Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”, it was started in October of 1914 with Part-1.  Part-1 briefly discusses that publishing of Braheen e Ahmadiyya in 1880, however, it doesn’t mention that the BA1 and 2 were the only 2 published in that year and they were mostly announcements, and not a book of knowledge, the 1889 Bait is also mentioned.  It goes on to claim that there are 400,000 Ahmadi’s currently in the world (In October of 1914).  Part-2 came out in November of 1914.  Remember, arguments were raging back and forth between the Qadiani and Lahori-Ahmadi’s about the prophethood of MGA.  Obviously, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s were claiming that MGA was not a prophet, whereas the Qadiani’s were asserting that MGA was in fact a Prophet without a law.  Part-2 quotes Khutbah Ilhamiya and Braheen e Ahmadiyya Vol. 5.  They go on two claim that MGA is equal to Muhammad, MGA had entered into Muhammad, and thus there was no difference between the two, per Qadiani-Ahmadi theory.  Part-3 came out in December of 1914, just before the annual Jalsa it seems.  This was the first Jalsa of Mirza Basheer ud Deen Mahmud Ahmad’s Khilafat.  Braheen e Ahmadiyya Vol. 5 is quoted as well as Haqiqatul Wahy.  MGA is forcefully introduced as a Prophet in his own right, however, without law.  Nuzul ul Masih and Chashma i Marifat.  They assert that Ahmadi’s still believe Muhammad to be the last of the prophets, however, only in the sense of a law-giver.  They also argue that Khatim was not used in 33:40, instead Khatam was used, which mostly means seal, had Khatim had been used, then it would have meant that Muhammad (Saw) was the last prophet altogether.  In February of 1915, “Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Part 4 was published.  This is the same time-frame wherein the Khalifa’s first book vs. the Lahori-Ahmadi’s was published, “Qaul al Fasl”.  “Haqiqat un Nubuwaat” was published by the Khalifa a few months later.  It also mentions how the Jalsa at Qadian was held on Dec 25th–27th of 1914, which was Christmas weekend.  It was the first time that women were invited to the Jalsa, the women seem to have had their own Jalsa area and held all sessions independently of men.  It goes on to argue how Ahmadiyya has been a major influencer in the politics of British-India.  Ahmadiyya is described as friendly to the extreme in its love of the British government.  Ahmadis have an utmost loyalty to the British throne.  Nevertheless, the series seems to end here.

Full PDF
Ahmad’s Place Among Prophets Part 1—4

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/30/haqiqat-un-nubuwwat-1915-by-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-some-quotes-and-data/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/09/25/al-qaulul-fasl-by-the-khalifa-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-early-1915/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/11/mgas-age-prophecy-discussed-in-the-ror-of-march-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/15/barahin-e-ahmadiyyah-volume-5-was-re-published-in-1914-it-was-the-second-edition/

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/2018/08/17/muhammad-ali-the-eventual-lahori-ahmadi-was-always-against-takfir-whereas-the-family-of-mga-was-not-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/15/are-ahmadis-the-fastest-growing-islamic-sect-the-world-christian-encyclopedia-opened-and-evaluated/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/in-1914-mirza-bashir-ahmad-simply-called-mga-a-mujadid-not-a-prophet/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-present-to-kings-by-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-1914-aka-tuhfat-ul-muluk/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/20/the-ahmadiyya-movement-and-ahmads-place-among-the-prophets-number-2-by-m-ataur-rahman-review-of-religions-november-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/05/ahmad-as-a-prophet-review-of-religions-of-april-1913/

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

The first Bait form in Ahmadiyya included an oath of loyalty to the British Government (1889 to 1947)

Intro
Its no secret, MGA and his family enjoyed British support, since MGA’s father, brother and uncles helped them put down the great mutiny of 1857.  In fact, after MGA died, the British government funded and built a huge building for Ahmadiyya in Qadian and for free!!!!  In today’s money it would be half a million US dollars.  At the time, this was the biggest building in Qadian, nowadays it is home to the Sikh College.  Ahmadi’s abandoned this college as they left in 1947, it was re-established at Qadian in March of 1948 by the Sikhs.  Nevertheless, MGA began accepting Bait’s in March of 1889, however, his own wife didn’t accept nor did any of his children.  There is no archived Bait form in Ahmadiyya history, the first form exists from later on in 1948 when they moved to Rabwah.  In fact, in 1948, Dard in his famous book about the life of MGA denied that this 4th condition ever existed in a different format.  Furthermore, the first Bait form is totally tampered with by the Mirza family and thus totally missing.

