Thorough research work on the Ahmadiyya Movement, #ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyat #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome

Search results

"Maulvi Abdullah"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Links and Related Essays—the-expected-mahdi

Click to access splitahmadiyyamovement.pdf

Click to access Truth-about-the-Split.pdf

Scan work

Here are more pages from his book:

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

The old tomb of Jesus website, Maulvi Abdullah, Khalifa Noorudin and MGA

Dear readers, about 10-15 years ago, some Ahmadi made a website called “tombofjesus”.  When the tomb of Yuz Asaf was discovered by some Ahmadi’s (1895 or 1896), it was argued by Maulvi Shaikh Abdullah (the lawyer) who was an inhabitant of Kashmir, that since this tomb was that of a prophet, that eliminated all muslims from the equation, thus it must belong to a Jewish prophet.  Muslims strictly believe that the HP was the final prophet, there were no more prophets to come. Muslims only had one prophet, on the other hand the jewish people had many prophets, in other words because of the concept of khatme-nubuwwat, this had to be a jewish prophet. When HMGA recieved this data he also used the ending of prophethood as his main argument in terms of proving that Yus Asaf was not a muslim.
Continue reading “The old tomb of Jesus website, Maulvi Abdullah, Khalifa Noorudin and MGA”

Who is Maulvi Shaikh Abdullah (June 1874-March 1965), the ex-Ahmadi?

Also known as Khan Bahadur Sheikh Abdullah Pleader was originally named as Thakur Das and born into a hindu family, he has been described as a Brahmin, not to be confused with the Reverend G.L. Thakur Das. The number one authority on his life and times is his own daughter, who wrote, “”A Woman of SubstanceThe Memoirs of Begum Khurshid Mirza”, (1918-1989), who was a famous film star in British India before the partition, her screen name was Renuka Devi. See pages 1–30. She explains how she would call her father as Papa Mian. She also explains how Maulvi Noorudin seems to have gotten him to convert to Islam in the 1889 era while Noorudin worked in Poonch. In 1889, he was at Ludhiana during MGA’s first bait ceremony and agreed and signed the bait form. Later on, Noorudin paid for him to complete his education at Aligarh, later on in the 1895–1899 era. It is worth noting that the whole story of Hazrat Eisa’s grave in Kashmir is based on the account of Molvi Abdullah Wakeel. Which he immediately protested to in his book.
Continue reading “Who is Maulvi Shaikh Abdullah (June 1874-March 1965), the ex-Ahmadi?”

Khalifa Nur-ud-Din lied about 72 witnesses and 570 ulema of Kashmir believing that Yuz Asaf=Eisa (as)

After MGA wrote Raz-e-Haqiqat and lied to the world about Yuz Asaf (1898), MGA and his team decided to send Khalifa Nur ud Din to Mohalla Khanyar, Srinagar, Kashmir on a fact finding expedition. You can listen to our sister Pious Spirit explaining this in her video on the Shamd ud Din RB channel (at 18:58 she explains Maulvi Abdullah). This is very odd, since it seems like Maulvi Abdullah left Ahmadiyya shortly after his letter was published in Raz-e-Haqiqat. Ahmadiyya sources tell us that in 1899, MGA and his team began writing the famous “Jesus in India” (it was published as incomplete book after MGA died in 1908). MGA published an announcement entitled, Al-Ishtihar al-Ansar (Announcement – the Helpers) on October 4, 1899 (See Mujadid-e-Azim, online english abridged version, page 835. However, in this announcement, MGA was telling the world that Khalifa Nur ud Din Jamooni had already went to Mohalla Khanyar, Srinagar, Kashmir and obtained the testimony of 556 ulema (see the Friday Sermon of Mirza Masroor Ahmad of 5-25-12 at the 33:28 to 35:19 mark, we have condensed this into a tik tok too)(see also Mujadid-e-Azim, online english abridged version. In 2012, Mirza Masroor said it was 560 ulema. Dard also mentions this announcement of 10-4-1899 (see pages 684-685). Dard claims that the expedition didn’t leave until 11-12-1889, thus contradicting the Lahori-Ahmadi’s. Nevertheless, 3 years, MGA and his team published “Al-Huda Wa-Tabsirato Liman Yara” (arabic only) and claimed that Khalifa Nur ud Din had 72 witnesses and even wrote their names who were supposedly testifying that Yuz Asaf= Eisa (as). In fact, in “Al-Huda Wa-Tabsirato Liman Yara”, MGA and his team of editors claimed that claimed that 100,000 people are witnesses that Yuz Asaf = Eisa (as).

