Search results


Shaykh al-Albaani called Lahori-Ahmadi’s as Muslims, then corrected himself and called Ahmadi’s as Kafir’s and Dajjal

Ahmadi’s are known to twist sources. In terms of Shaykh al-Albaani, they tried to prove that he considered Qadiani-Ahmadi’s as Muslims. However, it seems that this recording was old and was from an era when Shaykh al-Albaani thought that all Ahmadi’s were Lahori-Ahmadi’s. In fact, Shaykh Hamza Yousaf famously this same error many years ago. Both Shaykh’s were immediately corrected and agreed that Ahmadi’s (Qadiani and Lahori) were in fact Kafirs and representatives of a smaller Dajjal. On tik tok too. Continue reading “Shaykh al-Albaani called Lahori-Ahmadi’s as Muslims, then corrected himself and called Ahmadi’s as Kafir’s and Dajjal”

In 1891 in Delhi and in 1892, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad read his prayers behind Muslims who called him Kafir

MGA had a famous Delhi debate in 1891. MGA seems to have been forced to pray behind a Sunni imam. A year later in 1892, MGA prayed with Khwaja Kamaluddin in the Chaniyan mosque in Lahore behind Maulvi Rahim Bakhsh who had declared him a kafir, see Khawaja Kamaluddin, “Causes of Internal Dissensions in Ahmadiyya, Dec-1914). We should also remember that MGA had claimed prophethood already from 1880 to 1891, that’s 11 years, he was accused again in 1891. MGA responded by denying prophethood over and over again in 1891. Further, in Delhi, MGA cursed any claimant to prophethood and called them Kafir.

Links and Related Essay’s


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

In 1893, MGA was called a Kafir by a scholar from Baghdad, whilst in India

When MGA made his wild claims (1889 –1891), he also claimed to have been accepted in Arabia, Egypt and other arab lands. However, these were all the exaggerations of MGA and his team, they did this in terms of marketing, since no one could verify this support. Nevertheless, we have found a contemporary scholar from Baghdad, Al Syed Abdul Razzaq Qadri , who was staying at Hyderabad Deccan India, he seems to have read the book Aina Kamalat e Islam by MGA, but then gave the book back to its owner. The heretic expressions and false claims of MGA as mentioned in the book made him angry and shocked. In June 1893 he wrote letters to MGA calling him a liar, heretic and liable to be put to death with a sharp sword or killed by burning in the fire, a punishment for heretics. He asked MGA to send him a copy of the book so that he may write a comprehensive reply to what has been stated by MGA in AKI. In response to his letters, MGA did not send the book to him but wrote him a detailed reply comprising mostly of irrelevant personal glorification tall claims and flattery in arabic language. Most parts of arabic text include Quraanic verses and ahadis not having much relevance to the topic. Later on, in 1893 this reply of MGA was published in the shape of a 33 paged book titled as TOHFA E BAGHDAD. In the opening lines Mirza states he would respond to Abdul Razzaq Baghdadi in a civilized manner. However, towards the end of his letter his abusive language overpowered him and he used foul and obnoxious language. This is a short 33 page booklet in Arabic by MGA and his team.

He states that:

“Remember when my nails are pricked into the body of opponent it make him worst example of regret.”

“Very soon my Noor, (light) would shine and whole world would follow it except shameless peoples. When the day of punishment from my god would approach no dogs would remain alive nor their barking would be heard at that time”.

Another quote from Hidden Treasures, pages 115-116
(Arabic): I shall humiliate him who designs to humiliate you. We shall suffice against your scoffers. O Ahmad, God has blessed you. You did not let loose but it was Allah who let loose so that you should warn a people whose ancestors have not been warned and that the way of the
guilty ones might become manifest. Say: I have been commissioned and I am the first of believers. Proclaim: The truth has arrived and falsehood has vanished, falsehood always vanishes away. Every blessing is from Muhammad, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, then blessed is he who taught and he who has been taught. Say: If I have invented it, the sin of it is on me. They plan and Allah plans and Allah is the Best of planners. He it is who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth so as to make it prevail over every religion. There is no changing the words of Allah. I am with you so be you with Me wherever you might be. Be with Allah wherever you might be. Whatever direction might face there is the countenance of
Allah. You are the best people raised for the good of mankind and a source of pride for the believers. Despair not of the mercy of Allah. Hearken, the mercy of Allah is near. Hearken, the help of Allah is near. It will come to you from every distant track. Allah will help you from Himself. Men will help you whom We shall direct from heaven. There is no changing the words of Allah. Today you are in a position of high standing and trust with Us. They will say: ‘This is all his own invention’. Say: Allah is the Source of all this; and then leave them being beguiled by their sport. And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie against Allah? My mercy is on you in matters of the world as well as of faith. You are of those who are helped. (Tuhfa-e-Baghdad,
pp. 17-20, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 7, p. 21-23)



Mirza Mahmud Ahmad’s Speech In January 1913 Saying Only Those Are Kafir Who Brand Ahmadis As Kafir

During the period of Headship of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, when Mirza Mahmud Ahmad returned from performing the Hajj to Makkah, some welcome meetings were held for him in Qadian. One such meeting, attended by the Hazrat Maulana, was held on 14th January 1913, and was organized by the pupils of the Ahmadiyya religious school. At the request of the gathering Mirza Mahmud Ahmad made a speech about his journey. This event, along with the speech, is reported in Badr, 30 January 1913, pages 17-18.

