Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"Mirza Bashir Ahmad"

In 1914, Mirza Bashir Ahmad simply called MGA a Mujadid, not a Prophet—Review of Religions of June 1914

Intro
In the Review of Religions of June 1914, Mirza Bashir Ahmad (the younger brother) has described being Mujaddid of the 14th century as the mission of Hazrat Mirza sahib. See this link.

 

Mirza Bashir Ahmad did Takfir on all Muslims and Lahori-Ahmadis (1916)

This was taken from the Lahori-Ahmadiyya website: http://www.ahmadiyya.org/qadis/takfir-kalimat-ul-fasl.htm

The Qadiani Jama‘at has placed on its http://www.alislam.org website, in December 2007, the book Kalimat-ul-Fasal by Mirza Bashir Ahmad published by them in 1915, and written only a few months after the Split of 1914. Below is a link to the book:

www.alislam.org/urdu/pdf/Kalma-tul-Fasal.pdf

The author, a son of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was the younger brother of the then khalifa of their community Mirza Mahmad Ahmad. In this book are expressed, in the most stark and unambiguous language, those highly dangerous and extreme beliefs which were entirely unacceptable to many leading Ahmadis, who thereupon formed the Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha‘at Islam in Lahore to preserve the real teachings and mission of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Its online publication is surprising because for several decades, starting in the 1950s but more particularly since 1974 when Ahmadis were declared non-Muslim in Pakistan in the state constitution, the Qadiani Jama‘at had been distancing itself from these repugnant doctrines.

In summary, those objectionable doctrines are that:

  1. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet and messenger of Allah in a real sense just as Moses, Jesus and the Prophet Muhammad were prophets of God.
  2. All Muslims who do not follow him are actually unbelievers just as Jews and Christians are unbelievers in Islam.
  3. In practical relations in religious matters Ahmadis must treat other Muslims as being non-Muslims.

We quote below some extracts from this book showing how it presents the above beliefs. The original Urdu text is displayed below as images from the online book.

(Note: The version of this book on the Qadiani Jama‘at website has been taken from the March-April 1915 issue of the Urdu Review of Religions. The page references given here are to that version. The same pages from the magazine were also reproduced as a separate book, in which the number of each page is 90 less than the corresponding page number in the magazine.)

Mirza Bashir Ahmad begins a chapter as follows:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 107

“In this chapter some Quranic verses will be mentioned which show that Allah has made it obligatory to declare faith in all messengers and has called as kafir those who do not consider it necessary to believe in all prophets.” (p. 107)

After quoting such a verse, he concludes:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 110

“Thus, according to this verse, every such person who believes in Moses but not in Jesus, or believes in Jesus but not in Muhammad (peace be upon him), or believes in Muhammad but not in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but a staunch kafir and is excluded from the fold of Islam.” (p. 110)

It is declared here that all Muslims who do not belong to the Ahmadiyya Movement are non-Muslims because they do not believe in Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet, just as Jews and Christians are non-Muslims for not believing in the Holy Prophet Muhammad as a prophet. Such a Muslim is declared as not merely a kafir but a pukka kafir, meaning staunch or firm kafir.

Later on he writes:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 119

“It is a basic point that as the Promised Messiah is a messenger and prophet of God, he therefore has all the rights that other prophets have, and to deny him is the same as to deny any other prophet of Allah.” (p. 119)

Later in the book, Mirza Bashir Ahmad replies to several objections against his standpoint that the above were the beliefs of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

One of these objections is: If he is a prophet as the Holy Prophet Muhammad was prophet, then why did he not require his followers to recite a kalima in his name? Mirza Bashir Ahmad declares this to be a foolish objection and writes:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 158

“The fool does not realise that ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ was put in the Kalima because he is the crowning head of the prophets and the Khatam-un-nabiyyin. By mentioning his name all other prophets are implicitly included. There is no need to mention the name of everyone separately. Admittedly, the coming of the Promised Messiah has created one difference, and that is that before his coming the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’ included (besides the Holy Prophet) only the prophets before the Holy Prophet Muhammad, but after the coming of the Promised Messiah one more prophet was added to the significance of these words. … In other words, the same Kalima is still to be used for admission into Islam, the difference merely being that the coming of the Promised Messiah has added one more messengerto the significance of the words ‘Muhammad is the messenger of Allah’.” (p. 158; underlining here is ours).