In 1945, Maulvi Abdullah popped back into the story. He seems to have written a letter to Qadian wherein he stated that the letter which he wrote to MGA had been interpolated by MGA and his team of writers, he was a Bahai at this point and wanted to set the record straight (see all the scans in the below). Maulvi Abdullah said that he wrote this letter in response to an article by the Al-Furqan of 1944, wherein it was argued that generation after generation of Muslims believed Yuz Asaf= Eisa (as)(see Pious Spirit at the 47:56 mark). Nevertheless, Maulvi Abdullah says that the Khalifa never responded to his letter. However, in an Ahmadiyya newspaper, “The Furqan” of February 1946 (see page 40), (see Pious Spirit at the 36:25 mark), the Khalifa wrote that the denial of Maulvi Abdullah makes no difference in the case of Yuz Asaf = Eisa (as), many companions of MGA went on a fact finding expedition and also confirmed that Yuz Asaf = Eisa (as). The Khalifa continued that this knowledge {that Yuz Asaf = Eisa (as)} has been passes down through many generations of the families that live in Mohalla Khanyar. Thus, the 2nd Khalifa was claiming that MGA was wrong as he quoted Maulvi Abdullah’s letter in Raz-e-Haqiqat. Maulvi Abdullah goes on to state that the majority of the Muslims and ulema of Kashmir consider MGA to be a Kafir. At the end, Maulvi Abdullah seems to have been a rogue-Lahori-Ahmadi, he did eventually convert to Bahaism before he died. Maulvi Abdullah also says that the list of 72 witnesses was his work, and not that of Khalifa Nur ud Din, thus, proving that MGA and his team fabricated the expedition of Khalifa Nur ud Din, moreover, in those survey’s that were given out, it was never written that Eisa (as) was buried in Yuz Asaf’s grave, thus, destroying the Ahmadiyya position. Maulvi Abdullah also seems to have gotten 55 of the 72 to attest to the fact that they don’t believe that Yuz Asaf= Eisa (as) (see Pious Spirit at 22:04).

Continue reading “Khalifa Nur-ud-Din lied about 72 witnesses and 570 ulema of Kashmir believing that Yuz Asaf=Eisa (as)”

Yahya Khan, Shams ud Din’s cousin EXPOSED!!!!!!!

Watch my video on this herein.
Ever since Shams ud Din came out and exposed Ahmadiyya, the Ahmadiyya Movement has sent his cousin (Yahya Khan) to begin a verbal battle. Shams ud Din presented new research on Yuz Asaf and stunned the world of Ahmadiyya. This work hasn’t been responded to by any Ahmadi in 3-4 years and nor do they care to. I recently engaged Yahya Khan on whatsapp wherein I asked him as to why he has never responded. The problem with Yahya Khan is that he has been taught to be competitive in his speech. He isn’t capable of having an honest and candid conversation. As I began to ask him questions, he kept asking me if I had answered all the queries by Christians vs. Islam. He asked this about 10 times, he was trying to say that he didn’t have to answer to all the objections vs. Ahmadiyya. He kept trying to assert that Ahmadi’s only want to argue the alleged death of Eisa (As). He is right, this is the official Ahmadiyya policy, they don’t even encourage Ahmadi’s to read the books of MGA and discover his other writings. Yahya Khan doesn’t know Islam or Ahmadiyya, most of his channel is him slandering Muslims. He has his own channel (Real Islam Channel) and regularly joins his boyfriends at the Tiryaq ul Quloub channel. He kept deflecting, I kept pressing him on Yuz Asaf, he continued to deflect, he then questioned by ability to read the books of MGA. My urdu, the percentage of books in English. He doesn’t know that Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya 1-5 and Haqiqatul Wahy is about 15-20% of MGA’s writings. Since most books are very small booklets. Even BA-5 is a mash up of 4 books.He kept trying to say that since I hadn’t read MGA’s books in urdu, I don’t know them, he even claimed that BA 1-5 and HW weren’t 20%, which was a rough estimate by me. He kept doing point making, he is rude, he was mad when I mentioned Shams ud Din’s research, he immediately got jealous.

After the initial sputtering of Yahya Khan, he finally commented on Shams ud Din’s work.
Again, he said,  Yuz asaf isn’t a main concern of Ahmadis. He said that MGA called the Yuz Asaf life story as a fable, however, MGA never said that. It was Maulvi Abdullah, who later became a Bahai, in fact, his testimony is MGA’s #1 source of information. Then he said, if MGA quoted the letter, this means that he agrees with it. However, this contradicts MGA and british prostitutes in British-India, wherein MGA quoted a newspaper and didn’t give his own comments. However, in 1902, MGA tells the public to go and read Ikmal ud Din. So MGA is asserting that Ikmal ud Din is an authentic book.  The Injeel of Yuzasaif was found? MGA asserted this also in 1898, which is a lie, Yahya Khan was stuck again. He forgets that MGA claimed to have angels with him, ruhul-amin and etc. Yahya Khan also doesnt know that after MGA died, Jesus in India was published and the word Yuz Asaf doesn’t even exist in that book.

