Search results


Maulvi Sher Ali told the world that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad would send his Arabic writings to Noorudin and Ahsan Amrohi for editing

MGA hired many people to help him.  Noorudin was the most famous, as was Maulvi Syed Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi.

Summary, Seertul Mahdi Quotation number 104 Book By By Mirza basheer M.A .
Molvi sher Ali sahb says that Mirza Qadyani calls his arabic writings sort of revelation but Mirza use to get his Arabic revelation checked and corrected from First khalifa ( Hakeem Nooruddin) and Molvi Mohammad Ahsan and get them rectified. After Rectification they use to return it back.

Seertul Mahdi Quotation number 104 Book By By Mirza basheer M.A .


Additional Links and related Essay’s

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

Ahmadiyya clerics have been caught editing the writings of MGA yet again

Dear readers, we have caught Ahmadiyya leadership editing the writings of MGA many times.  See here:

In this specific case, we have found an instance wherein there was editing in the case of the Muhammadi Begum prophecy.  In MGA’s book, “A’ina Kamalat Islam”, in the original edition, MGA and his team had written that Muhammadi Begum’s father, Mirza Ahmad Baig would die within 4 months, however, in later editions of this book, it was changed to 6 months.

But Dard tells us…
Dard tells us that the marriage of Muhammadi Begum happened on April 7th, 1892, see page 334.  He also tells us that her father, Mirza Ahmad Baig died Sep 30th, 1892.  That is 5 and 1/2 months.  Thus, the prediction of MGA was false.  However, the Ahmadiyya mullah team went back and edited….they began by inventing the system of Ruhani Khuzain, and thus burning all of the old books and creating new ones, with many edits.

Related essays

The scans

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #ahmadiyyat #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Ahmadiyya leadership is always editing books on Ahmadiyya and MGA’s so-called ilhams

My team and I have found countless instances of academic dishonesty by Ahmadiyya leadership.  This is the proof that Ahmadiyya is a business, and their mullahs know fully about the fraud of Ahmadiyya, they are shareholders and thus remain quiet, they will never tell on their masters, i.e., the Mirza family.  If they did ever tell, they would be out of a job and homeless.  In the below, I have shown how MGA had a sick and vile “fake-ilham” about his cousin (his brother in village terms) and his wife.  MGA hated his cousin so much, he openly cursed his wife, who would be considered MGA’s sister (in village environment).  Further, this woman that he is calling a prostitute, she eventually became the great grandmother of Mirza Tahir Ahmad‘s wife.  Mirza Tahir ahmad married her in 1957.  Her name was Asifa Begum, she died in 1992.

Mirza Imam Din was dead by 1904, this ilham was 1906
It’s important to note, Mirza imam ud din died in 1904, his widow was still alive and still lived in Qadian, MGA still attacked her and hated her with a passion.

Who was Asifa Begum?
She was mother of Khursheed Begum who was Daughter in law of MGAQ and wife of Mirza Sultan.

The Mirza Tahir Ahmad connection?
“”””On 14 October 1957, Hadhrat Sahibzada Mirza Tahir Ahmad Sahib returned to Pakistan and on 5 December 1957, his Nikah was announced with Hadhrat Syeda Asifa Begum Sahiba, the daughter of Amatul Salam Sahiba and Sahibzada Mirza Rashid Ahmad Sahib.”””


Page 22

Download it here: The life of Mirza Tahir Ahmad

Tadhkirah, 2004 online english edition, MGA called his cousins wife as a Hooker

“On Monday morning I saw in my dream that Imamud Din’s wife, who had been a prostitute, had fallen down.” (Diary of the Promised Messiah p. 12).  Quoted in Tadhkirah, 2004 online edition.

Tadhkirah, 2004 online english edition, MGA called his cousins wife as a Hooker–SCAN

Previous editions of Urdu Tadhkirah, showing the quotes

Read my additional entries on Ahmadis editing the writings of MGA

What is the Diary of MGA?
I haave found references to this diary as early as the 1915-era, as the newly crowned Khalifa, Mirza Bashir-uddin Mahmud Ahmad quoting it vs. the Lahori ceders.  However, it seemed to have magically appeared to the Khalifa, it was missing for many years.  It is most likely a fraud, concocted by the family of MGA.

Ahmadis editing their books on Piggot

This video which was made by Akber and AK describes how Ahmadis have been editing their books for years and years and years.