It is plainly stated here that although members of the Qadiani Jama‘at proclaim the same Kalima in words as other Muslims, namely, “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah”, but they actually have in mind something more added to it, over and above what other Muslims believe. How can they then complain if the opponents of the Ahmadiyya Movement accuse them of reciting a different kalima?

Relations with other Muslims

Close to the end of this treatise, Mirza Bashir Ahmad answers the objection that if his standpoint is true, then why did the Promised Messiah still permit his followers to have those relations with other Muslims which are required exclusively between one Muslim and another, and are not allowed with non-Muslims. He replies:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 169

“This objection shows the lack of knowledge of the objector. We find that the Promised Messiah has permitted us to have only that relationship with non-Ahmadis which the Holy Prophet Muhammad permitted with Christians.” (p. 169)

He goes on to give examples of how Ahmadis can only have those relations with non-Ahmadis which Islam allows Muslims to have with Christians or with Jews:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 169
Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 170

“… If you say we are permitted to marry their (other Muslims’) daughters, I say we are also permitted to marry daughters of Christians. If you ask, why do we say salam to non-Ahmadis, the answer is that it is proved from Hadith that sometimes the Holy Prophet Muhammad even said salam to Jews in response to them. … Therefore, in every way the Promised Messiah has separated us from other Muslims, and there is no relation which Islam requires exclusively between Muslims which has not been prohibited to us (with other Muslims).” (p. 169–170)

According to this explanation, when a member of the Qadiani Jama‘at says assalamu alaikum to a non-Ahmadi he does so only as he would to a Jew or Christian in some circumstances, only as a return of greeting, and not as a sign of the common bond of the brotherhood of Islam.

He then replies to another question under the same objection about relations with other Muslims:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 170

“The objection arises here as to why the marriage of a woman who is an Ahmadi is not dissolved if her husband is a non-Ahmadi, or why is the inheritance of a deceased Ahmadi allowed to his non-Ahmadi son when a kafir is not allowed to inherit from a Muslim.” (p. 170)

In his reply he tells us that there are two kinds of commandments in Islam: those to be carried out by the individual and those that can only be carried out by the government or the law of the land. Then he writes:

Kalimat-ul-fasal, p. 170

“As matters of inheritance and dissolution of marriage fall under the law of the government, this is why the Promised Messiah wrote nothing about these. If he had possessed governmental power, he would have issued the same orders in these matters as well.” (p. 170)

Just ponder over this last statement! It is declaring, openly and bluntly, that if the Head of the Qadiani Jama‘at were to have the power to make laws in a country he would issue orders to the effect that non-Ahmadis should be treated as non-Muslims under the law of the land. So on what grounds can the Qadiani Jama‘at complain when they themselves are declared as non-Muslims under the law of the land in Pakistan?

All these extreme beliefs came back to haunt the Qadiani Jama‘at with a vengeance. They were declared non-Muslim in the law of the land by a government of non-Ahmadis in Pakistan in 1974 in exactly the same way as Mirza Bashir Ahmad has here proclaimed that his Jama‘at would do to non-Ahmadis if it should possess political power. They are prevented by the anti-Ahmadiyya groups from using or displaying the kalima because, it is alleged, they add Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in it by implication. Then there are the widely-reported assalamu alaikum court cases in Pakistan in which members of the Qadiani Jama‘at have been charged by the police with the crime of using this greeting, which is meant for use by Muslims. As quoted above, according to Mirza Bashir Ahmad when members of his Jama‘at say assalamu alaikum to other Muslims it does not mean they are regarding them as Muslims.

No doubt, all these repressive legal restrictions against them are highly unjust and a complete travesty of the teachings of Islam, and deserve total condemnation. But the Qadiani Jama‘at leadership themselves believe in directing the same unjust measures against all other Muslims.

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

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

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

Ahmad, the Messenger of the Latter days: By Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (1924)


Intro

We have found another rare book by Ahmadiyya leadership, its from 1924 and gives us many clues as to the life of MGA.

