Search results


Ahmadiyya leadership admitted (in the 1930’s) that MGA used lots of editors and ghost writers

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Maulvi Noorudin created Ahmadiyya as their collective brainchild.  MGA would have the dreams and make the wild claims and Noorudin would defend MGA and build a team of writers, imams and language scholars.  MGA knew Noorudin from the 1870’s, they both had correspondance with Sir Syed in this era also, they were both also members of the famous Ahl-e-Hadith sect of Northern India, this sect never numbered more than 100,000 in British India in the late 1890’s, thus, almost everyone knew each other.  Here are some names of the main ghost writing team, Maulvi Abdul Karim, Maulvi Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, Maulvi Sher Ali and Hakim Fazl Din of Bhera.  Some other people who came independently, yet still joined MGA’s team was Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi, who was also a member of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, in fact, uptil his job with MGA, he worked for the founder of the Ahl-e-Hadith sect, Syed Nazeer Husain from Delhi and Siddiq Hasan Khan of Bhopal.  Maulvi Muhammad Ali was another, however, he came via Khwaja Kamaluddin and the prominent Ahmadi’s of Lahore.

Maulvi Abdul Kareem, Maulvi Ahsan Amrohi and Maulvi Noorudin were the imams at Qadian
MGA never led any prayers in any mosque in his whole life.  He needed some imams to do this job for him.  They led the prayers at Masjid Mubarak and Masjid Aqsa on Friday’s for Juma or for Eid.  Their imamate was mostly via the Masjid Mubarak, Maulvi Abdul Kareem was the main imam.

They all lived together
MGA and his whole family, Noorudin and his whole family, Maulvi Ahsan Amrohi and his whole family.  Later on, roughly 1899-1903, Mufti Muhammad Sadiq and his whole family moved in, Maulvi Muhammad Ali and his whole family also moved in.  We estimate that 50-60 people lived with MGA in his mansion at Qadian by 1907.

MGA had a broken right arm from his youth
MGA could not be a serious writer, his arm just didn’t have the strength required to write all day, he thus had his team write and advise him accordingly, he would have his scribes send all writings to Noorudin, Amrohi and Abdul Karim for final approval.  In fact, MGA needed toilet attendants to help him relieve himself.

MGA spoke with a huge stutter and thus couldn’t be an Imam
The main issue was that MGA spoke with a terrible stutter his entire life.  Thus, he could never give a proper speech, give adhan, or lead prayers.

MGA was high on opium and indulged in massages
Ahmadiyya literature is filled with data which proves that MGA was taking opium everyday just to alleviate his pain from his many ailments.  Thus, MGA could not be a writer and come up with these claims, Noorudin managed all of this for MGA.  MGA got massages from men and women, and sometimes all night.

Amrohi didn’t want MGA to claim prophethood
MGA’s son tells us that there was a huge argument on this topic in 1900.  Ahsan Amrohi had no idea that MGA was about to claim prophethood and was shocked, whereas, Maulvi Abdul Kareem knew the inside story.  After initially following the Qadiani-Ahmadi’s and supporting the prophethood of MGA, Amrohi recanted and seems to have joined the Lahori-Ahmadi’s, he was dead by 1919 nevertheless.

Noorudin wrote BA5 after MGA died and published it
After MGA died, many old books were being published, “Jesus in India” was published, BA5 was published and many others.  The intro to BA5 is a dead give off that someone is an editor here, it mentions the famous 50=5 argument, Noorudin was obviously the editor.

Some quotes

“His holiness, the Promised Messiah, wrote his book of Tabligh, which is included in his book Aina-e-Kalamat-e-Islam in Arabic. During the course of its writing, he used to send the manuscript to the philosopher of the community, Nuruddin, for proof reading. After this, he used to send it to ustad Abdul Karim so that he may translate it in Persian.”  (Al-Fadl, January 15, 1929). 

“His holiness (Mirza) used to send manuscripts of his Arabic books to his first Caliph (Nuruddin) and also to Ustad Mohammad Ahsan. The first caliph used to return the manuscripts after reading them, mostly as he took them. As for Ustad Muhammad Ahsan, he exerted his utmost effort and at some places used to change words for correction.” (Seerat-ul-Mahdi, Vol. 1, P. 91).


Mirza Ghulam Ahmad even asked others to submit articles to be included in his book. Here is a letter Mirza composed to Chiragh Ali:

“I have been much pleased to receive your letter. From the very beginning, it has been my desire to serve Islam. Your book has encouraged me tremendously… If you have any articles, send them over to me… Your article about confirmation of prophethood has not reached me so far, although I have waited for it long. Therefore, I bother you once again to send me your article without delay. I would like you to write another article for me about affirmation of the reality of Quran, so that I may be able to include it in my book Baraheen-e-Ahmadiyyah.”
(Seyar-ul-Musannifin, Letter to Chiragh Ali;)(As reported in Qadiyaniat-An Analytical Survey).  

