Search results


Review of Religions of July 1935, pages 241-282 (Ahmadiyya Takfir and Quetta)

In July of 1935, the Ahmadiyya Khalifa felt the need to clarify his position on Ahmadiyya Takfir. From 1911 to 1922, the Mirza family had categorically called all Muslims who denied MGA (even silently) as Kafirs without any further clarification. This attitude of the Mirza family led to the split of 1914. After the Split, Muhammad Ali and the Ahmadiyya Khalifa argued over this topic extensively. However, after 1922-23, the Ahmadiyya Khalifa adopted a new attitude, he simply called Ahmadi’s as true Muslims, and called Muslims Kafir’s only in this strange and new terminology. In all of his writings and his brother’s (Mirza Bashir Ahmad) writings, they had never wrote that Ahmadi’s were “true muslims” and the rest of the Islamic world were Kafir’s as such. We then jump to 1935, even Lavan quoted this essay in his book. In the PDF you will find the Friday Sermon of April 26th, 1935 at Qadian by the Khalifa. In this speech, he clarifies that Muslims are only Kafir’s since Ahmadi’s are true Muslims. This edition of the ROR also contains data on the Quetta earthquake.

Review of Religions, 1935 July pages 241-282

Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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

Ahmadiyya Takfir in 1919

We have found a reference to the Al-Fazl of 1919 wherein the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad expressly calls all deniers of MGA’s prophethood as Kafirs and deniers of God.  Its from a recent online edition of Al-Hakam.

The quote
Question: How was it possible for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib[as] to attain a status after the demise of the Holy Prophetsa that was not achieved by any other person?  Which way or mode was adopted by Mirza Sahib that by following it, he was able to unite with earlier prophets and the rest of the people were deprived of this? What method can be followed for every person to become a prophet in the future?

Answer: Hazrat Mirza Sahibas neither adopted any new mode, nor any new way; in fact, he attained knowledge and divine wisdom from God Almighty by issuing all those teachings revealed in the Holy Quran upon his soul and acting upon them to perfection. Eventually, God appointed him to reform the world and granted him that rank which was never achieved by any other person in this ummah.

It all happened because he comprehended the essence of the Holy Quran to the utmost extent, more than any other in this ummah and practiced it significantly, greater than anyone else in this ummah. It was not that he discovered any hidden way that led him to attain such nearness to God. Even the earlier prophets did not achieve prophethood by finding out various particular ways. In fact, they attained the rank of prophethood by excelling in righteousness as compared to other people.

Did the Holy Prophetsa offer other types of prayers and keep fasts which were different from ours? Was he awarded the status of prophethood because he used to glorify God in some other manner? The fact is that they were the same prayers, the same fasts, the same charity and the same glorification of God which the Holy Prophetsa carried out like every other Muslim.  Despite of all that, he was a prophet and the rest of the people were his disciples and followers.

Regarding Abu Bakr[ra], the Holy Prophetsa said:

“Abu Bakr does not offer more prayers than you [people] and the rank that has been awarded to Abu Bakr is not because of his prayers, but in fact it is due to that which is present in his heart, i.e. divine wisdom and fear of Allah.”

Hence, as various companions embraced the rank of martyrdom following the same way, other people were not able to achieve that status. Likewise, as certain people became saints, holy men and the beloved ones of God in this ummah by offering the same prayers and charity, other people – despite offering the same prayers and offering much more supererogatory prayers, keeping fasts in a similar manner (rather excelling in fasting), performing similar Hajjes (rather
carrying out more pilgrimages), offering charity in a similar way (rather expressing much more generosity) – were not only deprived of these ranks, but in fact some of them were the most impure on the face of the earth and the recipients of the utmost wrath.