In this speech he mentioned various questions and objections that he encountered from people during the journey and his answers to them. He relates one of these as follows:

“Then a man raised the objection that the Holy Prophet has said that in every century there will be a group in his Ummah who will receive salvation, but you (i.e., Ahmadis) say that after the Companions till today all Muslims have been kafir as they believed that Jesus is alive. I replied to him that we do not call non-Ahmadis as kafir because of their believing in Jesus to be alive. We call them kafir because they call the followers of Mirza sahib, who are Muslims, as kafir. Therefore, under the Holy Prophet’s order, we call them kafir because they call Muslims as kafir.” (p. 18, column 2)

This speech was, of course, made almost two years after his well-known article of April 1911, in which he declared all other Muslims to be kafir, all those who “decline to accept his claims”, “even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues”.

See the image of this part of the speech below.


The image of the complete report in Badr can be read in pdf format at this link. The report begins in the 3rd column of the first page (p. 17). I have marked appropriate points by red lines.

Links and Related Essays

When Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was ordered by the British Govt. to stop issuing death prophecies and stop calling people Kafir

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his team were always writing about the death of their opponents.  In 1897, Lekh Ram was murdered, in the same year, a young man was sent to kill Dr. Clark, MGA beat both of the cases, since he was above the law in British-IndiaHowever, Batalvi continued to fight court cases vs. MGA.  In the early part of 1899, MGA was forced to sign an agreement wherein he would refrain from issuing his death-prophecies and etc, and he would not call people Kafir or Dajjal.  Dard wrote about this event briefly.

A translation of what MGA was forced to sign

The Urdu scans

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

Ahmadis will be seen running around making many false arguments. They are brainwashed to learn these arguments, so thus, they never listen or seek to understand why people don’t believe in Ahmadiyya, aka the Mirza family business. Even Nawab Siddiq Hassan Khan tore of the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya and sent it back to Qadian in that condition, which enraged MGA. MGA was also accused of claiming prophethood by the Ahl-e-Hadith, only Batalvi defended him. I have written a full review of BA3 herein.
New research from Upal (2017) proves that MGA was called a Kafir even before his wildest claims!

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

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

Upal (2017) writes
Page 126

“””While Nawab Sidiq Khan had criticized Braheen because of its anti-Christian views, a number of other Muslim leaders saw in it claims that ran counter to their understanding of Islamic doctrine. These included Amritsar and Ludhiana’s Muslim leaders who issued a fatwa of kufr against Ahmad and went around India to collect signatures from other Muslims to the same effect (Batalavi, 1884: 170). Ahmad’s friend, Muhammad Hussain Batalavi, took upon himself to reply to this criticism through his Ishat-us-Sunnah magazine. He devoted a whopping one hundred and fifty three pages of Issue Nine and Ten to respond to each of these criticisms with well researched arguments. The amount of time, effort, money, and his personal capital, Batalavi spent on defending Ahmad reveals the extent of their ideological and social connections.

The review also reveals Batalavi’s perceptions of Ahmad. Batalavi clearly identifies with Ahmad as a fellow Punjabi Ahl-e-Hadith who is willing to spend considerable resources to defend Islam. He also sees Ahmad as more rural, less educated, less sophisticated, and less successful than himself. He sees Ahmad as “a Punjabi who has never had the opportunity” to live in the cosmopolitan cultural centers of Hindustan, “who hasn’t had the occasion to read Urdu literature” and therefore is not able to write “refined Urdu vernacular” (Batalavi, 1884: 346). There are also hints of a noble savage in Batalavi’s perceptions of Ahmad as he sees Ahmad as someone who is so overcome with religious fervor and zeal that “he’s unable to hold back” from including his unrelated revelations in the Braheen (thereby lengthening it and “increasing publication costs”), and someone who doesn’t understand that the “current civilization” demands refraining from crudely attacking one’s enemies (Batalavi, 1884: 346). Batalavi touts his personal knowledge of Ahmad’s beliefs beyond the words written in Braheen to defend Ahmad. Answering the accusation that some of Ahmad’s English revelations are grammatically incorrect, Batalavi says, “When I met the author who visited the city of Batala, where I am now, I asked him, ‘when you receive revelations in English, are you shown English alphabets or Persian alphabets?’ He responded that he is shown English sentences written in Farsi script. That’s when I became sure of my suggestion that the mistake lies in the author’s perception… and not the divine revelation” (Batalavi, 1884: 291). Ahmad’s ignorance of English and his miracle of English revelations will attract English speaking Christians and Hindus to Islam argues Batalavi. It’s clear that Batalavi sees the younger Ahmad as his junior, albeit more zealous, friend in need of assistance. Batalavi sees himself as heroically defending Ahmad with his superior knowledge of Quran, Hadith, and Islamic traditions. Since Batalavi does not see Ahmad as his competitor, he holds nothing back in defending him.”””
Two brothers Molana Abdullah and Molana Muhammad Ludhianvis issued a decree of excommunication against Mirza immediately after he issued first volumes of Baraheen Ahmadiyya

As per tarekh ahmadiyat, Baraheen part 1 was published in 1880. Molvi Muhammad and Molvi Abdul Aziz Ludhianvi issued Fatwa against Mirza on some of the contents of BA.