The video


Ahmadi mullahs like Muhammad Ali and Noorudin were working day and night to cover-up the falsity of MGA.  They simply lied about everything and were in full callusion.

Hani Tahir catches Ahmadi-clerics/employees editing the writings of MGA

As we all know, Hani Tahir recently left Ahmadiyya and began a string of videos wherein he exposes how Ahmadi-Mullahs have been lying for the past 100+ years.  There was a video wherein he found an Ahmadi (a co-worker of his) that purposely erased a portion of a prophecy by MGA.

Which Prophecy?
Its from 1905, MGA was claiming that an Earthquake would occur that was similar to the final Earthquake before judgement day as described in the Quran.  In the original prophecy, it was written that this prophecy would indeed happen during MGA’s lifetime, however, since it didn’t happen, his editing team began working on a solution.  They simply erased the portion that mentioned, “in my lifetime” and then added it to tadkhirah in 1935 and all proceeding editions.


Here is the full video by Hani Tahir

Ahmadis have been editing and adding and erasing to the work of MGA for years and years and years.  See my other essays here for more on the topic. 

Ahmadis keep editing MGA’s writings

As we all know, Ahmadi-mullahs keep editing the writings of MGA in an attempt to cover-up his errors and omissions.  In fact, the entire book of announcements that the AMI published is exactly that… attempt at backdating and forward-dating.  Further, the collection of Ruhani Khuzain is an attempt to edit MGA’s writings and etc.

2009 edition Tadkirah vs. 2004 edition Tadhkirah

In the old version of Tadhkirah (2004 edition) there was an ilham on page 346:

God almighty has conveyed it to me that every person to whom my call is conveyed and who does not accept me is not a Muslim and is accountable to God for his defult (Letter addressed to Dr. Abdul Hakeem)(April 1906).

In the new version of the Tadhkirah this revelation does not exist!!! It seems that Masroor is at again, he has purposely re-published a new version of this book so that some controversial revelations might be suppressed.

On a side note, MGA had denied ever making this statement.

In Haqiqatul Wahy(1907) p. 178 he writes:

Dr. Abdul Hakim in his pamphlet MASIH AL-DAJJAL and other writings accuses me of having written that anyone who does not believe in me, even if he has not heard my name or is living in a country beyond the reach of my call, is an unbeliever and shall go to hell. This is a patent fabrication by the Doctor. I have never said so in any book or poster of mine. It is binding on him to produce such writings of mine in which I have said so!

MGA must have forgot what he wrote in that letter to Dr. Hakeem Khan, a year after writing the letter he totally denied it.

Who collected Tadhkirah??

The first edition (of Tadhkirah) was compiled by a committee, headed by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, appointed by Khalifatul Masih II and was published in 1935 (see the preface of the current edition).

The Ahmadiyya editing team is notorious in their attempts to clean out the controversial writings of MGA.  This is how Ahmadis begin to delete data.  However, this data is still available on the Ahmadi website under “Essense of Islam” Vol. 4 (see page 87).  And it is mentioned in the writings of Mahmud Ahmad.  Interestingly enough, this quote was also quoted in 1935, in the Al-Fazl.  Thus, this quote was approved by the sons of MGA for over 70 years.


Who ordered for its removal?  Why?  What is the real reason for removal?


An In-depth look at ‘Truth 9’ from the ‘True Islam’ Campaign

Dear readers, this was an excellent posting that I saw on reddit.  I would only like to add the FACT that MGA said that salvation was only through him, as he beefed with the famous Dr. Khan, who was an Ahmadi apostate.  Dr. Khan told MGA that based on 2:62 of the Quran, anyone could achieve salvation, thus, believing in MGA wasn’t absolutely necessary.  Dr. Khan was right, heaven or hell is up to allah, no one else, allah gives exemptions and exceptions as he pleases.  This Dr. Khan saga led to MGA doing takfir on the whole world, MGA wrote in a private letter that Dr. Khan was an apostate, and that all Muslims had to follow MGA for salvation.  Notice how Ahmadi’s don’t quote MGA on this verse.  Ahmadi’s don’t follow MGA, they follow whomever their current Khalifa is.  In the case of 2;62, the 2nd Khalifa agrees with MGA in that all people must believe in ALL prophets for salvation.