On January 12th, 1889, MGA published an announcement with the 10 conditions of Bait
This announcement is totally missing.  However, 8-9 years later he admitted that loyalty to the British was the 4th condition (see the scan in the below).  We are unsure when it was taken out and deleted.  Dard tells us that this was the same day that MGA’s son, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad was born (see Dard, pages 201-208).

1948, Dard writes that the 4th condition is 
“””Fourthly, that he shall in no way harm God’s creatures in general and Muslims in particular under the influence of his passions— neither with his hands, nor with his tongue, nor by any other means.””””

Dard seems to quote the announcement of January 1889
This is very odd.  Dard totally ignores what MGA wrote in Kitab ul Barriyya and seems to quote the announcement of Jan 1889.  This is a total lie by Dard, he knew that this wasn’t the first list of conditions, however, he was most likely pressured to cover this up, since the headquarters of Ahmadiyya had just moved to the semi-independent-puppet-state called Pakistan.

Dr. Basharat Ahmad in Mujadid-e-Azim skips the entire topic of any Bait form
Interestingly enough, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s don’t ever mention any Bait Form at all.

In 1897, MGA published conditions for bait form in Kitab ul Barriya

In this book, MGA goes into detail about when he was born (1839 or 1840) and the services that his family rendered to the British Government, especially in 1857.  We have archived many of the court statements that were recorded in that book herein.

Quotes from Kitab ul Barriyah
“”””It has been proven from my continuous seventeen year long speeches that I am faithful and sincere to the English Empire from the core of my heart and soul. I am the son of a father who was also a friend to this Government. My faith is to obey this Government and love the people; These are the conditions set for my devotees and followers who take the oath of allegiance to me. I have stressed this clause under the fourth item of my pamphlet Shuroo-al-Baiat (oath of faith) which has been distributed among my devotees and followers.””””
(Kitab-ul-Barriah, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 13, P. 10; Kitab-ul-Barriha, P. 9, Supplement)

The scans

The Lahori-Ahmadi’s have published an abridged english translation of Kitab ul Barriya, but left out the bait form
In an interesting development, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s, led by Zahid Aziz have published an abridged english translation of this book, however, they left out the bait form.  This isn’t the first time they have done this, they did the same with Khutbah Ilhamiya and Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya.

The flattery towards the British government last all of MGA’s life, and in fact, it was Ahmadiyya policy until they moved to Pakistan in 1947
Another example is that of MGA’s book, Roohani Khazyian 15- page 114 – Chapter Sitara Qaisera, which translates into english as: “The Star of Victoria” and is a 16 page pamphlet published in 1899.  In this book, MGA says:

“”””THE SERVICE WHICH I HAD PROVIDED FOR ENGLISH GOVERNMENT THAT I HAD PRINTED FIFTY THOUSAND OF BOOKS, MAGAZINES AND ADVERTISEMENTS FOR THIS COUNTRY AND HAVE SEND AFTER PUBLICATIONS TO OTHER ISLAMIC COUNTRIES THAT ENGLISH GOVERNMENT IS BETTER TO US SO IT IS OBLIATORY ON EVERY MUSLIM TO BE REAL SINCERE TO THIS GOVERNMENT AND SHOULD BE THANKFUL TO THIS DOWLAT ( ASSET ) AND PRAY FOR IT.””””

The scan work

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/03/06/nusrat-jehan-begum-and-other-women-didnt-get-into-to-mgas-bait-in-1889-and-after-were-they-illiterate/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/17/ahmadiyya-leadership-lied-about-the-first-bait-ceremony-in-1889/

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

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/bar/sklife.htm

https://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Ruhani-Khazain-Vol-21.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/11/the-entire-mirza-family-was-above-the-law-in-british-india/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/30/the-british-govt-donated-25000-rupees-for-the-talim-ul-islam-high-school-in-qadian-in-1909/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talim-ul-Islam_College