Scans from tarekh ahmadiyat 

In the Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, vol. 3, 1883, MGA claimed that 9:32 was revealed to himself

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

Other Quranic verses that MGA claimed for himself in BA4
——48:28, 61:09 and 9:32
Links and Related Essays

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

Did some Deobandi Scholars refuse to call MGA a Kafir??


Professor Johnathan Brown is getting trolled by many Ahmadis these days.  He had publicly posted a statement asking for people to show any Muslim scholar who considered Ahmadis as Muslims.  Well…some people have responded.  

Abdul Majid Dariyabad
The opinion I attribute to Abdul Majid Dariyabadi is from an exchange he had with Ashraf Ali Thanawi on interpreting Mirza Ghulam’s nubuwwah, which is documented in volume 6 of Thanawi’s Fatawa Imdadiyya.

Ubaydullah Sindhi
He considered Hakim Nur al-Din as the most prominent Qur’an mufassir of his time. The extracts are effusive with praise for him. Further, Sindhi considers Ahmedism a sociopolitical movement and refuses to entertain any theological pronouncements against them.

Sindhi and Dariyabadi actively, not passively, abstained and refused to do takfir of Ahmedis at a time when it had become a call for doctrinal mobilization. Dariyabadi’s exchange with Thanvi is over doctrine: he makes a case for using ta’wil to exculpate Ahmedis from denial of khatam un Nubuwwah. Let me share a secondary source recounting that exchange. As for Sindhi, if you look at the recent spate of writings by Deobandi scholars against him, he is repeatedly singled out for refusing to do takfir of Ahmedis. This refusal was not grounded in lack of knowledge or lack of interest. In the entire chapter from Professor Sarwar’s book, he praises Hakim Nur al-Din as a faqih, muhaddith and mufassir (not as a good kafir) and criticizes Ghulam Mirza as a weak intellectual, but not once does he do takfir of the latter. He even points to the futility of the entire Khatm un Nubuwwa movement which is based on doctrinal takfir of Ahmedis. I do take your point that Ahmedism itself was an evolving movement at that time.

Anwar Shah Kashmiri
Allamah anwar shah wrote ikfaar ul mulhideen in which he wrips apart the qadianis

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad says that any Muslim who believes in abrogation, is a Kafir

Izala Auham is an interesting book. Ahmadiyya leadership seems to be purposely lying about its publish date.  As we all know, this book came in 2 parts, the first part was published in 1890, before MGA claimed to be Esa (as), and before MGA claimed that Esa (as) was dead. In fact, Part-1 has some very controversial writings which prove that MGA was a liar and planned all of his claims. In this particular quote, MGA is claiming that ALL muslims who believe that “abrogation” occurred in Islam are Kafirs. However, as we all know, in 1891, 99% of the Muslim world believed in the theory of abrogation. In fact, Sir Syed had denied it in 1880, Noorudin and MGA copied him directly. It must be noted that the “Quran-only-type-of-Muslims” have existed since the inception of Islam. However, even those Muslims never declared anyone a Kafir for believing in hadith. And further, the quran specifically tells Muslims to follow both, the quran and hadith.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________The quote
Izala e Auham: Roohani Khaza’in Vol. 3:, p. 170, via See also, pages 61-62.

“””Gist of our faith is:  La Ilaha Illallah Muhammadur Rasulullah. (There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.)

Our belief, which we hold in this life here on earth and to which we will continue to adhere firmly till the time that we pass on to the next world, is that our spiritual leader and master, Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, is the Seal of the Prophets and the Best of the Messengers. At his hands religion has been perfected and blessing of Allah has been consummated which lead man to the right path and further on to God Himself. We hold this positive belief with absolute certainty that the Holy Quran is the seal of all Divine books and not an iota can be added to or subtracted from its prescribed teachings, inhibitions, commands and injunctions. There will be no revelation or word from God which may amend or abrogate or change or alter any of the injunctions of the Holy Quran. If anyone subscribes to such views, in our opinion, he ceases to belong to the body of believers and becomes an infidel thereby.

Links and Related Essays

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


Ahmadis consider all Muslims as terrorists and Kafirs

Its no secret.  Ahmadis hate Muslims, and with a passion.  I blame it on the Mirza family, in contrast, the Lahori-Ahmadis are much better.

Here are some screen shots of an Ahmadi calling me a terrorists on FB

Ahmadiyya Khalifas need to be arrested for murder
I live in California, I dont know anyone in Pakistan, like no one.  Why would an Ahmadi accuse me of terrorism?  On top of that..I am a veteran of the US Air Force…with 10 deployments from 99-2004, with major combat time.  Its impossible for me to be a terrorist.

Ahmadis are crazy and fanatical…more evidence will come.

Up ↑