Such people continue to exist from the early period of Islam and they are still around. The Holy Prophetsa said that there would be a group of people among us who would recite the Quran and offer more prayers than us, but faith would not enter their hearts. Did those people, who questioned the Holy Prophet’ssa act [of distributing the spoils of war] that he had not kept in mind the pleasure of God while distributing the riches and that he had given preference to
his kin with respect to it, not offer prayers? They were, however, hypocrites, regarding whom Allah the Almighty states that they shall be in:

الدَّرْکِ الْاَسْفَلِ مِنَ النَّارِ
[“in the lowest depth of the Fire”]. Hence, it is not necessary to find out a new way to achieve a special rank. There are so many ranks for a person acting upon the teachings of Islam and practicing them with true intent and pious inclination that one person can achieve prophethood by carrying out only these practices; another person can become a siddeeq [truthful] by performing these very actions; another can become a wali [beloved of God] following them and
another person can become a simple momin [believer] through the same practices, yet not achieve any significant rank of nearness.

You study in a college. If a student achieves such high grades as compared to others and it is said that they beat the record, it is not because they studied a new course or studied in a new college. Moreover, those who pass in first, second or third divisions are not given such awards because of a new course. Some of them are awarded scholarships, while others are not, but they are not given that award owing to new courses. Studying similar courses, some students pass in first, some in second, while others in third division. Several students achieve scholarships from among them, whilst some not only excel the students taking exams in their time but their marks exceed even the earlier records.

The same thing applies to faith. In fact, the distinction in ranks results from the differences of understanding and the differences of action, not because of different courses or syllabi.

Mirza Sahibas, under the blessing and mercy of Allah, comprehended the Holy Quran and acted upon it to a degree that no one else in this ummah understood or practiced it. Thus, God Almighty granted the status of prophethood to Mirza Sahib and did not give it to others.

Hazrat Mosesas, Hazrat Jesusas, Davidas, Solomonas and the Holy Prophetsa were all the followers of same path. God says to the Holy Prophetsa:

فبھداھم اقتدہ

[“Follow thou, their guidance.”] In spite of this, was it possible for everyone to become Khatamun-Nabiyyin [Seal of all the Prophets]?

Question: Is it a disgrace to term someone as mujaddid or muhaddis who progresses from the status of mujaddid [reformer] and muhaddis [a recipient of God’s word] to complete prophethood, or not?

Answer: No doubt, it is a disgrace for someone to call a prophet only a mujaddid or a muhaddis, but in speech or writing, if there arises a need to mention that a prophet is also a mujaddid and muhaddis, then it is not at all disgraceful for him in mentioning that. This is a manifestation of truth. What is insulting for a prophet is when the discourse expresses and intends denial of his prophethood.

Question: If a person (non-Ahmadi) says “Assalamo alaikum” [peace be upon you] to you in an Islamic way, then what should be our reply to him?

Answer: Our reply to such a person shall be “Wa alaikumussalam” [peace be upon you also].
The Holy Prophetsa used to say [the same] to the Jews. In fact, we will precede [in saying Salam] to those non-Ahmadis who are not in denial as it is a custom. This is not as exclusive as it was before. We say Salam to that nation which has the custom of Salam.

Question: If a person, who does not call Mirza Sahib a kafir [disbeliever] but acknowledges him as a momin [a true believer] and considers those people bad who called Mirza Sahib a kafir, does not take Bai‘at only because of not being able to understand a few matters, what do you think about them? Are they a Muslim or not?

Answer: There are only a few matters of dispute which can make Mirza Sahibas either a prophet or a “kafir”. When they are verified, Mirza Sahibas becomes a prophet and if denied, he is considered a kafir.

What do you mean by a few [matters]? Saying the word “few” does not decrease [the importance of matters]. A person can even become kafir [denier of truth] by not believing in one God. A person becomes a kafir by denying a single prophet. A person becomes a kafir by merely not believing in the resurrection after death.

Hence, one should look at the significance of those few matters before stating that it is not right to consider someone a kafir just because they deny only a few issues.

The one who does not accept these few matters, denies Mirza Sahibas. The one who
does not accept Mirza Sahibas, denies God …

How is it possible that they do not accept a few matters and still consider Mirza Sahibas to be a momin? If a person thinks like that, then their mind is deceiving them. If they ponder over it, then they will surely understand.