MGA’s family only moved back to Qadian after Ranjit Singh died, i.e., 1839
Ahmadiyya leadership has lied for years and years about the birth-year of MGA.  MGA himself told the world that he was born in 1839 or 1840, he wrote that in 1897, in his famous Kitab ul Barriya.  In this book, Mahmud Ahmad is trying his best to argue that MGA was born in 1836 or 1837, however, he quotes Lepel Griffin’s famous, “Punjab Chiefs”, wherein Mr. Griffin tells us that it was only after Ranjit Singh Died in June of 1839 that MGA’s family was allowed to move back to Qadian.  Mahmud Ahmad, the Ahmadi Khalifa, thus disproves himself.  Mahmud Ahmad seems to quote the 1909 edition of Lepel’s Punjab Chiefs, which has a different name, “Revised as Chiefs and Families of note in the Punjab (1909)”.

Mahmud Ahmad’s quotation
(See page 6) “Mention must be made of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, younger son of Ghulam Murtaza and founder of the remarkable religious movement known as the Ahmadiyya.  Born in 1839, he received an excellent education, and in 1891 he declared himself to be the Promised Mahdi or Messiah of the Muslim faith…..”

Mahmud Ahmad lies about MGA being carried by Train to Batala
I have already covered this issue here: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/02/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-died-of-an-opium-overdose-1908/.

Mahmud Ahmad doesnt mention anything about a death certificate at all.  That story seems to have began its circulation after 1924, as Ahmadis were covering up the indiscretions of  MGA.  The truth is….MGA’s body was carried from Lahore all the way to Qadian (see Muhammad Ali, 1916).

The PDF book
Ahmad The Messenger of the Latter Days

Bashir Ahmad Misri, Murdered Multani were Correct about Mirza Mahmud in 1937 – Viceroy Papers

Please accept my apologies for the long title. The events of 1937 in Qadian went all the way to the Governor of the Punjab and the Governor-General (Viceroy) of India. Recently released documents by the Indian government show that:

  • Abdur Rahman Masri and Fakhruddin Multani did accuse Mirza Mahmud of moral turpitude of a sexual nature
  • Mirza Mahmud had no response but to incite violence against them up to the point that the Deputy Commissioner Gurdaspur was thinking about charging him.
  • Incitement led directly to the murder of Fakhruddin Multani
  • Deputy Commissioner Gurdaspur had to threaten Mirza Mahmud in order to get his tone down and renounce violence
  • Masri and Multani were guarded by police and authorities advised them to leave Qadian for their own safety
  • Section 144 (unlawful assembly) was imposed in Qadian for many days and mass prosecution under section 107 (incitement, same charge that was brought against Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) was contemplated

See this page from the original.  Other pages and complete description is at Fakhruddin Multani’s page, and Masri’s account.

Bashir Ahmad Misri’s Mubahila with Mirza Tahir Ahmad

Taken from: http://ahmedi.org/eng-articles/misrimubahila.html

1st January 1989
Al Hafiz B.A. Masri
7 Hurst Road East Molesey Surrey KT8 9AQ England
To Mr. Tahir Ahmad Mirza Amir Jamaat Ahmadiyya 16-18 Gressenhall Road London SW18 5QL England

1.Your secretary Mr. Rashid Ahmad Chaudhry, has sent me a letter (undated) by Recorded Delivery daring me on your behalf to accept your challenge of Mubahilla which you gave to the opponents of Qadianism on the 10th June 1988. This letter, along with a copy your challenge reached me on the 5th of August 1988.

2. It gives me great pleasure to accept your challenge and to avail myself of this opportunity to expose the pious fraud of Qadianism once and for all.

3. Mubahilla is a sort of ordeal by prayer in which two parties beseach Allah to establish the truth or falsity of matter under dispute. Since Mubahilla is a grave matter of utmost solemnity, it is expedient that we should settle its articles and convenants directly between the two of us instead of negotiating through our secretaries to avoid any possibility of ambiguity or incertitude in the final result of it.

4. On page 4 of your challenge you have conceded that those who accept your challenge are free to single out any one clause out of the articles you have listed. I therefore choose to accept the articles which you have written on page 2 in these words: “The second aspect of this Mubahilla concerns the utterly false accusations and the mischieveous propaganda against the Ahmadiyya community.”

5. Since my accusations are about matters of moral turpitude and sexual promiscuity of a nature which is not generally thought fit to be mentioned to ears polite, it needs to be explained as to why I feel justified and morally obliged in making these immodest accusations as issue for this ‘Mubahila’.