The scans


Links and Related Essays


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

MGA’s ghost writers argue on the prophethood of MGA in 1900


I wanted to post a reference from the writings of Mahmud Ahmad in 1915 as he argued that MGA was in fact a prophet, however, without law.

The reference

“At last that event did take place. In the year 1900, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim, the preacher of the Friday sermon, gave a sermon in which he, used the words Nabi (Prophet) and Rasul (Messenger) for the Mirza. This caused great irritation to Maulavi Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan Amrohawi. When Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim came to know of this, he gave another Friday sermon in which be addressed the Mirza, requesting him to contradict his belief, if he was wrong in considering him to be a prophet and Messenger of God. After the Friday prayers were over, Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim caught hold of the skirt of the Mirza’s apparel and requested him to correct him in his beliefs if they were erroneous. The Mirza turned around and said that he, too, held the same belief. Meanwhile, Maulavi Muhammad Ahsan had been greatly agitated by the sermon and in anger was pacing the floor of the mosque. On Maulavi ‘Abdul Karim’s return, he began to quarrel with him. When their voices rose very high, the Mirza came out of his house and recited the Qur’anic verse: “O ye who believe! Don’t raise your Voice above the voice of the Prophet.”

(This event is based on the report of a speech of Sayyid Sarwar Shah Qadiani at an annual conference held in Qadian, and published in al- Fadhl, Vol. X, No. 51, dated january.4,1923)

(See also Haqiqat al- Nubuwat, p 124.[published in 1915])

MGA had multiple ghost-writers.  In this case, Maulvi Amrohi (who was the first payed Ahmadi-mullah), he didn’t know that MGA had finally claimed prophethood and Maulvi Abdul Kareem was ordered to pronounce it.  They proceeded to argue, then MGA quoted the Quran and thus claimed prophethood openly for the first time (summer 1900). However, he remained silent for an additional 1 1/2 years or roughly 14+ months.

Later on, after “Correction of an Error” was published, Maulvi Amrohi wrote a rebuttal to an inquiring mind who accused MGA of claiming prophethood, however, Maulvi Amrohi very tactfully only denied independent prophethood, he never even mentioned the “The Ummati-Nabi”.  Fast forward to 1914, Maulvi Amrohi nominated Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa and sided with him in his first year of his Khilafat.  He even read Mahmud Ahmad’s 2 books on the subject of prophethood, i.e. Qaul al Fasl and Haqiqatun Nubuwwat, however, in the summer of 1915, he seems to have had a change of heart and denounced MGA’s claim of prophethood and deposed Mahmud Ahmad as Khalifa.  He then sided with the Lahori-Ahmadis and died in 1919 in this state.


Links and Related Essays


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


Was Noorudin the Ghost-writer of MGA?

This is a quick essay and referencing post that I wanted to create.  Here is the reference:

“””Many people used to say that his holiness, the Promised Messiah, did not know even Urdu and someone else wrote the books which were attributed to him. The others held even a worse opinion about his writing potentialities. They believed that Shaikh Nuruddin was the person who wrote the books for him.” (Al-Fadl, February 5, 1929; by Mirza Mahmood Ahmad Qadiani)””””

Links and Related Essays


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

Ahmadiyya translations and interpretations on 4:159

Catch up on our arguments on 4:159 here.  We have found the translations and commentaries by Noorudin and a 1947 english translation of the Holy Quran published under the name of the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad, however, he was not literate in english, thus, someone else wrote this on his behalf.  In fact, this entire commentary and translation are missing from all Ahmadiyya sources in 2019.  We have also found and posted Malik Ghulam Farid’s first edition (1969) of his long Quranic commentary, which was published under Mirza Nasir Ahmad.  The current one on the website has went through many editions.  It is important to note that in 1947 and 1969, Ahmadiyya sources quote a Tafsir of the Quran called Jarir (Ubayy).  They quote this Tafsir in their attempt to change the meanings of 4:159 from “they must believe in him before HIS death” to “they must believe in IT before their THEIR death”.  This seems to be a reference to the Tafsir by Al-Tabari, who’s full name is Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī , and Ubay is most likely a reference to Abd-Allah ibn Ubayy (the famous hypocrite).  However, upon cross examination, we find that Imam Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310) said in his Tafsir (6:18-21): “Commentators differ on the meaning of this verse, some saying that it means ‘believe in `Isa before `Isa’s death’.” He then cites reports to that effect from Ibn `Abbas, al-Hasan, Qatada, Abu Malik, and others. Then he said: “Others said that it means believe in `Isa before the death of the Jew or Christian.” He then cites reports to that effect from Ibn `Abbas, Ubay, Mujahid (Tafsir 1:180-181), `Ikrima, al-Dahhak, al-Hasan, Muhammad ibn Sirin, and others. Then he said: “Others said that it means believe in Muhammad – blessings and peace upon him – before the death of the Jew or Christian.” He cites a report to that effect from `Ikrima. Then Imam al-Tabari states that the likeliest view to be correct is: there is none of the People of the Scripture but he will certainly believe in `Isa before `Isa’s death.