How is it possible that a person who claims to be a false recipient of divine revelation and regarding whom God Almighty states that he is a great kafir, there exists another person who considers him a momin and then also believes that he does not receive revelation from God
Almighty? If that person does so, then let alone Mirza Sahib, God’s denial comes into effect because God Almighty declares him to be a kafir while that person considers him a momin.

If you mean to say that such a person does not use foul language by saying that they are not bad, then their faith has nothing to do with that. A noble person does not use abusive words.

(Transcribed originally in Urdu by Hazrat Rahim Bakhsh, also known as Hazrat Maulana Abdur Rahim Dardra)

Links and Related Essays

Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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

Al-Fazl, September 1917, proves Ahmadiyya Takfir towards all Sunni’s/Shia’s

Ahmadiyya takfir is a tricky subject, most people haven’t properly understood it.  Feel free to read all our entries on this topic here:

We found an Al-Fazl article from 1917–the scan


Summary and translation
Mirza Mahmoud (the Khalifa) says and calls his denial as denial of “bani Isreal” as denial of Mirza qadyani is denial of other prophets.  He says his denial is denial of messenger of God.  His denial is denial of Maseeh maoud.  22 sep-1917 Al fazal page 2.

After 1923, Ahmadi’s were told stop Takfir outwardly

Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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



Muhammad Ali, the eventual Lahori-Ahmadi was always against Takfir, whereas the family of MGA was not (1914)

Ahmadi’s are trained to misrepresent the truth, plus they are brainwashed.  I have been engaging Ahmadi’s for 10+ years and they all play dumb when it comes to Ahmadiyya Takfir.
We have always argued that MGA and his family did open Takfir from 1906 to 1923, then they began to do silent Takfir, as they invented the term “true-islam” and began to outwardly call Muslims as kafirs only in the literal sense, however, hiding their true beliefs, which are that Muslims and the Lahori-Ahmadi’s are Kafirs.  Nonetheless, we have found a quote from Muhammad Ali, which is quoted in the Pagham e Sulh of March 1914.  This quote is from March 19, 1914, the Khalifa had died less then a week prior.

The quote
“””“I have an urge in my heart that compels me to speak out even if I have to accept all manner of tribulation. Calling the followers of the Qibla as being kafir is the crime which Hazrat Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad bitterly accused his opponent Maulvis of committing. But alas! Today we
ourselves are doing what we accused others of. I shudder at the thought of calling those who
recite the Kalima, ‘There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah’, as
being kafirs and excluded from the fold of Islam. … I am prepared to face whatever consequences I may have to bear, and I pray to Allah to give me the strength to be steadfast
upon the truth and grant me patience in adversity.””””
— Paigham Sulh, 19 March 1914.

This was quoted in the Light magazine as of 2007

Click to access light-apr07.pdf

Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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


A fake Ahmadiyya response to our essays which expose Ahmadiyya Takfir from

Firstly, this website is an unofficial source of information on the Ahmadiyya Movement. Ahmadis are not allowed to give official answers to any questions.  Even the Ahmadi-Mullahs that we have encountered on social media always have a disclaimer on their accounts, which specify that these views are “theirs”, and not of the Ahmadiyya Movement.  This is a legal complication that Ahmadis are taught to avoid.  Thus, any and all answers from this website or any Ahmadi in particular are invalid.  The only official answers are from the Ahmadi-Khalifas or in an official book by an Ahmadi Mullah aka cleric.  MGA on 2:62.

The author purposely overlooks all of our main points
I have posted the link to the essay in the above paragraph.  The author of this website is dishonest and academically biased.  A fair person would go through our main arguments and tackle them with fairness.  Instead, he has totally avoided most of the data that we have presented.

For example:

1.  He fails to even mention MGA’s comment from 1906, wherein MGA clearly tells Dr. Khan that his deniers arent Muslim.

2.  He fails to even acknowledge that he is quoting Tiryaq ul Qulub of which 98% of that book was written in 1899, this was before MGA even claimed prophethood.  MGA views of Takfir changed after the 1905 era.