http://www.ticollegerabwah.com/talimul.pdf

http://www.sncqadian.com/about.php

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

Al-Zamakhshari, “Wa-lakin Shubbiha Lahum”, 4:157 and the Ahmadiyya context

Intro
In the history of Islamic scholarly activity and in the context of 4:157, every Islamic scholar, muffasir, mujadid and etc believed that Esa (as) would physically return to the planet, that part of issue was never debated.  However, the “substitution theory” was challenged by the Mutazalite’s and specifically Al-Zamakhshari.  In Todd Lawson’s book, “Christ and the Crucifixion”, he writes that Al-Zamakhshari was the first Muslim to ever challenge the “Substitution-theory” as well as the last (See Lawson, page 103).  Lawson divides the past 1400 years into 3 distinct eras.  Pre-Tabari Tafsir, which is 687–923, the classic and medieval tafsir’s are 923-1505, and the final category is called modern developments.  Its important to note that in the first category, the Pre-Tabari Tafsir era, all Tafsir’s gave the “substitution theory” and never questioned the grammatical prose of “Shubbiha Lahum”.  The earliest translations and commentaries by Ibn Abbas and Al-Makki indicate that the proper translation is “But so it was made to appear to them”.  In fact, in the “Pre-Tabari Tafsir era”, Lawson researched and quoted 13 top scholars from this era, and they all gave the same opinion about Shubbiha Lahum, i.e. that it referred to the “Substitution theory”.  In conclusion, Zamakhshari was a heretic as were all Mutazalite’s, and they differed amongst themselves, however, they were in with the ruling family (the abbassids) and had Ibn Hanbal executed and continued to sway islamic opinion.

How many times does “Shubbiha Lahum” occur in the Quran?
“””Some form of sh-b-h appears in the Quran 12 times and in 8 separate verses.  2:70, 3:7 (twice), 13:16, 2:118, 6:99 (twice), 2:25, 39:23 and 4:157.  The meaning of the root varies, of course, according to the 6 different forms it assumes in these contexts.  The most frequent meaning is a function of the 3rd-form verbal usage, ‘to be similar or nearly identical to the point of confusion of true identity’ (see Lawson, page 32).”””  

Additional data on the Mutazalites and how they died and were a heresy
http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/13.htm

Sir Syed Ahmad Khan adopted the Mutazalite position on Islam +Quranism
It is important to note that MGA wasn’t the first person in British India to revive a dead heretical scholar, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was the first.  Sir Syed Ahmad Khan used Mutazalite ideas, like for example, prayers being meaningless was a Mutazalite belief, as well as Sir Syed’s.  MGA and his team refuted this position, and thus broke away from Sir Syed.  The reason was, MGA was using his prophetic revelation as the means to legally tell Muslims to change, whereas, Sir Syed was simply using reason and logic.

MGA on this specific sentence, “”Shubbiha Lahum”?
MGA seems to have been silent on this specific topic.  In fact, MGA doesn’t seem to have ever even referred to the substitution theory.

MGA on Al-Zamakhshari?
It seems that MGA or his team of writers wrote about Al-Zamakhshari in 1908.  References to his work appear in Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya Volume 5, which was published posthumously, per the order of the Khalifa (Nooruddin).  Search the PDF and you will find that MGA and his team quoted Al-Zamakhshari in terms of the death of Esa (As).  MGA quoted Zamakhshari in Malfuzat also.  He refers to him in terms of 66:12 and the famous hadith wherein it is stated that everyone was touched by Satan except Esa (as).

Ahmadiyya cherry picking
Al-Zamakhshari believed in the second coming of Esa (As) (physically), he also believed in Abrogation, the concept that the Mahdi and Esa (As) were different people, abrogation and many others things that Ahmadis disagree with.  Hence, Ahmadi’s are taught to cherry pick the things that they need and discard the rest of any scholars writings, this is academically dishonest. Zamakhshari also believed in the ending of prophets.  And he never endorsed the concept of the Ummati-prophet.

Shabbir Ally on Al-Zamakhshari
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan also copied the Mutazalite’s, and specifically Al-Zamakhashari and thus believed that Esa (as) was on the cross, and then died afterwards.  This is nothing new, even Ak Shaikh and Akber Chauhdry believe the same, Muslims are allowed to believe in this way.  However, none of these people ever believed that esa (As) lived 90 years after the event of crucifixion and died in India, thus Ahmadiyya have no right to reference Al-Zamakhshari, or Shabbir Allr.  Shabbir Ally believes just like Zamakhshari, that Esa (As) died, was actually hung on the cross and will still physically return.

Neal Robinson 
Under Construction

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/02/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-was-a-student-of-noorudin-pre-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/03/24/ahmadis-follow-19th-century-science-they-are-stuck-physics-of-the-night-journey-of-prophet-muhammad-%EF%B7%BA-the-multi-verse/

https://www.google.com/search?q=ibn+hanbal+was+killed+by+the+mutazlies&oq=ibn+hanbal+was+killed+by+the+mutazlies&aqs=chrome..69i57.4423j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/13.htm

https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=2&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=158&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1

http://aaiil.org/text/articles/reviewofreligions/1913/reviewreligionsenglish_191312.pdf

http://aaiil.org/text/books/others/khwajanazirahmad/jesusinheavenonearth/ch08lightholyquranbirthjesuschrist.shtml

http://aaiil.org/text/articles/others/2007/twoclassesbelievers.pdf

https://www.premier.org.uk/Topics/Society/Religion/Islam-s-apologist-Why-I-believe-what-the-Koran-says-about-Jesus

https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya-Part-5.pdf

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Zamakhshari

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila

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

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

 