Links and related Essays

The essay

The True Islam campaign (TIC) is a project by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at USA that aims to correct some of the most common misconceptions about Islam , as well as educate Muslims, non-Muslims and Americans of other faiths about the correct meaning of Islam. Let’s have a closer look at ‘Truth 9’ which claims that “True Islam is a religion that recognizes no religion can monopolize salvation”

The basic claim is clear: Islam does not claim to have a monopoly on salvation. Following other belief systems may qualify you for it as well. It sounds like a very modern, tolerant and inclusive way to look at religion.

I know that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at (AMJ) disagrees with the mainstream islamic position regarding eternal punishment. I don’t believe that the Ahmadiyya position holds up to critical examination and it an interesting conversation for another day but not what I will focus on here. The questions for today are the following:

(i) Do the verses the TIC present in support of their claim in ‘Truth 9’ actually say what the TIC they claims?

(ii) Does the context of the source Qur’anic verses actually support the interpretation that the TIC is making?

(iii) Is the interpretation, proposed by the TIC actually in accordance with their own literature?

1) The claims of ‘Truth 9’


“True Islam recognizes that no one religion holds a monopoly over salvation. The Holy Quran clearly supports this belief as it declares, “Surely, those who believe and the Jews and the Christians and the Sabians—whichever party from among these truly believes in God and the Last Day and does good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, and no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieve” (2:63).

This verse demonstrates that it is not just Muslims who will receive the rewards of their good deeds. Jews, and Christians, and Sabians—those who are of non-Abrahamic religions—will all be rewarded for their good deeds and their faith. Indeed, it is impossible for Muslims to declare a monopoly on salvation when the Holy Quran clearly states that those of other religions who do good deeds will have no fear.” [1]

The claim, as highlighted by me, is clear. The Qur’an is saying that to gain salvation being a Muslim (i.e. a believer in Islam) is not a necessary condition. Apparently salvation is apparently available through other belief systems as well.


“The Holy Quran is likewise clear that God’s grace and mercy are His most powerful attributes: “God replied, I will inflict My punishment on whom I will; but My mercy encompasses all things” (7:157). ThereforeTrue Islam recognize that ultimately, God’s mercy will encompass all human beings, regardless of their faith. Indeed, True Islam teaches that if mercy were not one of the attributes of God, no one would be delivered.” [1]

Clearly, the TIC is claiming that this verse is applies to All humans, including Atheists and apostates like me.

2) A closer look at the context of 7:157

2.1 Here are the complete verses 7:157-158:

7:157 “And ordain for us good in this world, as well as in the next; we have turned to Thee with repentance.’ ALLAH replied, `I will inflict MY punishment on whom I will; but MY mercy encompasses all things; so I will ordain it for those who act righteously and pay the Zakaat and those who believe in Our Signs.”

7:158 “Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet, the Ummi whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel which are with them. He enjoins on them good and forbids them evil and makes lawful for them the good things and forbids them the bad things and remove from them their burdens and shackles that were upon them. So those who shall believe in him and honour and support him and help him and follow the light that has been sent down with him – these shall prosper.’ “

Given the content and context 7:157, the TIC’s choice of what to include in their quotation looks very odd. They have clearly left out important context for the half sentence they did quote. The part they quoted is a direct reply by Allah to the repentance in the sentence preceding it. That is crucial context. When left out, it changes the meaning of the verse. The verse is clearly talking about believers, people who pay zakat and who follow and honour Muhammad. In other words ‘Muslims’. It makes no sense whatsoever to claim that it includes all human beings, including disbelievers like me.

2.2. But… but it says, “MY mercy encompasses ALL things”?

Some Ahmadi apologists claim that since the portion of the verse quoted by the TIC uses the word ‘all’, they are then justified to expand the scope of the salvation offered as a promise to all humans. I don’t see any justification for making that leap.

The context of the verse is about Moses bringing back the tablets and his people worshiping a golden calf: 7:149 “And the people of Moses made, in his absence, out of their ornaments, a calf. …”

If you read that verse in context, it is clear that the point of the chapter is to emphasize the need for repentance and in God’s capacity to accept it:

7:154 “But those who do evil deeds and repented after that and believed, surely, thy Lord is thereafter is Most Forgiving, Merciful.”