Muhammad Ali in 1917
He left his commentary blank in terms of explaining this verse properly.  He didn’t argue like the Qadiani’s.

1947, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad’s english commentary of the Quran
1947, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, english translation and commentary of the Quran

Maulvi Noorudin’s urdu translation of the Quran and commentary
Hakim Noor Uddin on 4159

Malik Ghulam Farid on 4:159 in 1969
Malik Ghulam Farid 1969

An alleged Tafseer by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Tafseer Mirza Ghulam

Mirza Tahir Ahmad’s urdu translation
Mirza Tahir Ahmad’s translation in Urdu

Al-Azhar University, comments and translation by Dr. M. M. Khatib on 4:159 in 1984
Al-Azhar 1984 on 4159

Muhammad Asad on 4:159
Muhammad Asad on 4159

Links and Related Essays

The Quran Discussion Group

New York, NY
871 Personal Growth Seekers

Quran is the holy book of Muslims. And this group is for every human being (Muslims and Non-Muslims) who want to know about Quran.We read and discuss the Quran in an open min…

Check out this Meetup Group →

The Quran Discussion Group

New York, NY
870 Personal Growth Seekers

Quran is the holy book of Muslims. And this group is for every human being (Muslims and Non-Muslims) who want to know about Quran.We read and discuss the Quran in an open min…

Check out this Meetup Group →


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

Who is Syed Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha, who worked as an Imam in Bhopal uptil 1891?

Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi was initially working as a Mullah in the state of Bhopal, he worked exclusively for Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan, who was the husband of the Queen of Bhopal, it seems that MGA sent him his Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya in 1880 or 1882, I am not sure which volume, however, Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan tore up the book and sent it back to MGA in that condition.  This could have been 1885 also.  In 1890, Nawab Siddique Hassan Khan of Bhopal died and it seems that Syed Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi was jobless.  In 1891, he helped MGA with secret information about the debate with Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali.  After Noorudin died (1914), he left Ahmadiyya and it is unclear what religion he joined, however, it seems like he became a Lahori-Ahmadi.

He was a member of the Majlis-i-Ulema of Nawab Siddique Hassan Khan of Bhopal State in India.

1891, October
Syed Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha was still living in Bhopal.  He wrote letters to MGA and helped MGA with his debate with Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Bhopali.

1891, December 27-29
Amrohi was at the first Jalsa Salana in 1891, he was seated on the stage, right next to MGA
See page 417—

Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi lived exclusively in MGA’s house (1892)
Just like all the people in the inner circle of MGA, he lived exclusively with MGA and led prayers in the Masjid Mubarak, Maulvi Abdul Kareem and Noorudin also led the prayers in this tiny mosque which was the personal office of MGA(see page 430).  MGA barely went into his own house and never taught his children anything about Islam.  It is unclear whether or not Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi’s children or wife also lived with him in Qadian, however, it seems unlikely.

In 1892, Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi became a paid Mullah of MGA and took the lead in several debates
Ahmadiyya sources tell us Amrohi was the first paid mullah of Ahmadiyya (See Dard), starting in late 1892, he then began touring the countryside and helping MGA with debates.  He also began editing MGA’s ilhams and other articles and books.

He disagrees with MGA’s claim of prophethood.

He defends MGA’s announcement of prophethood (Eik Ghalti Ka Izala), however, he only defends the part about MGA not being an independent prophet.

Ahmadiyya leadership published books by Maulana Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha on 30th May 1907–See Al-Badr.  

May 26th, 1908, Nooruddin nominates Amrohi as a possible choice for Khalifa
As we all know, Amrohi was highly praised in Ahmadiyya, this is another example, further, by 1909, almost all of MGA’s closest team of writers were forced to move out of MGA’ house, it is unclear if Amrohi also had to move out.

He writes: “”Prophethood among the Followers of Muhammad”” by Maulana Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha, Oct-1913, in Tashhizul Azhan.  