Scans

Videos

Barahin-e- Ahmadiyyah volume 5, was re-published in 1914, it was the second edition



BA-5, 1924 edition
Intro

We have been tracking the writing and publishing of Barahin-e- Ahmadiyyah volume 5.  It can also be spelled as Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya.  Muhammad Ali told us that it was initially published in Oct of 1908, however, he is silent about the supplement.  When was the supplement added?  Who ordered its addition?  Nevertheless, we have come across information from the 2009 online edition of Tadhkirah, on page 705, wherein it is stated in a footnote that there was a 1914 edition of Barahin-e- Ahmadiyyah volume 5.  This is very odd since it is only 5-6 years after its 1st edition was published.  “Correction of an Error” (originally published in 1901) was also re-published in 1914.

What edits were made to the second edition of Barahin-e-Ahmadiyyah volume 5?
We know that the Ahmadiyya team of Mullah’s are always working to fix the errors and omissions of the Mirza family.  We would have to assume that they either added the supplement in 1914, or edited Barahin-e- Ahmadiyyah volume 5 and then re-published.

Tadhkirah (2004 online english edition) doesn’t have this entry at all
In the 2009 edition of Tadhkirah it is stated this footnote was added by Jalal-ud Din Shams.  He was the “fixer”, he worked on behalf of the Khalifa to cover up many indiscretions of the Mirza family.

We found the 1924 edition of BA-5
My team has found the 1924 edition of BA-5.  It is posted in this essay.  We don’tr know whether Shams erred and wrote 1914 instead of 1924 or if this is the 3rd edition.  Nonetheless, we have posted the scan of the cover page.

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Braheen+e+Ahmadiyya+vol+5

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/?s=editing

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?
s=ghost+writershttps://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/04/ahmadiyya-mullahs-have-been-caught-editing-the-writings-of-mga-yet-again/

Tags

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

Before Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad took a loan from a Hindu on interest

Intro
As we continue to dig into the life of MGA before Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya we see a pattern that has developed, i.e., that MGA was a good-for-nothing-lazy-punjabee-fraudster.  In this specific instance, we have found information which proves that MGA never had property valued at 10,000 rupees in 1879.  In fact, in those days, MGA’s brother was ruling the family dynasty, and MGA’s eldest son (Mirza Sultan Ahmad) had already been chosen to take over the family management of Qadian as soon as MGA’s brother died.  So…when MGA claimed that he would give a reward worth 10,000 rupees if anyone could refute his book, it was all hogwash.  It was all a lie.  In fact, Dard did cover up job and added the idea that MGA had property worth 10,000 in 1879 (see Life of Ahmad by Dard, page 91).  Most of this correspondance was recorded by MGA in his book Shahn-e-Haq (1887).

MGA was penniless in 1884
Even after getting money sent to him by many rich Muslims, by 1884, MGA was broke (see Dard, “Life of Ahmad”, page 134).  He had no money, he relied on his friends to send him money.  In Qadian however, MGA had no bills to pay, all he needed was money for food and transportation.

The income tax case of 1898 proves that MGA was broke in 1884
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/04/the-british-government-allowed-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-to-operate-tax_free/

Also see “Life of Ahmad”, Dard, page 595.  By 1898, MGA was claiming that his annual income was 7200 rupees, of which roughly 70% came from MGA’s followers.  MGA claimed to own some land, but not very much, he didn’t list his own house as property in the case, nor did he list any of his properties in Qadian.

Additional info
In Maktoobate Ahmadiyya page 36, Vol-5, Number 3 there is a letter that Mirza wrote to Munshi Rustam Ali on 9th May, 1887, that he wanted to set up a printing press at Qadian which will cost Rs. 1500/- So He shall be thankful, if loan of Rs.400. Is given to him. He says That he will arrange balance Rs. 800 or 900/. from some other place.
It proves that either Mirza was a penny less even in 1887 or he wanted to mint money from simple fellows.