7:156 “.… Thou art our Protector; forgive us then and have mercy upon us and Thou art the Best of those who forgive”

7:157 “And ordain for us good in this world, as well as in the next; we have turned to Thee with repentance. …’

So, what this part is actually talking about is God’s response to that repentance. God is willing to forgive term ‘all things’ even if the sin committed is as severe as shirk. The ‘all’ is referring to God’s mercy being able to forgive all sins. This forgiveness, however, is contingent on that repentance. It does’s not provide the blank check of eventual salvation to all human beings, including non-believers.

2.3. What about bismillah?

Another line of defense I have come across in debates about this is that the word used in 7:157 is رَحْمَتِي (rahmati) has the same triliteral root as words used in bismillah (“In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful”.) The claim is that rahman and rahim there stand for ‘mercy comprehending the entire universe’ and ‘a mercy limited in its scope but repeatedly shown’. This meaning is apparently also being repeated in verse 7:157. Since the mercy granted by the first of those words in bismillah encompasses everyone including non-believers, they feel justified to expand the scope of the mercy granted in the verse to them as well.

The problem with that line of reasoning is that you have to ignore the rest of the verse and the context of the entire chapter. You have to ignore the emphasis on repentance and and and the turning away from the sins. Which once met, can cover any past transgressions. The verses clearly attach conditions to it which once met can cover any past transgression. Basing the interpretation just on the deconstruction of one word alone is to rip the word mercy out of its clear context.

The mistake made by the TIC is in their overruling a specific claim with a more general claim. Here a (simple) example to illustrate the point:

(a) everyone is allowed to enter my house

(b) only my friends are allowed to enter my room

There is no contradiction between those statements. (a) is a general rule (b) is me introducing an additional condition limiting the scope of (a) for a specific subset of (a). Ahmadi Muslim apologists for the TIC are basically arguing like this:

(1) statement (a) allows everyone to enter my house.

(2) my room is part of the house

\ Therefore everyone is allowed to enter my room.

To do this, is to ignore my modification of rule (a) with with rule (b). In my room the general rule of ‘everyone’ does not apply, even if ‘my house’ in a general sense would theoretically also encompass my room.

Bringing it back to the verse 7:157, it is simply not relevant what the scope of the word mercy is in bismillah. Or if according to it even atheists can enjoy some general blessings given by gods mercy. The real question is does that interpretation of mercy apply to salvation as laid out in this verse? The answer is a clear no. The mercy in verse 7:157 is a response, which has to be preceded by the condition of true repentance and has to be followed up with works and belief. Ignoring that context is turning the meaning of the verse on its head.

3) A closer look at the context of 2:63

Here is what Mirza Bashiruddin Mmahmood Aahmad (the 2nd Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community) writes in his 5 Volume Commentary, p.127 -128 [2] about this verse:

“The verse is important, and much difference has arisen about its real meaning. Some who are not in the habit of making a deep study of the Quran have hastily jumped to the conclusion that, according to this verse, belief in Islam is not necessary. They say that anybody, whether he is a Muslim, a Jew, a Christian or any other, who sincerely believes in God and Last Day and does good deeds will be saved. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Quran emphatically declares in a number of verses that belief in the Holy prophet and his revelation is essential. Says god: Surly those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers and desire to make a distinction between Allah and His Messengers and say ‘We believe in some and disbelieve in others,’ and desire to take a way in between, these indeed are veritable disbelievers; and We have prepared for disbelievers an humiliating punishment (4:151, 512). Again, And those who believe in the Hereafter believe therein (i.e. the Quran) and they strictly observe their prayers (6:32).

From these two verses it becomes clear beyond any shadow of doubt that according to the Quran (1) belief in the Prophets is part and parcel of belief in God. And (2) belief in the Hereafter includes Belief in God’s revelation as well. Elsewhere the Quran says, Surley the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission) and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam it shall not be accepted from him and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20, 86).

This verse along with the two quoted above definitely proves that the objection mentioned above is entirely baseless and is born of utter ignorance of the real Quranic teachings. In fact, as explained in the above verses, the Quran confides itself to a mention of belief in God and the last days, not because belief in the Holy prophet and the Quran is not essential, but because the former two beliefs include the latter two, the four being essentially inseparable.”

I have not much to add to that other than that I agree with the Ahmadi Khalifa’s interpretation here. It completely and unambiguously debunks the claim made by the ‘True Islam Campaign’ in ‘Truth 9’.

4) Summary / TL; DR

The TIC claims in Point 9 that “True Islam rejects any type of a monopoly on salvation”.