6. Normally no individual has a right to sit in judgement on another individual. However when a person assume a position of trust and moral responsibility he becomes personalized as an institution and forfeits his prerogative as an individual. In any civilized society, Doctors of Medicine, School Teachers, Office Bearers of Destitute Homes and Orphanges, the functionaries of all such institutions become open to moral and ethical censorship, in addition to Statutory Law. One of the reasons why religious charlatans and impostors remain unconstrained from the exploition of simple and gullible people is that the Governments of Secular States do not feel inclined to interfere in matters spiritual. It is left to society at large to regulate the affairs of their respective religious institutions and establishments.

7. My second justification is that your Qadiani clique started violating the civilized norms of sexual ethics not as individuals but as an institution in the name of Islam. Stop calling yourselves as Muslims, give yourselves any appellation as a new religion and Muslims will gladly leave you alone.

8. My accusations are not against the generality of the Qadiani community. There are many among them who believe in the Qadiani doctrines honestly and sincerely, albeit mistakenly. We do not start kicking against the people of other faiths on the grounds of doctrinal differences. It is only when their lifestyle becomes a menace to the ethical fabric of a society that people put their foot down. If there are degenerates in this world who are willing to sacrifice the honour and chastity of their womenfolk and young boys out of devotion to the religious thugs, good luck to them. However the moot point of contention arises when unsuspecting and innocent victims fall prey to such deceits. In that situation you feel justified in shouting from the roof-tops: Snake in the grass!

9. It is with this sence of moral responsibility and genuine solicitude that I accept your challenge of Mubahilla to establish whether the following accusations are true or false. MY CLAIM THAT THEY ARE TRUE IS BASED ON MY PERSONAL KNOLEDGE GAINED DURING MY LIFE IN QADIAN WHERE I WAS BORN AND BROUGHT UP UNTIL 1937, WHEN I DENOUNCED QADIANISM. THE OATH OF MUBAHILA

10. You shall declare on oath, in the words laid down below, that the under-mentioned statements made by me are false to the best of your knowledge; and I shall declare oath in the same words that they are true to the best of my knowledge:

11. “I Mirza Tahir Ahmad (Son of Mirza Basheer-ud-Din Mahmoud Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement), the present Amir of the Qadiani section of the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, declare it on oath in the name of Allah that to the best of my knowledge, the under-mentioned statements made by Al-Hafiz B-A Masri, s/o Sheikh Abdul Rahman Masri, are false and that I have no knowledge to the effect that they are true. I pray and beseech Allah that in case I am perjuring myself by willingly uttering this false evidence while on oath, I may be cursed by Allah and die within one year from the date of uttering and signing of this oath in the presence of six witnesses, three of whom shall be selected by me and three shall be selected by the said Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri.”
Signed by: six witnesses Signed by Mirza Tahir Ahmad .

12.”I, Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri (s/o Sheikh Abdul Rahman Masri), declare it on oath the name of Allah that, to the best of my knowledge, the under-mentioned statements made by me are true. I further declare it on oath in the name of Allah that Mirza Tahir Ahmad, the present Amir of the Qadiani section of the Ahmiadiyya Jamaat knows that they are true. I pray and beseech Allah that in case I am perjuring myself by wilfully uttering this false evidence while on oath, I may be cursed by Allah and die within one year from the date of uttering and signing of this oath in the presence of six witnesses three of whom shall be selected by the said Mirza Tahir Ahmad.”
Signed by: Six Witnesses Signed by Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri. THE ADJURATIONS OF MUBAHILA

13. I, Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri, give this evidence on oath in the name of Allah that: Your father, Mirza Basheer ud-din Mahmoud Ahmad (the eldest of the three sons of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who was the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, the Second Khalifa of the Qadiani section of the Ahmadiyya Jama’at) was a debaucher, fornicator, adulterer and incestuous i.e. guilty of habitual sexual intercourse even with women of near kin who are declared by not only the Islamic Shari’ah but also by all scriptural religions as inviolable (Haram). Your paternal uncle, Mirza Basheer Ahmad ( the second of the three sons of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) was a homosexual with a great sexual propensity for young boys. Your paternal uncle, Mirza Shareef Ahmad (the third of the three sons of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) was a homosexual with a great propensity for your boys. Your elder brother, Mirza Nasir (s/o Mirza Basheer- ud-Din Mahamoud Ahmad, grandson of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and the third Khalifa) was a fornicator and homosexual. Your maternal grand-uncle, Mir Muhammad Ishaque (brother of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s wife) held an oligarchial and celebrated position in the Qadiani community and was honoured with the title of Muhaddith, i.e. authority on Hadith (Sunnah and Tradition). He was a homosexual. As the man-in-charge of the orphanage in Qadian, the young orphan boys were helplessly at the mercy of his perversions.