Continue reading “Yahya Khan, Shams ud Din’s cousin EXPOSED!!!!!!!”

In 1898-1902, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed that Yuz Asaf brought the Injeel to India per “Kamal-ud-Din WA Itmam ul Naimat”

In 1898, in Raz e Haqiqat, MGA and his team of writers stole the Yuz Asaf theory from “Shahzadah Yuz Asaf” by Mirza Safdar Ali (1896). In this book, MGA and his team of writers published a letter from Maulvi Abdullah (who quit Ahmadiyya later and became a Bahai), in this letter, Maulvi Abdullah said that “Kamal-ud-Din WA Itmam ul Naimat”, has only fairytales and fake stories. MGA even claimed that Yuz Asaf brought the Injeel to Kashmir and it had been found in Tibet (See Raz-e-Haqiqat, online english edition). 4 years later, in an arabic only book, AL-HUDA WA-TABSIRATO LIMAN YARA (1902), MGA and his team wrote that Yuz Asaf brought the Injeel to Kashmir and if anyone was interested in seeing this data, they should consult, “Kamal-ud-Din WA Itmam ul Naimat”. In the same year, via Tofha Golarvia, they said the same (see the ref in the below).

MGA and his team of writers also seem to have quoted “Ikmal-ud-Din Wa Itmam-un-Ni’mat” aka
“Kamal-ud-Din WA Itmam ul Naimat” in Ijaz e Ahmadi (1902) and claimed that it referred to the double eclipses of 1894-1895 and a sign of the Mahdi.
Continue reading “In 1898-1902, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed that Yuz Asaf brought the Injeel to India per “Kamal-ud-Din WA Itmam ul Naimat””

The Shams ud Din Challenge (2021)

Our brother, Shams ud Din has the Ahmadiyya Jamaat worried. They already told his cousin, Yahya Khan (the pharmacist) that he must start an open war with him. This has been going for 2-3 years. Recently, Shams ud Din seems to have posted 3 questions as a challenge to Ahmadi’s. Shams ud Din’s cousin, Yahya Khan wasted over 10 hours of video discussing terms of a debate that he doesn’t want to have. Yahya Khan should have simply given the answers to these questions. However, he is being told what to do from behind a curtain, the Ahmadiyya Jamaat is in-fact telling him what to do. The issue is that MGA quoted 23:50 in terms of Yuz Asaf= Eisa (as), and thus, told a huge lie. There are no hadith about 23:50 or any additional corroborating info from any islamic source that connects 23:50 with Yuz Asaf. 

Continue reading “The Shams ud Din Challenge (2021)”

The most important question for #Ahmadis, did Waffa happen in India? Or Israel?

Ahmadi’s run around the world and want to debate Muslims on the death of Esa (as). However, they hide their true beliefs, which are that Waffa happened to Esa (as) in India. This is a ridiculous belief in terms of Islamic literature. NO Muslim ever in the history of the world claimed that Waffa happened in India. Watch my video on this herein. Ahmadi’s even twist 23:50 and claim that this verse is about the death of Esa (as), however, this verse is about the birth of Esa (as), not his death. Watch my video explanation on this. Continue reading “The most important question for #Ahmadis, did Waffa happen in India? Or Israel?”

In the 1990’s, did lots of Ahmadi’s in Pakistan left Ahmadiyya and became Baha’i’s?

We can all agree on the similarities between Baha’i’s and Ahmadi’s. In fact, Maulvi Abdullah was an Ahmadi and converted to Baha‘ism in the 1940’s. It is also rumored that in the late 1920s or early 1930s Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had to expel some members of his Jamaat who were found out to be secret Bahais and were using the Qadiani Jamaat platform to propagate their own beliefs (See the comments of Zahid Aziz). One of them had even become either editor or deputy editor of Al-Fazl.

In 1886, in Surma Chasma Arya, MGA claimed that Muhammad (saw) was a manifestation of God. In 1904, the Al-Hakam claimed that Bahaulah claimed to be the Messiah. In 1904, in Lecture Lahore, MGA and his team mentioned how while going through the 27th August, 1904, edition of Paisa Akhbar, I learned that a gentleman named Hakim Mirza Mahmood Ahmad Irani, who is a follower of someone claiming to be the Messiah, is presently in Lahore and desires to have a Mubahala [prayer-duel] with me. The ROR (english) also discussed the Bahai’s, more info to come.
Continue reading “In the 1990’s, did lots of Ahmadi’s in Pakistan left Ahmadiyya and became Baha’i’s?”

Up ↑