They claim that the verse 7:157 would suggest eventual salvation for all humans. But as I have shown it is a classic case of contextomy. They are ripping part of the verse out its context and the narrative its embedded in. The TIC’s interpretation leaves out the conditions for salvation which the verse itself establishes.

The TIC also claims that verse 2:63 makes it

“impossible for Muslims to declare a monopoly on salvation”

But their own Khalifa, the late Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad, has already debunked that interpretation:

“Some who are not in the habit of making a deep study of the Quran have hastily jumped to the conclusion that, according to this verse, belief in Islam is not necessary. (…) Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Both of the aforementioned statements cannot be true at the same time. Either the interpretation the TIC gives “is entirely baseless and is born of utter ignorance of the real Quranic teachings.” Or the interpretation as given by the 2nd Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is not “True Islam” according to present-day Ahmadi Muslims.

5) Final thoughts

In this post I have shown that:

  1. The verses presented by the True Islam campaign do not support their claims.

(ii) The content and context of the relevant verses negates the interpretation the True Islam campaign has is put forward.

(iii) The those interpretations promoted by the True Islam campaign have beenare called out and already debunked in the True Islam campaigners own Jama’at literature, by their second khalifa, no less.

Even if someone believes in a finite hell and maintains that the overall point the TIC tried to make can still be true, I do believe that it is worth thinking about the validity of the lines of reasonings proffered bys the TIC, and whether they are valid.

If I hold a belief, I don’t have to accept every argument that someone makes in support of it. The credibly of each arguments has to be assessed independently of my belief in the validity of the conclusion. To do otherwise is to feed one’s own confirmation bias. It would be working backwards from a desired conclusion instead of making an actual argument for the position I am proposing. One can make a bad arguments for valid statements.

I would encourage my brothers and sisters within the Ahmadiyya Muslim Ccommunity to look with neutral eyes upon the arguments presented. I would even argue that it is more important that the people who hold a belief try to ensure that the arguments that are being put forward are sound, well supported and and that they call out those conclusions which are poorly argued.

6) References



* Unless stated otherwise I am using the English Translation of the Quran by Maulawi Sher Ali from and ‘the ‘Ahmadiyya Islamic numbering scheme for’ of Qur’anic verses.

** Format changes, like emboldening certain words, in quotes have been added by me.


“The Message or a Cry of Anguish” in urdu as “Al-Balagh Ya Faryad-e-Dard” by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and company (1898)

Dear readers, 8-9 years ago, my team of writers and researchers found a cache of lost english books by Ahmadiyya INC. These are books published in English by MGA, with MGA as the author. They are not content translations of any known booklets in Urdu as they are abridged/revised/edited versions for an English audience. And all under the author’s name and during his lifetime.  The question is : why were they lost?  Especially when Ahmadiyya has not been able to do translations for 110+ years, why do these authentic versions penned and published by the ‘Messiah’ himself not valuable for your ‘spreading the message’ to English-speaking people and your newer generations?  Muhammad Ali was working at the Islamia College in Lahore, the copies of this draft were sent to him for translation, he did an excellent job, a few years later, MGA lured him away from the Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam and their Islami College in Lahore, Muhammad Ali became the highest paid employee of MGA and he moved to Qadian (see Mujadid-e-Azim).  Dard tells us that they are indeed translations (in 1947 he told us, see Dard page 581).  Per Dard, The Sirajul Akhbar, dated 13/6/1898; the Singh Saba, Amritsar, dated 30/5/1898, and the Sat Dharam Parcharak, Jullundur, dated 15th Jeth, supported the course adopted by MGA.  The Punjab Observer, Lahore, dated 6/5/1898, and the Paisa Akhbar, dated 14/5/1898, differed from MGA.  MGA only disagreed with the Anjuman Himayat Islam (of which many ahmadi’s were also members) in terms of who should be responding to these types of attacks, of which he nominated himself, in a very arrogant manner.  MGA never said that he opposed blasphemy laws, in fact, just 2-3 years prior he endorsed them.  MGA believed in blasphemy laws until he died, he never changed at all.  It was later Ahmadiyya Khalifa’s which began to oppose these blasphemy laws and they have thus avoided all of MGA’s comments on the matter.