14. I could go on listing many more names of people who held very high positions in the Qadiani Establishment, using their prestige and power to gratify their sensuous and perverted desires free of moral censure. However the real reason for writing these sordid details, even though it is an obscene subject, is to refute your assertion that the accusations are utterly false” and a “mischievous propaganda” against the “Ahmadies” while you know fully well that they are true.

15. As it is, I have confined the list of people in the above accusation to the Mirza family only in order not to confiuse the issue and thus to leave any loop-hole in it for to wriggle out of this Mubahila. Even within the Mirza family, I have left out many names of the second and the third generations for the same reason. The main reason for not including women of this family in this list is out of comassion. Although some of them have played a very active and willing role in this abomination and fraud, I consider them by and large as being the victims rather than the cluprits. Most of them had no choice and deserve pity.

16. The circumscription of the period of Mubahila to one year is meant to achieve definitive verdict of Allah. Leaving it open to generalities and to an unspecified period as you have done in your challenge, would leave the outcome of the Mubahila inconclusive. However, I am open to suggestions by you for any alteration in the span of time.

17. In case you try to seek shelter under the plea that you cannot vouch under oath for the good or bad moral conduct of those who are dead, I would point out that you have already agreed in principle to do so, on page 8 of your challenge in these words: “Since the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement is no longer in this world and it is neccessary that there should be a party to represent him, I and the Ahmadiyya community declare it with all our hearts and without any scruples that we accept this challenge of Mubahilla on his dehalf.”

18. If you are prepared to accept the challenge of Mubahilla on behalf of your dead grandfather, there is no earthly reason why you should not be able to accept a similar Mubahilla on behalf of your dead father, dead uncles and dead brother.

19. Apart from this the moot point at issue on which I am accepting your challenge of Mubahilla is not that you should represent your ancestors mentioned in paragraph 13. Your are being put on oath to vouch for yourself whether or not it is within your knowledge that your ancestors named in that paragraph were morally depraved and sexual debauchees. The reson why it has become necessary to drag these obscenities into the open is to prove that you as the head of a so-called religious denomination, know all these facts to be true and yet you are hypocritically misleading your followers and others and perpetuating the fraud of Qadianism in the name of Islam.

20. I hope you will appreciate that, by accepting your challenge of Mubahillah. I am giving you a unique chance of proving once and for all that my accusations are false. What you have to do is simply to declare on oath, in the words prescribed above in paragraph 11, that you have no knowledge that my above-stated accusations in paragraph 13 are true. I assertively insist that you know without a shadow of doubt that my accusations are true, so much so that on my part I am prepared unhesitatingly to stake not only my cerdibility but my life as well on it. More than that I am prepared to lay myself open to the eternal curse of Allah on myself, in case I am wrong or uttering a falsehood.

21. Mr Tahir Ahmad! Let us take our case to the Court of Allah, the Supreme Judge of the Universe and leave it to him to adjudge between us.
Signed: B.A. Masri. Al-Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri.
P.S. Since there are millions of Muslims who do not know Urdu,I would request you to do all your correspondence on this subject in English, which can be translated later into Urde, Arabic and other languages.
B.A. Masri.
BY REGISTERED POST To Mr. Tahir Ahmad Mirza Amir Jama’at Ahmadiyya 16-18 Gressenhall Road London SW18 5QL England.

A REMINDER It is noted that you have neglected to respond to my letter, accepting your challenge of Mubahilla. This was mailed to you by registered post on the 18th August 1988, and two months later there is still no reply from you. In case I do not receive a reply from you within two weeks, I shall have to make it known to the Muslim world that your challenge of Mubahilah was nothing more than a cheap con game and a confidence trick at which you people have become quite adept.
I would like to make this point clear that, until the oath of Mubahila has been pronounced and Allah’s Judgement has been invoked solemnly by both the parties, the Mubahilah does not become operative. I have to request you, in your own interest, not to try to have me killed, as your predecessors used to do when cornered in similar circumstances. Otherwise the consequences for you and your minions would be extremely disastrous.
The whole Muslim world has come to know what kind of people you are. They are getting fed up with your Qadiani fraud in the name of Islam and are not prepared to put up with it any longer. I am still hoping against hope that you would tell me when and how you would like both of us take the oath of Mubahila.