3.  He fails to acknowledge that in 1911, the young Mahmud Ahmad had written that A Muslim is only he who believes in the prophethood of MGA.  Nooruddin had to edit this essay, he even held it back before publishing.  Moreover, Kwaja Kamaluddin wrote a clarification of Mahmud Ahmad’s essay, which was also approved by Nooruddin, that clarification seemed to tone down Mahmud Ahmad’s aggressive position on Takfir, which was opposed to the position of the Khwaja, who eventually split with Muhammad Ali and created the aaiil.

4.  He doesnt know that in this 1911 essay by Mahmud Ahmad, he quoted MGA’s letter to Dr. Khan and confirmed and agreed with what MGA had written.  Noorudin tried to water it down, however, Noorudin was on his deathbed, and couldnt do much, he was dying a slow and painful death.  Noorudin even told his inner circle that Mahmud Ahmad hadn’t understood Takfir and needed more training.

5. then refuses to even acknowledge what his Khalifa wrote from 1914 to 1923 on Takfir.  His Khalifa exclaimed in this era, that all of those Muslims who hadn’t accepted MGA were Kafirs.

6. then refuses to even acknowledge that the Khalifa’s brother, Mirza Bashir Ahmad, he also wrote that all Muslims who had rejected the prophethood of MGA were Kafirs.  Technically, the Lahori-Ahmadi were also included in this category.

7.  He continues ignoring the fact that the split happened on this very topic, Muhammad Ali and the Ahmadi Khalifa and many other Ahmadis argued on and on about Takfir.

8.  He then goes on to ignore the fact that by 1923, the Ahmadi Khalifa had began to tell Ahmadis to stop calling Muslims as Kafirs.

9.  He doesnt know that by 1924, and in the Khalifa’s book on the split, the Khalifa admitted that Muslims were Kafirs, however, he was willing to call them as “Non-Ahmadi-Muslims”.

10.  He doesnt know that in 1935, the Ahmadi Khalifa again quoted MGA’s famous quotation of 1906 wherein he tells Dr. Khan that all Muslims who reject him (MGA) are non-Muslim.

11.  He wont admit that in 1953, while in court, the Ahmadi Khalifa totally denied ever writing that Muslims were Kafir, and totally avoided all questions on this topic, he even went so far as to deny that he had written his own diary.  He even denied that the Al-Fazl was an official Ahmadi newspaper.  MGA had done the same in the late 1890’s, he denied that the Al-Hakam was an Ahmadi newspaper.

The first reference that needs to be evaluated?
Ahmadis need to look at a certain statement by MGA in terms of those Muslims who have rejected him, the quote is from 1906.  This specific quote is from the letters that were exchanged between MGA and an Ahmadi (Dr. Khan, he was a follower of MGA for 20 years) who was asking MGA about salvation.  He was asking MGA in terms the Quranic verse 2:62, which indicates that ALL Jews, Christians and Sabians that were living in those days had the opportunity to make it to heaven, hence, their was no compulsion to join Islam.

An important quote

“Any person who believes in the coming, after the Holy Prophet Muhammad, of a prophet the rejection of whom makes one a kafir, is excluded from the fold of Islam. If the Qadiani Jama’at holds this belief, it too is excluded from the fold of Islam.” (Al-Fazl, 11 April 1916).

Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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

In 1923, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad, the Ahmadi Khalifa, ordered Ahmadis to stop doing Takfir on Muslims

As we all know, nowadays, the Ahmadi-trolls on social media are running around and denying that Ahmadis had ever done Takfir on anyone.  The truth is, the soon to be Qadiani branch of Ahmadis began doing open Takfir on all Muslims (shias. sunnis, sufi’s, all muslims), in 1911, at that point they weren’t “qadianis” yet, since the split happened in 1914.  The Split happened in 1914, and the Lahoris vs. Qadiani’s arguments began.  And they debated each other on a few topics, Prophethood, Takfir, Khilafat and Ismuhu Ahmad, the birth of Esa (As) was never an issue.