Summary of the situation

When Mirza Qadiani published Ishtihar with challenge if somebody publishes satisfactory answers to his book Baraheen e Ahmadiayya he would pay a reward of Rs. 10,000/-, Pandit Lekhram said in his book Takzib e Baraheen e Ahmadiyya that announcement of cash reward of Rs10,000/- by Mirza Qadiani, was only a lie and deceit because Mirza Qadiani,s total moveable and immoveable property was not worth Rs.10,000/- at that time because all men and women Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs knew the state of insolvency and indebtedness of Mirza Qadiani.

This can also be judged from the fact that after marriage with Nusrat Jehan, Mirza remained a permanent guest of his father in law. Mir Nasir Nawab was a Draught man at Canal Irrigation Department. Wherever he was transferred and moved, he found Mirza there as an uninvited guest. Mirza spent many years at Ludhiana and Ambala Cantonment, breaking the breads at his fathers in law,s house.

In those days Mirza obtained a loan on interest from a Hindu Mahajin (a money lender) of Ambala Cantonment. After publishing and country vide sale of Baraheen e Ahmadiyya Mirza Qadiani got financially eased out a bit, he wrote two letters to this Hindu Mahajin to get his loan settled, calculate and receive the amount payable by him.

But unfortunately for him, his letters reached to the hands of Hindu Ariyas of Qadian. These ariyas, just to show the world that Mirza took loan on interest whereas usury is not allowed in Islam, published these two letters. Mirza Qadiani wrote these letters to Bishan Singh Ambalvi. The publication of these two letters, infuriated Mirza Qadiani.

Clarifying his position, in his Book Shahna e Haq page 37- 39, Mirza Qadiani writes:-

“ in this objection the factual position is only that I have wrote to a Hindu shopkeeper to settle my old accounts which was long pending and receive money and return the loan security. Although I don,t exactly remember the text yet I think somewhere i had requested him not to disclose that he has been called for the settlement of loan. So that our enemy may not do false propaganda. Yet Ariyas with few bad character peoples of Qadiani stole these letters which is a theft and a cognizable offence under the criminal laws. Actually these evil minded, tried to steal some money from the cash box of Bishan Singh in his absence and got hold of these two letters. After which these criminals in collusion with each others published these letters just for the defamation of us. Lala Bishan Singh being a gentle man did not bring the case to the court as these were business letters, publishing of which is a cognizable offence. So in my opinion a suit should be filed against this theft”.

(Quoted by Rafiq Dilawari in his book Raees e Qadian).

The scans


#ahmadiyya

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

The scans

MGA made lots of excuses for the delay

MGA claims to write 300 arguments in support of Islam
“We wrote Braheen e Ahmadiyya after observing hundreds of defects and evils in the society. In the mentioned book, the truth of Islam was shinning in fact more than the sun because of 300 strong and sound arguments.” (Braheen e Ahmadiyya 2, Roohani Khazien 1, page 62)

MGA claims that he has instead written millions of arguments
“People said that the promise of giving arguments mentioned in Braheen is not fulfilled. Though there are millions of arguments in Braheen for the truth of Islam.”
(Badar,volume 6, No. 17, page 7-8, 25 April 1907) (Malfoozat volume 5 page 206, new edition)

MGA on the delay of the Braheen and other people’s investment money

In 1900, MGA and his team wrote: 

[RK, v 17, pp. 448-458; Arba`een Number 4]. The article is dated
December 1900. In this he censures his critics and claims that he has Divine support etc. Toward the end of the article is the following:

“””If I have received from you the payment for the price of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya then I invoke the oath of God Almighty upon you, in Whose presence you will be made to appear, that [you should] return all those four parts of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya to my custody and take your money back. Look, I make this open announcement that after this if you demand the price [refund] of Baraaheen-e-Ahmadiyya and, having shown [those parts] to some friend of mine, send [return] all four parts to me, as value payable, and if I, after receiving the four parts, do not pay their price, then [may] the curse of God [be] upon me. … And prior to this I have published three announcements, regarding the price [refund] of Baraaheen, which had the same content that I am prepared to return the price. [These people] should return all the four parts of my book and receive from me the few paltry coins that they are dying for. … [Dated] December 15, 1900 AD [RK, v 17, pp. 457-458; starts at last line of p. 457, above the marginal note; Arba`een Number 4].”””

In 1900, MGA promised 40 parts for his books Arbaeen, however, he only gives 4 calls it even
“Just as God had initially fixed 50 prayers then reduced it to 5 in place of 50, similarly according to the Sunnah of Rabb-e-Kareem, I reduce for the sake of viewers and pronounce number 4 as 40.” (Roohani Khazain vol.17, Arba’een No. 4, Page 442, http://www.alislam.org/ur…uhani-Khazain-Vol-17.pdf, PDF 477)

 

Up ↑