When Nooruddin died (1914), Amrohi was the first to nominate Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad for the Khilafat
However, just 2 years (1916) later he seems to have been bought out by the Lahori-Ahmadis, he switched sides even after reviewing Mirza Basheer-uddin’s books of 1915, which forcefully promoted the prophethood of MGA.  Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad covered this topic extensively here (see page 195) and many others…

He died in 1919
His books remain in Urdu and unexplored,

Links and Related Essays

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

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and 4:159 (4:160 in the Ahmadiyya Quran’s), before the death of Jesus (as)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad stole many arguments from Sir Syed about the death of Jesus.  Sir Syed seems to have been the first Muslim ever in history to change the translation of 4:159 in 1880 in his famous Tafsir.  Sir Syed totally changed the translation of this verse, since he was looking to disprove that idea that Esa (as) hadn’t died yet.  Sir Syed knew that 4:159 proved that Esa (as) hadn’t died yet, thus, he purposely mistranslated it to sound preposterous.  MGA followed his lead, and in 1890, in Izala Auham, MGA used the exact same translation that Sir Syed used.  In 1891, MGA’s first few debates after his wild claims also discussed 4:159, see his famous Delhi debate with Bashir Bhopali.  From 1892 to 1901, MGA seems to have went quiet on the topic of 4:159.  However, in the 1901-1902 era, (See Ijaz-i-Ahmadi, page 31, online english edition, Ahmadiyya editors have purposely mistranslated the word Ghabi herein) it came to MGA’s attention that Abu Hurairah had supported the idea that Esa (as) hadn’t died yet, via Tafsir Thana’i, in fact, Tafsir Thana’i was written by Maulvi Sanaullah, in his Tafsir he quoted Abu Hurairah via a super authentic Sahih Bukhari hadith.  MGA and his team of writers were thus forced to discredit the scholarship of Abu Hurairah and called him stupid (GHABI in Arabic) or lacking understanding.  MGA then commented on 4:159 in 1906/1907 via Haqiqatul Wahy (see page 44, online english edition, which is purposely mis-translated in this case), wherein he presented the same belief as Sir Syed again.  Again, he called Abu Hurairah as stupid, which the Ahmadi editors have changed to flowery language.  Furthermore, MGA presented 5:64 (5:65 in the Ahmadi’s Quran’s) in Haqiqatul Wahy as evidence that Jews and Christians will not ALL be converted to Islam before the death of Esa (as)(see page 45 and page 855).  Ahmadi’s have continued to use this verse in the same way in 2019.  Interestingly enough, the official 5-volume commentary of the Quran by Ahmadiyya scholars doesn’t mention how 5:64 (5:65 in the Ahmadiyya Quran’s) means that the Messiah won’t convert all Christians and Jews to Islam before his own death.

What does 4:159 (4:160) really mean?
This verse has to be read together with 4:157 and 4:158.  Ahmadi’s like to isolate these verses and then change the meanings.  When they are read together, 4:157–159, it is clear that Esa (as) hasn’t died yet and upon his physical return to this world, all Christians and Jews who will be alive in that era will convert to Islam (See Tafsir Ibn Kathir also).  As we all know, MGA failed in this 2019, Christians are in majority on this planet, and Jews have their own technologically advanced country with nuclear weapons and America backing them up.

1880, Sir Syed on 4:159

(Tafsir Ahmadi by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, vol. ii, p.48)

ii. Referring to the expression ‘in this’ (Arabic: bi-hi) in the verse: ‘And there is none of the People of the Book but will believe in this before his death’ (4:159), which is generally taken to mean in him (i.e. in Jesus) Sir Syed writes:

“This points to the words ‘And their saying: we have killed the Messiah’ [4:157], and to their saying, and not to the Messiah. So this means: ‘All the People of the Book, before their death, will believe that Jesus was killed’. After this it is said: ‘And on the day of Judgment he, i.e. Jesus, will be a witness against them’. The word ‘ala [‘against’] is used to indicate loss or harm. So the meaning is that on the day of Judgment Jesus will be a witness against their belief.”

1870 to 1890, MGA on 4:159 from 
MGA published lots of data in this era, specifically, BA 1–4 were published in this era.  MGA never even commented on 4:159.

1890 in Izala Auham, on 4:159 
The Lahori-Ahmadi have translated portions of Izala Auham, specifically, wherein MGA claims that there were 30 verses of the Quran that prove that Esa (As) had died.  Per MGA and his team of writers, one of those verses is 4:159.  They wrote:

“And there is none among the People of the Book but will believe in it (the crucifixion of Jesus) before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he (Jesus) shall be a witness among them.”