By 1923, the Ahmadi Khalifa changed his mind on Takfir and Ismuhu Ahmad
From 1911 to 1923, Mirza Basheeruddin Mahmud Ahmad, the Ahmadi Khalifa, and son of MGA, was busy making many many arguments wherein he called the deniers of the prophethood of MGA as Kafirs, his younger brother, Mirza Bashir Ahmad wrote extensively on this also, this fatwa of Kufr also included the Lahori-Ahmadis.  Thus, the Ahmadi Khalifa was trying to distinguish “qadiani” Ahmadis from other Ahmadis, to be clear, other Ahmadis who believed in MGA, yet rejected the Khilafat, they were not even Muslims per the Mirza family, they were Kafirs.

The quote
See Freidman, “Prophecy Continous” (2003) edition, see page 161

“Mahmud Ahmad wrote in 1923, that though it is true that the non-Ahmadis are infidels, one should not speak about it needlessly 56.”

56—Review of Religions,–22 (1923), page 51

The full PDF of ROR, 1923
A letter from His Holiness Khalifa tul Masih

Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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

Mirza Nasir Ahmad discussed his father’s and uncle’s statements on Takfir in 1974 at the National Assembly hearings

Ahmadis are trained to lie about everything.  I mean everything.  Mirza Nasir Ahmad was forced to talk about his father’s, grandfathers and uncles statements wherein they did Takfir on the whole Muslim community.  This happened in 1974, at the NA hearings on Ahmadiyya.  In the below, my team and I have translated and collected an interesting exchange wherein Mirza Nasir Ahmad goes to call all Muslims as Kafirs.

Read other essays on Ahmadiyya Takfir here

The exchange
Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza sb reply to my question has not been clear yet. I asked about a man to whom the message of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani sb has been conveyed but he is not convinced,in which category would you place him? Is he a kafir.?

Mirza Nasir . In what sense?

Yahya Bakhtiar. In the sense that he do not believe in a prophet. Although he says he is Ummati of Muhammad saw and says i have complete faith in Him (pbuh). For such person U said yesterday that he is a kafir but not out of the circle of islam.

Mirza Nasir. Yes I stated that today with references of hadis.

Yahya Bakhtar. Those who did not hear of Mirza, are they kafir and of which category or not kafir according to your teaching and writings.?

Mirza Nasir. In which category would u place those who do not believe in Moosa and Eissa a.s ?

Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza sb I am asking to u about this?

Mirza Nasir. He would fall in the same category as that of the one who do not believe in Moosa and Essa a.s.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Because Mirza Bashir had said he is kafir even if he has not heard of Mirza sahib. So U are saying both are in same category of kufar, the one to whome Mirza sb,s message reached and the one who has not heard of him.

Mirza Nasir . Category is not the same. But decree will be issued on prima facie. We say kafir in limited sense.
Yahaya Bakhtiyar . Even if he is not aware of the name of Mirza sb.?

Mirza Nasir . If a man born in Moscow 7 years ago he is not aware of the name of Moosa Essa a,s and Muhammad s.a.w. He has no Iman.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza sb you have just said that when i say I am a musalman, it is not for Mufti Mahmood and Molana Modoodi, to say that I am not.

Mirza Nasir. I am saying this too now.

Yahya Bakhtiar . Then why do U say if i decide then no body has to interfere . Mirza sb.

Mirza Nasir . No no i have to decide it for myself and others would have to decide for themselves.

Yahya Bakhtiar. But the point is this that you are deciding for others
Mirza Nasir. No I am not.

Yahya Bakhtiar. U r deciding that so and so class is a kafir of this category and so and so is a kafir of that category. In that case U have to give this right to others too.

Mirza Nasir. I did not say that.

Yahya Bakhtiar. I am talking of a criteria you laid down. What i said yesterday was, if we acquire certain right for us we have to concede the same for others too.