Background story for this book
In 1897, a renegade from Islam, Dr. Ahmad Shah Sha’iq (formerly Medical Officer of Ladakh, turned Christian and was living at Oxford), wrote a book “Ummahatul Mu’minin” (Mothers of the believers), attacking the wives of the Holy Prophet, Muhammad. It was printed at the R. P. Mission Gujranwala and published by a Christian, Parshotam Das, as the agent of the author in India. One thousand copies of this book were sent free to Muslims. MGA received a copy on February 15, 1898. The book wounded the hearts of Muslims deeply and caused considerable excitement among them.  MGA saw that this agitation was going to produce a bad effect upon the peace of the country. (Life of Ahmad by A.R. Dard, online edition of 2008, p. 580)

A Muslim group (Anjuman Himayat Islam) blamed Mirza Ghulam Ahmad‘s vicious polemics against the Hindus as the root cause. In this booklet, the author is at his self-praising best, claiming to posess 10 qualities that any ‘defender of Islam’ should have. A portion of the original Urdu book is in Arabic, and an appendix lists all the books in the private library of Hakeem Nooruddin which the author declares that he was ‘blessed’ to have access to.

The Anjuman Himayat-e-Islam, Lahore, prepared and sent a memorial on April 26, 1898, to the Government but MGA said that the step contemplated was not right.  MGA said that instead of writing a letter of discontent, Muslims should find someone who fits the criteria needed to defend Islam.  In a very arrogant manner, MGA then nominates himself in his book.  Obviously, the Muslims of India would never nominate MGA, since they saw him as a Kafir.

Freedom of Speech in British India?
The sedition law, introduced by the British in India in 1870, outlaws speech that “brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India.” The penalty for running afoul of the statute: up to life imprisonment.

What is the Anjuman Himayat-e-Islam?
It was created in 1884 as a team of Muslim writers who were to defend Islam in front of Christian and Hindu attacks.  Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig, was on the management committee of the Anjuman Himayat-i Islam. However, on 2nd February 1936 C.E., on a proposal by Iqbal, the General Council of the Anjuman Himayat-i Islam put forward a resolution that Finality of Prophethood is a fundamental principle of Islam and that all its members believe in it. Hazrat Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig supported this motion. Upon this some members then tried to add further conditions to this motion. This led to angry arguments and Hazrat Dr. sahib walked out in protest. This led to his suffering a stroke and passing away a few days later. On Dr. sahib’s death The Light wrote an editorial in which Dr. Iqbal was accused of calling Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig a kafir. In reply, the weekly Himayat-i Islam wrote: “Read the proceedings and be reasonable … where and when did our respected President demand that Dr. Mirza Yaqub Baig was a kafir and his expulsion from the Anjuman is extremely necessary …” (Pages 895–898.) Thus until this time Iqbal did not call Lahori Ahmadis kafirs. Indeed, when The Light, the organ of Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat-i-Islam accuses him of so doing, Himayat-i Islam, the organ of the organisation of which Iqbal was the President, denied this charge.

Noorudin gave a speech at the 1893 annual Anjuman Himayat-i-islam’s annual conference
See ‘Noorudin” by Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, page 105

1896, the Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam was read out at an Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam’s event
Noorudin was the president of the Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam by 1896, he thus allowed the reading of MGA’s paper (The philosophy of the Teachings of Islam) to continue for more days as it was read out by Maulvi Abdul Karim.

1897, Noorudin invited again to the annual convention of the Anjuman Himayat-i-Islam
Noorudin was invited to this anjuman’s annual convention once again (see page 97).

Hani Tahir quotes this book in terms of the Ahmadiyya census fraud
Hani Tahir explains how MGA fraudulently told the British government that he had only 318 Ahmadi’s in his ba’it (See at the 8:59 mark), later MGA says it was a mistake and he had much more Ahmadi’s at that time, well into the thousands, see the urdu/arabic version of the book.

This book was republished in 1922, as Urdu (Part I), Arabic (Part II)
We have not seen the second edition (1922), nor we have compared and contrasted the 2.  As we know, Ahmadi’s are known for editing.

Earlier summaries of MGA’s books didn’t include this book
The current book on the “books of MGA” is “hidden treasures”, this book goes over 90+ books of MGA, however, the older book which was also a summation type of book seems to have missed the book in question altogether.  This “summation” book was written 20+ years ago and thus proves that Ahmadiyya INC had purposely distanced itself from this book.  However, Dard admitted to the world that the book was in fact published (1947).