1891, MGA’s debate with Maulvi Muhammad Bashir Sehsavani (who worked in Bhopal at the time) in Delhi
4:159 seems to have been brought up in one of MGA’s first debate as a Messiah (See Life of Ahmad).  Maulvi Muhammad Bashir took great pride in being a grammarian with a specialty
in the use of the Arabic letters laam and nuun sakeelah. His repeated contention was that whenever a verb has laam or nuun sakeelah on it, the verb always denotes the future tense (See Mujadid e Azim, abridged english edition, pages 402-410).  It seems that MGA and his team counter-argued that  many different Quranic verses that despite the presence of laam and nuun sakeelah on a verb, it could denote the present tense only. In such cases it cannot be interpreted in the future tense. He also presented other verses where the verb with laam and nuun sakeelah denoted the present continuous tense so that both the present and the future were included. The detailed discussion is available in the book Al-Haq Delhi for the interested reader.

It seems that Maulvi Syed Ahsan Amrohi was working as an undercover Ahmadi in this time frame in Bhopal, he hadn’t publically converted to Ahmadiyya.  Per Mujadid e Azim,  Hazrat Mirza had received a letter from Ahsan Amrohi on the day of the debate same. In this letter, Maulana Amrohi had written, among other things, that:

“Maulvi Muhammad Bashir has been working on his statement for six months. The fruit of his exertion is confined to the written statement he is bringing with him. He has no other material.”  (See Mujadid e Azim, english online abridged version).

We didn’t find any references by MGA or his team of writers to 4:159 in this 10 year period.

1901-1902 era and the Ijaz-i-Ahmadi book
(See Ijaz-i-Ahmadi, page 31, online english edition, Ahmadiyya editors have purposely mistranslated the word Ghabi herein)
It came to MGA’s attention that Abu Hurairah had supported the idea that Esa (as) hadn’t died yet, via Tafsir Thana’i, in fact, Tafsir Thana’i was written by Maulvi Sanaullah, in his Tafsir he quoted Abu Hurairah via a super authentic Sahih Bukhari hadith.  MGA and his team of writers were thus forced to discredit the scholarship of Abu Hurairah and called him stupid (GHABI in Arabic) or lacking understanding.

Maulvi Sanaullah’s Tafsir of the Quran was published in this era.  He quoted a super-authentic hadith from Sahih Bukhari wherein Abu Hurairah related that Esa (As) would physically descend and he referred to 4:159.  The hadith is as follows:

(((Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 657)))

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle ﷺ said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler),
he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it.” Abu Huraira added “If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): — ‘And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) Before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness Against them.” (4.159) (See Fateh Al Bari, Page 302 Vol 7).

MGA was thus forced to discredit Abu Hurairah, he even called him as stupid and lacking understanding.

This is another dead era in terms of 4:159.  No Ahmadi sources wrote about it in this era.

MGA on 4:159 in 1906/1907 via Haqiqatul Wahy (in the online english edition)
MGA calls Abu Hurairah as wrong and possessing weak intellect on pages 44-45 of Haqiqatul Wahy, since Abu Hurarya claimed that Esa (as) would physically return based on 4:159.  MGA wrote disparaging comments about Abu Hurairah in BA vol. 5 and Ijaz i Ahmadi.

On page 700 of Haqiqatul Wahy, MGA says about 4:159: 
“””Meaning that, there is no one out of the People of the Book who, before his death, fails to believe in the Holy Prophet sa or Hadrat ‘Isa [Jesus]. It is recorded in the books of exegesis that the People of the Book receive this revelation when they are going through the agonies of death or are at death’s door. Evidently, they happen to believe only when God reveals to them that a particular Prophet is true. But this revelation does not make them the Elect of God. However, this indeed is the divine practice that when death is imminent, most people tend to see a dream or receive a revelation. It is not exclusive to any particular religion nor is there the requirement that one be righteous and a doer of good.””””

Historically, Al-Tabari tells us
It is narrated from Sa’id bin Jubair from Ibn Abbas [about]; “No one will remain from among the People of the Book but will certainly believe in him before he dies.” He said; “Before the death of Eisa ibn Maryam.” (Tafsir Al-Tabari 9/380 Narration 10794-5 under Qur’an 4:159. Classified as Sahih by Hafiz Ibn Hajr in Fath Al-Bari 10/250, Kitab Ahadith Al-Anbiya, Chapter on the Descent of Eisa ibn Maryam).

Pickthall on 4:159
“””There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them “””

Muhammad Ibn Al-Hanafiyyah (15 – 81 AH)
Muhammad ibn ‘Ali Abi Talib (also known as Ibn Hanafiyya, the son of Hazrat Ali (RA)), explained Qur’an 4:159 in these terms: “He will descend before the Day of Judgment. All Jews and Christians will believe in him.” (Al-Suyuti, Durr al-Manthur, 2 :241.)