Signed: Al Hafiz Basheer Ahmad Masri.

 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed that his coming to Earth was revealed in Surah Fatiha!!! Review of Religions, Feb 1924



Intro

My team and I have written about the wild claims of MGA many times.  We have written how MGA was most likely planning on claiming to be a law-bearing prophet if he had lived to 1911.  Further, in the era of 1900 to possibly 1935, Ahmadi’s considered MGA to be equal to Muhammad (saw) (nauzobillah) and vice versa.  This article is a translation of some arabic writings of MGA, that seem to have been recovered in this era, and then translated by M. Rahim Baksh.  The Review of Religions, was edited by the Khalifa’s younger brother, Mirza Bashir Ahmad, who was the only college educated child of the mirza family by 1924.

Highlights of this article
1—MGA claims that his coming was actually revealed to Muhammad (saw) in Surah Fatiha.
2—MGA claims to be the final brick, in the house of prophets, not Muhammad (saw).
3—MGA claims that the Jews are an accursed people and that Muslims have become just like the Jews.

The article
Prophecy Contained in The Opening Chapter of The Quran

Eye-witnesses state that Ahmadis had revolvers during the Rabwah incident, Pakistan Times, June 19th, 1974



Intro

We have written about the Rabwah incident at length, see here: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/26/the-samdani-commission-interviewed-mr-arbab-alam-president-of-the-student-union-nishter-medical-college-he-was-an-eye-witness-pakistan-times-june-20th-1974/

and here

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

Read this to get caught up on info: https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/03/abdul-sami-zafar-tells-the-inside-story-on-the-may-29th-1974-rabwah-train-attacks/

 

 

Our notes from the testimony of eye-witnesses
1—Ahmadis planned this attack.
2—Ahmadis boarded the train and attacked defense-less teenagers with weapons.
3—A few Ahmadis were carrying revolvers.
4—This was a  terrorist attack ordered by the Khalifa

The story from the Pakistan Times   

“””””””Mr. Arbab Alam, Final year student of the Nishter Medical College, Multan and President of the Students Union of his college, who was injured during the disturbances at Rabwah Railway Station on May 29, stated on Thursday that two of the assailants had revolvers with them.

He was recording his evidence before the Tribunal comprising Mr. Justice K.M.A Samdani, inquiring into the Rabwah incident.

The witness stated that in order to force open a door of a smaller compartment where the students of NMC (Nishter Medical College) had taken refuge, one of the men armed had threatened to fire.  At this stage another man entered the compartment and tapped the shoulder of the man holding the revolver and told him that the time to use weapon had not yet come.

He stated some of the people who had launched the attack on NMC students were armed with hockey sticks, chains, small hammers and whips.  One of them was carrying a sword, he added.

Narrating the incident, Mr. Arbab Alam stated that as soon as the trained stopped, they started hitting the students who were sitting on seats on the platform side of windows with their respective weapons.  They hit the windows of the compartment with small hammers, the witness added.  

“I told the students not to get perturbed and directed them to draw the shutters and close the doors of the compartment.  But they could not go close to the windows because of the attack.  However, they managed to draw the shutters with much difficulty.  But one of the windows got stuck and could not be closed.  Meanwhile the crowd started pelting stones through the half-closed window, the Mob also tried to use lathis (a large bamboo stick) and small hammers through the window.  The students however managed to check the attack by obstructing the half-closed window with holdalls”

In the meantime, Mr. Arbab Alam stated the mob broke open one of the doors and entered the bogie upon which the witness directed other students to move to the rear towards the small compartment of the bogie and close it from the inside.  Hardly the students had moved to the rear, a group of 15 to 20 persons entered the compartment and two of them began throwing out students’ luggage on the platform and yard side as well.  

The witness who was in the middle of the compartment enquired of the intruders if someone among the students had misbehaved with them and “I assured them that if anyone had, I would call for his explanation” he stated.  