Some Quotes
“It has wounded the feelings of millions of Her Majesty’s Muslim subjects living in the Punjab and other provinces of India by its abusive, scurrilous and contemptuous tone and by using the most indecent and insolent epithets and grossly offensive language against our lord and master, the Seal of the Prophets, the holiest of the Holy, Hadrat Muhammad Mustafasa and has so severely affected Muslim hearts by its shameful and disgraceful falsehoods and fabrications that its harmful effects will extend to our posterity.” (page 1 of the book,
Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 12, p. 369)

Links and Related Essays


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

Scans of this english book, published in 1898



“Haqiqatul-Wahi” (1907) in english as “The Philosophy of Divine Revelation” is in english for the first time ever

Dear readers, for the time ever, the Ahmadiyya movement has fully translated MGA’s most voluminous book into english.  We are currently reading it and preparing an academic styled review.  We are sure that the Ahmadiyya editing team has already went through this book and purposely mis-translated the controversial portions of this book.  The book should be called “Reality of Revelations”, however, Ahmadiyya editors are being told what to write and how.  We found an error between Muhammad Ali’s translation and the new one.  Enjoy!

We already found something
In 1915, as the Lahori-Ahmadi’s had already split with the Qadianis.  Muhammad Ali was busy refuting the Qadiani doctrines in terms of the prophethood of MGA, Takfir and the verse of Ismuhu Ahmad.  Muhammad Ali’s most compelling argument was that MGA had written in 1907, in the supplement to Haqiqatul Wahy as follows:

Supplement, Istifta, p. 64

“Prophethood has admittedly been terminated with the advent of our Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. There is now neither any book besides the Quran, the best of the Scriptures nor any Shari’ah other than Shari’ah of Muhammad. The Holy Prophet, who is the best of all creation, has given me the name ‘prophet’ which is a reflection of countless blessings earned by obeying him faithfully. I see no virtue of my own. I owe accomplishments to this holy soul. My prophethood in the divine lingo means only abundance of communion and communication. Let the curse of Allah be upon him who aspires anything beyond this and arrogates or pulls his neck away from the yoke of obedience to this Holy Prophet. Our Messenger (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), is undoubtedly the Khatam al-Anbiya and with him has terminated the chain of the messengers; so no one can now claim perfect prophethood after our Messenger, the Chosen one. Nothing is now left after him except abundance of communion and communication and even that cannot be received without obedience to the Holy Prophet, who is the best of mankind. I declare it on solemn affirmation that I have attained this status only by following the beams of light radiated from his prophethood, and that I have been called a prophet by God only metaphorically and not by way of reality.”

This supplement was in Arabic only
I would have to guess that Ahsan Amrohi wrote this supplement, since Maulvi Abdul Kareem was already dead, Nooruddin probably helped.  To date, we have not checked the arabic on this sentence.  We are working on that.

The new translation–2018
….prophethood came to an end after our Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and there is no Book after al-Furqan [the Discrimination; i.e. the Holy Quran] which is superior to all earlier Scriptures, neither is there any new shariah after the Muhammadan Shariah.  

However, the Best of Mankind declared me to be a Prophet, and this is a matter of being his reflection due to the blessings of complete submission. And I find no excellence within me; all that I have obtained is through his holy soul. By calling me a Prophet, Allah means only [that I receive] abundant revelations and converse [with God]. May the curse of Allah be upon the one who aspires to anything beyond that, or considers his own person as something special, or frees his neck from the yoke [i.e. complete submission] of the prophethood [of the Holy Prophet sa].

Surely, our Messenger is Khatamun-Nabiyyin [the Seal of the Prophets] and the chain of
Messengers has ended with him. Therefore, no one has the right to claim prophethood after our
Messenger, the Chosen One, in an independent manner, and nothing has remained after him except dialogue [with Allah] in abundance. Even this is conditional upon following [the Holy Prophet sa] and is not granted unless one is a true follower of the Best of Creation. I swear by God that I have been blessed with this spiritual station only by following the radiant rays of the light of the Chosen Prophet sa. I have been granted the name ‘Prophet’ by Allah, not in its original sense [of being raised independently], but as a subordinate Prophet.

Either Muhammad Ali lied or the Qadiani editors?
I can’t figure out who is lying here.  At least not yet.  If you notice, they took out the word metaphor and totally replaced it with “original sense” and they removed, “not by way of reality” and wrote: but as a subordinate Prophet”Something is wrong here, how could there such a difference in translations?

Related Essays and Links

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

Up ↑