Abd Allah Ibn Abbas (618 CE – 687 CE)
About the verse Qur’an 4:159: “This verse is proof that Jesus (AS), son of Mary, will appear… All of the People of the Book will believe in him before his death.” (Al-Hakim, Al-Mustadrak, 2:309.) He also said referring to the Holy Qur’an 43:61, “God indicates that Jesus (AS) will appear before the Day of Judgment.” (Khasmiri, al-Tasrih, 289-90).

Ibn Abbas (RA) said, “When Allah intended to raise Jesus (AS) to the heavens, he went to his companions… and Jesus (AS) ascended to the heavens through an opening in the top of the house”. (Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir called it Sahih).

Al-Hasan Al-Basri (642 CE – 729/110 CE/AH)
“I swear to God that Jesus (AS) is at this moment alive in God’s presence, and that everyone will believe in him when he returns.” With regard to the Holy Qur’an 4:159, he said: “God raised Jesus (AS) to His presence. He will send him before the Day of Judgment as a holder of rank. Good and bad, all will believe in him.” (Al-Suyuti, Durr al-Manthur, 2:284) He also made a similar comment regarding the Holy Qur’an 43:61, saying that the meaning of the verse was that Jesus (AS) would return to earth. (Al-Suyuti, Durr al-Manthur, 2:220).

Muhammad Hijaab on 4:159
In this video, Imam Muhammad Hijaab explains the true meanings of 4:159 (at about the 10 min mark).

Some Additional Commentary that I found from here–

Yusuf Ali’s english translation is as follows:

“””And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them”””

Yusuf Ali gives this interpretation in his commentary note 665:

Before his death: Interpreters are not agreed as to the exact meaning. Those who hold that Jesus did not die refer the pronoun “his” to Jesus. They say that Jesus is still living in the body and that he will appear just before the Final Day, after the coming of the Mahdi, when the world will be purified of sin and unbelief. There will be a final death before the final Resurrection, but all will have believed before that final death. Others think that “his” is better referred to “none of the People of the Book”, and that the emphatic form “must believe” (la-yu` minanna) denotes more a question of duty than of fact.

Note 664 on Surah 4:158 is maybe a helpful background to the above note, since in 665 he only talks on the basis of what he just stated is the generally accepted Muslim view:

There is difference of opinion as to the exact interpretation of this verse. The words are: The Jews did not kill Jesus, but Allah raised him up (rafa`u) to Himself. One school holds that Jesus did not die the usual human death, but still lives in the body in heaven, which is the generally accepted Muslim view.

In a mailing list discussion, one Muslim claimed this clearly states that all People of the Book will believe in Jesus before his (future) death. This seems to be grammatically possible. Several translators seem to follow this understanding and their translations say something to the effect that “everyone from the People of the Book will (certainly) believe in him …”. However, why would Jesus be a “witness against them” when they believe in him? Should he not be a witness against those who do NOT believe in him?

Rashad Khalifa is the odd one out who transfers this into the past tense (was required to believe), while all others see this either present or future. Khalifa circumvents the problem by inserting the word “required” which is not in the Arabic.

The main question so far seems to be whether the emphatic form means “certainty of fact in the future” (will believe) or “duty for everyone” (required, must believe). But there are more opinions on the meaning of this verse…

In response to Yusuf Ali’s translation of this verse, an Ahmadiyya gave me the following explanation regarding their interpretation of this verse:

Everybody will believe in whom? The verse you quoted does not give a name anyway. Why not? And whose death is being referred to? I mean, many *People of the Book* die everyday without believing in Jesus a.s. anyway. i.e. the Jews, whilst the Christians already believe in him as the Messiah anyway. And if you mean to say that they will all believe in him as a Prophet of God after his hypothetical return to earth and subsequent death, then there would be no need for Jesus a.s. to be a witness against them on the Day of Judgement anyway. So, your proposed construction of the verse becomes untenable.

Besides the Arabic pronoun used does not here mean *him* but *it*, because the incident being referred to in the preceeding verse is to Jesus’s a.s. alleged death on the cross, so the correct translation (with my explanation in brackets) will be:

“And there is none among the People of the Book but will (continue to) believe in IT (i.e. the death of Jesus a.s. on the cross) before his (own) death (i.e. the death of the Jew or Christian himself); and on the Day of Judgement he (Jesus a.s.) will be a witness against them … [4:159].

This Ahmadiyya interpretation gets rid of some problems but substitutes it for others.

The way this is now translated and interpreted by the Ahmadiyya, it says that ALL the people of the Book, Jews and Christians, will continue to believe the death of Jesus on the Cross. But Muslims tell us that there have been thousands (or even millions) of Jews and Christians who converted to Islam, and consequently they do no longer believe in this death on the Cross. Does that not mean the Qur’an is wrong, according to the interpretation given above? Isn’t the Ahmadiyya translation only removing one problem by substituting it with another interpretation, equally wrong on the factual level?