“”Meanwhile, two or three of them began pulling a sick student who was lying on an upper berth.  As the sick student resisted they could not pull him down from the berth.  Having failed to do so, they attacked him with small hammers.  He, however, fell off and later managed to run away to the rear compartment.  Later when they addressed me, enquiring as to who was the group in-charge of the students, I told them that it was I.  Meanwhile one of them hit me with a tea-mug, which they had picked up from our compartment.  As my head reeled with the blow, obliging me to seek support against a side-window, someone hit me from behind with something I became semi-unconscious and fell down.  However, shortly afterwards, I regained my senses.  But I continued to lie on the aisle and I could hear the noise.”””

As Mr. Arbab lay there, he noticed that intruders were trying to push the smaller compartment of the bogie.

In the meantime, he stated, Mr. Amin, another student of his college and who happened to be Nazim of Islami Jamiat-i-Tulaba, entered his compartment.  “I saw him bleeding from his head, and his clothes were stained with blood” he stated.  The witness told Mr. Amin that as he was unable top move he should lie on a lower berth.  Some time later some railway men visited them in the compartment and assured them that the assailants had gone, he deposed.

The witness stated that he had heard slogans of “Mirzaiiat-zindabad”, Mohammadiyat murdabad”. “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad ki jai” and “Nishtat ke Musle hai hai”.  In addition to hearing the slogans, while lying on the aisle of the compartment, he overheard people talking that the bogie should be disconnected from the train.  Some said that it should be set on fire, while some others suggested that they should take us  (NMC students) away and wait for some one to come and take them.

Earlier, the witness stated six men boarded the students’ bogie at Sarghoda.  When the NMC students objected to their presence in their bogie, they got off the train at the next station –Shaheenabad.  It were these 6 men, he said, whom he saw calling the crowd at the Rabwah railway station with the help of their hands while standing in the doorway of the last bogies of the train.

Following the attack, Mr. Arbab stated, 13 NMC students including himself were admitted to Nishtar Hospital, Multan.  “I was discharged from the hospital on June 11th, he stated.  

Earlier, he added, the injured students had objected to the rendering of first aid to them at Lyallpur railway station by Mr. Abdul Wali, stated to be a Mirzai.  

Mr. Ejaz Hussain Batalvi, counsel for the Ahmadiyya community, asked Mr. Arbab Alam a number of questions pertaining to internal politics of Nishtar Medical College to contend that students of the institution were divided into 2 hostile groups and this hostility had some bearing on the Rabwah incident.  

Cross-examined, the witness stated that he had not stepped out of his compartment at Rabwah on May 29, in reply to another question, he stated: “I do not know whether or not the luggage of students was thrown out of the train and was later collected, nor did I enquire about it from students.”  

Narrating the incident that occurred on May 22 while the NMC students were travelling in the Peshawar-bound Chenab Express, indicated that the incident was a sequel to the exception taken by students to the distribution of the daily Al-Fazl among them and preaching by an Ahmadi at the Rabwah railway station.

The incident had resulted in the raising of slogans by the students which were “Narraa-i-Takbir” “allah-o-akbar” “Islam-zindabad” “Khatme Nabuwwat zindabad” “Mirzaiyat murdabad”and “Mirzai thah”, he stated.  

Earlier, Mr. Bashir Ahmad of Sarghoda who was travelling on the Chenab Express on May 29 from Sarghoda on his way to Quetta, stated that a boy in his compartment had pulled the chain when the train steamed into the Rabwah station.  As soon as the train stopped, he said, a group of 15-16 young men entered his compartment.  They caught hold of one of the students there and began belaboring him.  After beating one, they pounced upon another but did not beat him severely.  The student who the intruders had earlier beaten up later took refuge under one of the seats of the compartment to save his life from the subsequent assaults, he said.  The attacked student has also sought his protection, he added.  

Later, he said a group of 10 persons entered the compartment, looking for students, but when we told them the men there was none, they left, he said.  The intruders, he said were armed with sticks, one of them was carrying a whip and the rest of them were empty handed, the witness stated that he had seen various groups of persons entering different compartments.  However, I cannot say what they did in the compartments, he added.  

Cross-examined by Mr. Ejaz Hussain Batalvi, the witness stated “we had not intervened to rescue the students because we were afraid that we might be beaten up.”  In reply to a question, he said while beating up those boys, the assailants were saying, “Come along we will give you the hooris”

Ch. Rafique Ahmad Bajwa, one of the counsel appearing in the inquiry, prayed the tribunal to summon confidential reports submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Jhang, to the Home secretary from December 1873 to May 1974.