Mirza Nasir , of course I am not a man of superior race. I am a humble person.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza sb If u claim to be muslim u have the right to claim that . Similarly if Mufti Mahmood says he is a Muslim he has the right to say that. U have no right to stop him from claiming to be muslim.

Mirza Nasir. Yes absolutely.

Yahya Bukhtiar Now here a question arises as to which category u place Mufti Mahmood as per your writings and teachings. U say he falls under that category of Kufar.

Mirza Nasir. No no i don,t say that. I said muslim of a certain category.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Kafir of a certain category. So in that case they have the right to call u muslim of certain category. Or not muslim at all.

Mirza Nasir. Yes absolutely. But they do not have the right to negate our claim of being muslims

Yahya Bakhtiar . See you have made three categories.
Certain category of people are out of islam and ummat,

Mirza Nasir. Yes like the category of Abu jahal and many more.

Yahya Bakhtiar. The other category is un-sincere who will get more punishment than other and they are kafir too.

Mirza Nasir . I did not say they will get more punishment, it is upto Allah swt.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Words like Sinful and hell bound were used.

Mirza Nasir . That has been said with reference to Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahab and Ibn e Temiya. I had said this has been said in earlier books like “Mufridat e Raghib” which tell us that there are different kinds of Iman and different types of Kufar.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza sb plz tell us again what you said is that word kufar was used for few sinners. Do the words out of Islam has also been used for such persons?

Mirza Nasir Ahmad. “Kharaja minal islam”( he went out of Islam)was used .

Yahya Bahtiar. And still u think they r muslims

Mirza Nasir . Those who said like this are also of this opinion.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Of course we need the reference which says such class of person is muslim and still out of fold of Islam.

Mirza Nasir. U can not understand this until u have deep study of Quraan and Ahadis.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Here i am saying that Mirza sb (Mgaq) saying out of fold of Islam and Kafir. And u say!

Mirza Nasir. I say Nabi Pak saw saying that.

Yahya Bakhtiyar. Mirza sb (mgaq) using both kafir and out of fold of islam at a time what does that mean? He is using these words intentionally not superfluous.

Mirza Nasir. No.

Yahya Bakhtiar. One way he says kafir and out of fold of islam!

Mirza Nasir. Who says that?

Yahya Bakhtiar. Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood.

Mirza Nasir. Both words have been used in same sense.
Yahya Bakhtiar. In that case one part has become superfluous.

Mirza Nasir. All right take it as superfluous.

Yahya Bakhtiar. I would not take it as superfluous because I think he is very carefully using these words. He would not use a superfluous word.

Mirza Nasir. Even if it is against your faith.

Yahay Bakhtiar. No i want interpretation of your faith when  Mirza sb says for non ahmadi muslims that they are kafir and out of fold of islam. And still you say that they are Muslim.

Mirza Nasir . Of course I say that.

Yahya Bakhtiar. Well my understanding is that he (MBM)is clearly declaring non Ahmadi muslims are kafir and out of fold of islam.

Mirza Nasir. I have been raised and part of that family i say he never took that meaning.

Yahya Bakhtiyar. Didn,t he (mbm) say kafir.?
Session adjourned.



The scans

Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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

Ali Rizvi mentions the lies of Qasim Rashid in his book, in terms of Takfir from Ahmadis to Muslims


The lies of Ahmadi people continue day by day.  Ahmadi’s dont care, they are loyal to the Mirza family and gladly lie on their behalf.  I recently came across an ex-Ahmadi’s video on the subject of Takfir and Ahmadiyya and felt moved to post it.  In this video, the famous ex-Muslim, Ali Rizvi’s book “The Atheist Muslim”, is discussed, in his book Ali Rizvi mentioned his exchange with Qasim Rashid, and in terms of a specific quotation from MGA, wherein MGA clearly called all Muslims that reject him as non-Muslim.