Is there any interpretation of this verse that is consistent with the rest of Islamic theology (whether the Sunni or the Ahmadiyya version) and the facts of life that some Christians and Christians do convert to orthodox Islam, some to Ahmadiyya Islam and believe exactly as these movments tell, and most of them continue to believe in the revelation given by God in the Bible?

Whatever this verse means, the facts will contradict any theory which understands it in a way such that all of them will continue not to believe, or all of them will believe. This is certainly a challenge to the “none … but” construction in the aya which makes a statement that supposedly holds without exception.

At the following link you will find a number of further articles examining the Qur’anic passage and Muslim traditions on the Crucifixion which we would like to recommend reading as well. Based on the above and those further articles…

Conclusion: The one and only passage in the Qur’an dealing with the issue of the Crucifixion is extremely vague and riddled with problems of its own. How then can it be the bases for rejection of the very clear meaning of the passion narratives in the Gospels?

However, the above are not yet all the different versions of Sura 4:159.

A video in Hindi, explaining how the Ahmadi translation of 4:159 is total nonsense
Fast forward the video to the 1 hour 34 minutes mark.

Mirza Tahir Ahmad’s urdu Tafsir on 4:159

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s quotations, which were built into a Tafsir

Links and Related Essays

The Quran Discussion Group

New York, NY
870 Personal Growth Seekers

Quran is the holy book of Muslims. And this group is for every human being (Muslims and Non-Muslims) who want to know about Quran.We read and discuss the Quran in an open min…

Check out this Meetup Group →


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

“Jihad and the British Government” the original edition by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1900) in English

We have found the original edition of “Jihad and The British Government” by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1900), which was edited and translated into english by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, who would eventually become a Lahori-Ahmadi.  The Qadiani’s might have never published this since it was translated by Muhammad Ali, instead, they published a new translation in 2006.  The Lahori-Ahmadi’s published their english edition in 2011.  As we all know, MGA really was trying to abrogate Jihad altogether, he was also planning on claiming to be a law-bearing prophet.  However, he died suddenly in May of 1908 and all of those plans were stopped.  Nevertheless, an Ahmadi, Zahir ud Din, claimed in 1911—1913 era that MGA was a law-bearing prophet.  Noorudin was even telling Ahmadi’s that even if MGA claimed law-bearing prophethood, all Ahmadi’s should still accept him.

Jihad and The British Government

Links and Related Essays—the-expected-mahdi


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

Who is Shaikh Yacub Ali Irfani?

Shaikh Yacub Ali Irfani, also spelled as Sheikh Yakoob Ali Irfanee was an Ahmadi who worked as a major confidant and was on MGA’s team of writers/editors/imams.  He seems to have been a student/assistant of Noorudin while he was in Jammu as early as 1886.  He went on to be the main editor of Al-Hakam and then wrote many early biographies on Ahmadiyya.  He also wrote a biography on the wife of MGA, Nusrat Jehan Begum.

Irfani wrote a note in a letter of Noorudin about a potential marriage between MGA and Noorudin’s pre-teen daughter.

He is present at the very first Bait ceremony in Ludhiana but doesn’t take bait with MGA.

MGA makes Irfani the editor of his first newspaper (see Dard, pages 563-564).

January 1909
Irfani vehemently supports the Khilafat of Noorudin (See Truth about the Split and Noorudin by Zaf Khan).

He writes a biographical book which is officially published by the Ahmadiyya community called ‘Hyat-e-Ahmad’.   He wrote 4 historic books in 1915, Sirat-ul-Nabi, Sirat Ahmad, Hyat-e-Ahmad and Sirat Masih Maoud.  We have found a scan from Hyat-e-Ahmad which indicates that mga was born in 1839.  The Khalifa began to officially change this date in 1916 or so.

He wrote another biographical entry by a toilet attendant of MGA, Mir Hamid Shah.

He writes a biography on the father in law of MGA, Mir Nasir Nawab, this is wherein MGA blurts out to the effect that he has cholera.  After this was published, it was a shocker, Ahmadiya leadership ordered a 2nd edition be published and they erased the relevant sentences.

Links and Related Essays

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

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and 2:62, the “Salvation” or “status” of Non-Muslim’s in an islamic state?

Chapter 2 of the Quran was revealed to Muhammad just after he arrived in Medina in roughly 2 A.H. and became the General/Leader of the “greater-medina-area”.  2:62 indirectly tells us that there is NO compulsion (see 2:256 also) for any person to join Islam or serve in the military.  These verses seem to be a “peace-time” teaching of Islam.  In fact, this entire Chapter teaches Muslims how to live in a diverse environment and lays the grass-roots for the most basic Islamic teaching, justice.