As the inquiry was in progress, a man from Jhang, stated to be a lawyer, appeared before the tribunal and sought permission to file documents pertaining to land bought by the Ahmadia community in Rabwah.  He submitted the Ahmadis had bought the land for Rs. 250 per square.  He indicated that Ahmadis had been violating the agreement under which the land was transferred to them.

END

 

Mirza Basheer uddin Mahmud Ahmad was poisoned as a child, then had many mental issues


Intro
MGA’s eldest living son from his second wife has lots of issues as a child.  He was Bashir-2 and MGA was afraid that he was also going to die, thus he (and his team) masked the famous “Promised-Son-Prophecy”.  MGA was embarrassed when Bashir-1 died and made lots of excuses.  Thus, they were purposely unclear in terms of what child was the Promised Son, they even wrote that it might be Mirza Mubarak Ahmad, however, he died at age 7 in 1907.  Interestingly enough, Muhammad (Saw) progeny was cut-off by Allah, thus ending the cycle of prophets on planet Earth.  In the below, we prove that Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad was a sick person, just like his father, yet he was privileged and allowed to do as he wished.  He most likely had brain damage from being given opium as a child as well as being poisoned with dirty breast milk.  

Mirza Basheeruddin Mahmud Ahmad was given pure opium by MGA as a child

    “During my childhood, he (Mirza Ghulam) gave me OPIUM for sickness. Gave it to me for six months continuously.”

Statement of Mirza Basheeruddin Mahmood, Khalifa Qadian, Minhaj-ul-Talibeen, p.74.

A new book published by alislam.org tells us more
In a new published by Ahmadiyya INC, they tell us of another story.

See here: 
https://www.alislam.org/library/books/The-Promised-Son.pdf
The Promised Son
Written by Rashid Ahmad Chaudhry
First published in the UK, 2017
© Islam International Publications Ltd.
Published by:
Islam International Publications Ltd.
Islamabad, Sheephatch Lane
Tilford, Surrey GU10 2AQ, UK

Mirza Basheeruddin Mahmud Ahmad was poisoned from breast milk? 
See page 8:

“””Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad ra was born on 12 January 1889 around 10 o’clock in the evening. He was lovingly nicknamed Mian by his parents. In those times it was customary for a maid to be employed to look after a child. The maid who was appointed to look after him had been very ill but she had not told anyone. Eight of her children had already passed away due to an illness they contracted through her breast milk. The maid, without seeking permission from the parents, gave some of her milk to Mian Mahmud ra. This led to the illnesses infecting the blood of Mian Mahmud ra. From the age of 2 to 12 Mian Mahmud ra remained very ill. Sometimes he would get a fever, while at other times he would suffer from coughing fits. The doctors said that it was unlikely that he would survive very long, but the doctors were not aware of Allah’s promise. Allah had promised that the chosen one would live for a long time and his fame would spread all over the world.

Mian Mahmud ra was a favourite of his parents, but they took his upbringing and discipline very seriously. The Promised Messiah as and his wife continuously strived to make him a model Muslim.””””

Mirza Basheeruddin Mahmud Ahmad was still married off at roughly 12-13, the 1902 era
He was then married off to a young bride.  He then failed his matriculation exam and was an embarrassment to Ahmadiyya.

In 1907 he was accused of immoral behavior with women
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/09/fast-times-at-qadian-high-adultery-and-immorality-of-mahmud-ahmad-and-company/

Were the mental issues heriditary?
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/16/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-suffered-from-hysteria-and-convulsions-and-his-wife-and-his-son-mirza-basheer-uddin-mahmud-ahmad-the-2nd-khalifa/

He becomes the Khalifa in 1914 and immediately forcibly marries Noorudin’s daughter
Mirza Basheeruddin kept running wild, he was priviliged and above the law.  She ended up dying mysteriously, she had 3 children with the Khalifa, all of those children seem to be missing from the management of the Ahmadiyya Movement.  As soon as she died..the Khalifa immediately married again.  From roughly 1925, the Khalifa always kept 4 wives, when one would die, he would marry another.

The 1930’s, homosexuality and etc
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/25/bashir-ahmad-misri-murdered-multani-were-correct-about-mirza-mahmud-in-1937-viceroy-papers/

His agonizing death
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/25/the-slow-agonizing-death-of-mahmud-ahmad/

Up ↑