Qasim Rashid initially authenticated the quote
Most people havent done the extant of research as me and my team, as a result, as they engage Ahmadis, they only have a few quotes, whereas I have a full catalog of supporting references in this case.  In fact see here:

My team
My team an I have collected more research data on Ahmadiyya then any other source on the internet, and we continue to work, in fact, when MGA did his Takfir in 1906, with Dr. Abdul Hakeem Khan, most of the writings from Dr. Khan were never revealed, however, my team and I have found them and posted them here:

Qasim Rashid then denied the quote altogether and called it a clerical error
Ahmadis get away with this type of behavior, since in this case, Ali Rizvi didnt have the supporting quotes.  In 1911, Mahmud Ahmad, the soon to be Khalifa, he quoted MGA as saying exactly what we know he said, i.e., all Muslims who reject MGA are non-Muslims.  Further, the Lahori-Ahmadis cited this quote vs. the Qadianis almost 10 times from 1914 to 1965, further, in 1935, the Al-Fazl newspaper (the official organ of Ahmadiyya), quoted it again.  Then, the 2004 edition of Tadhkirah also had the quote, it was only in 2009, when a new edition of Tadhkirah was published, thats when they removed the quote.

Enjoy the video!!!!


Links and Related Essays


Al Hakam – 6 September 2019

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


Kashif Chaudhry is at it again, he continues to accuse Muslims in America of Takfir and calls them terrorists


I have written about this fanatic before.  He was radicalized by Mirza Tahir Ahmad in the 80’s, further, his father is an Ahmadi-mullah, and many of his uncles have been jailed for breaking the law in Pakistan, in terms of Ord-XX and other behaviors of fanatical Ahmadis like purposely distributing Ahmadi books, when they know its against the law in Pakistan.

Professor Jonathan AC Brown’s recent post
On 11-25-17 he writes:

“””For those of you interested, what I find totally beyond the pale with Ahmadi PR operators like Kashif Chaudry is that they call Muslims takfiris for doing no more that following the consensus position of all Sunni and Shiah scholars. And we all know what it means when you’re called a takfiri in the West: surveillance and perhaps even referral to some CVE/Prevent program. So if you want to avoid this accusation, you have to go against the agreed-upon position of ALL Muslim scholars. How is this an honest attempt at dialogue? It’s bullying of the worst kind, denigrating the highest form of discourse by intimidating it with the most clumsy and thoughtless forces within reach.”””

“””I blocked Kashif Chaudhry because he repeatedly threatened to “out” people as “extremists” for not accepting Ahmadis as Muslims and also threatened to publish photos of them with other people to drag those people into his net of defamation as well. I could tell he was a lowlife because I have a good sleeze-dar (when someone keeps trying to meet you for coffee despite the fact that they are calling you terrible names, it’s not a good sign). I hope he improves his conduct and can rejoin polite society.”””

“””My response to Kashif Chaudry’s latest Ahmadi doorstepping (Will you condemn xyz Muslims for exercising their Constitutionally protected freedom of religion?!): Kashif, stop playing dumb. As I’ve said numerous times, if you and other Ahmadis go around calling people ‘Takfiris’ for just following what is the CONSENSUS Of Sunni and Shiah ulama, saying that Sunni extremism is the cause of Islamophobia, going on Fox News with ROBERT SPENCER (!) to say how mosques need to be surveiled (Yes, I saw that Ahmadi rep doing that), in short, using the climate of Islamophia to try to bully Muslims into accepting Ahmadis, you will continue to get the same reaction: total rejection. The merits of your case aside, your conduct is nauseating. I have never seen a Shiah scholar of any repute or any Shiah organization throw Sunnis under the bus the way you and other Ahmadi reps do regularly. If you want to be Muslim, take the hits like the rest of us and stop throwing law-abiding Muslims under the bus to advance your own mainstreaming-in-America agenda. I won’t have a dialogue with you because you are not interested in discussion. You’re interested in getting the hegemonic, Islamophobic, security-state public space to threaten Muslims into accepting Ahmadis. Do it on your own time, not mine.”””

Up ↑