MGA and his team never really commented  on 2:62 until 1906
MGA never commented on this verse, nor did any of his “ghost-writers” until Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan wrote about it in his Tafsir of the Quran in 1905, which was marketed by the ROR.  In this Tafsir, Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan wrote that belief in MGA was not necessary for any Muslim.  This is where and when MGA took up this topic and he wrote a letter to Dr. Khan explaining how his rejectors were Kafirs.  After MGA died, his sons took this up, in 1911, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (the soon to be Khalifa) began calling Non-Ahmadi-Muslims as Kafirs and quoting MGA’s letter of 1906.  The soon-to-be-Lahori-Ahmadi’s immediately disagreed, Khwaja Kamaluddin immediately issued a response wherein he claimed the son of the founder was wrong and etc.  This question was left to Nooruddin, who was disabled mentally and physically at the time.  More controversy followed, Noorudin died without officially solving the issue.  The Split happened and this was the main issue between the two groups, prophethood was also included, Ismuhu Ahmad was also included but dropped by 1923 by the Khalifa.  The Qadiani-sect did open Takfir in those days to all Muslims and to the Lahori-Ahmadi’s.  By 1923, the Khalifa ordered Ahmadi’s to stop doing open Takfir, the Takfir went silent, and has been silent and deceptive since 1923.  However, some of the hard-core Ahmadi’s will proudly call the deniers of MGA as Kafirs.

Sir Syed Ahmad Khan on 2:62 in the 1870’s via his Tafsir, “Tafsir-i-Ahmadi”
As we all know, MGA and his team copied Sir Syed Ahmad Khan almost word-for-word, except for the Jesus in India=Yuz Asaf theory, that is very unique to Ahmadiyya.  They also copied Sir Syed Ahmad Khan in terms of “Jesus is Dead” and Jinn=bacteria.  Nevertheless, we are sure that Sir Syed Ahmad Khan used this verse to explain that Christians, Sabians, Jews, and all other pagans were eligible for heaven.  Or at a minimum should be seen and treated as respectful members of society.

MGA never commented on 2:62 in the famous Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya
MGA and his team of writers/scribes totally avoided this verse in this book. It should be remembered that 100+ verses of Quran were touched on in this collection.

MGA waited until 1906 to commentate on this verse
To date, MGA and his team of writers never commented on this verse at all.  We haven’t found any evidence.  What we have found is that MGA was having his beef with an Ahmadi, Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan in 1906 over the implications of this verse.  Dr. Abdul Hakim Khan emphatically wrote in his commentary that belief in MGA was not necessary, which caused MGA to ex-communicate Dr. Khan and to declare Takfir to all Muslims in the world.

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad quotes MGA’s letter to Dr. Khan and does open Takfir.  Kwaja Kamaluddin and Muhammadi Ali object.  Noorudin tries to keep the peace, but fails.

The split happens, the Qadiani-sect breaks away while doing open-Takfir, the Lahori’s refuse to call the belief in MGA as mandatory and also call him a non-prophet type.

Muhammad Ali (The Lahori-Ahmadi) publishes his commentary on the Quran and under this verse (2:62), he writes that it doesn’t actually mean that Christians and Jews can make it to heaven without belief in Muhammad (Saw) and Allah.

The Ahmadiyya Khalifa orders Ahmadi’s to stop doing open Takfir, the Takfir goes underground.

While in court, the Ahmadiyya Khalifa claims that he never meant to do Takfir, and it was only meant as talking down to Muslims and Lahori-Ahmadi’s, in other words, it was only symbolic Takfir.

The 1988 official-5-volume commentary of the Quran by Malik Ghulam Farid and others

 [5 volume commentary]

“””The verse important and much difference arisen about its meaning. Some who are not in the-habit Of making a deep study Of the Quran have hastily jump to the conclusion that, according to this verse, belief in Islam is not necessary. They say that anybody, whether he is a Muslim, Jew, Christian or any other, who sincerely believes in the Last Day and does good deeds will be saved. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran emphatically declares in a number of verses that belief in the Holy Prophet and in his revelation is essential.”””

Additional info on this 5-volume commentary
This commentary seems to have been published in 1947 and then again in the 1960’s.  Those editions were destroyed by Ahmadiyya leadership.


While commenting on this the 4th Khalifa says: [P22 Islam’s response to Contemporary Issues]

“”””As such, followers of all religions based on Divine revelation have been granted the assurance that provided they do not fail to recognize the truth of a new religion (despite their sincere efforts to understand) and stick honestly and truly to the values of their ancestral religion, they have nothing to fear from God and will not be denied salvation.”””

Links and Related Essays

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

Up ↑