Search

ahmadiyyafactcheckblog

Search results

"tash"

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

Intro
The life of Maulana Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha is an interesting case study.  He left Ahmadiyya in roughly 1915, and with his entire family, it is unclear who his wife was and his children.  He wrote an article in the Tashhizul Azhan of Oct-1913(as quoted by Mahmud Ahmad in 1924 and Muhammad Ali before him) in which he showed that the only prophethood which could be granted to Muslims was Nubuwwti Juzwi or partial prophethood.  This contradicts the view of the Qadiani jamaat about the prophethood of MGA.  In fact, Amrohi famously opposed the prophethood claim of MGA in 1901.

Some quotes
“Hence it follows that prophecies regarding future events granted in proof of the truth of Islam will be transmitted through the medium of Nubuwwat and that is what is meant by Nubuwwati Ghair Tashri‘i (Prophethood without Law) or Nubuwwati Juzwi Partial Prophethood). All the Ambiya’ who came after Mosesas, were honoured by the gift of this kind of Nubuwwat because the Nubuwwat of Ahkam (Lawbearing Prophethood) had ceased among the Israelites with the advent of the Torah” (Tashhidhul Adhhan October 1913, page 500) See also, “Truth About the Split” (1924), online edition, see page 127.

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/13/life-sketch-of-maulvi-syed-muhammad-ahsan-amrohi-2/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/hope/2007/hope200712_lifesketchsyedmuhammadahsanamrohi.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/ahmadiyya-leadership-published-books-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-on-30th-may-1907-see-al-badr/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/27/maulvi-abdul-kareem-lived-exclusively-with-mga-on-the-3rd-floor-of-mgas-house/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/27/muhammad-ali-lived-exclusively-within-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-house-for-almost-10-years-1899-1909/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/16/dr-mir-muhammad-ismail-mgas-brother-in-law-lies-about-mga-leading-salaat/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/11/eik-ghalti-ka-izala-aka-correction-of-an-error-was-re-published-on-march-1-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/

 

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

Some quotes from Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad’s magazine “Tashhiz al-Ahzan”

“In this verse God has said that the Holy Prophet is the Khatam an-nabiyyin, and none shall come after him who may be raised to the status of prophethood, and who may abrogate his teachings and establish a new law. Nay, however many saints (wali) there are, and righteous persons, they will get all that they get through service to him. Thus God has said that the Holy Prophet’s prophethood was meant not only for his times, but that in future too no prophet would come…His being the Khatam an-nabiyyin contains a prophecy. This is that before the Holy Prophet Muhammad there arose hundreds of prophets in the world who had great success…But thirteen hundred years have now passed since his claim, and no one has attained success by claiming prophethood. Why has this arrangement stopped? Obviously because of the prophecy that he is the Khatam an-nabiyyin. Now we ask the opponents of Islam, what greater sign can there be than the fact that, after the Holy Prophet, no person who claimed prophethood was successful. The words ‘God is ever Knower of all things’ mean to say: We have made him Khatam an-nabiyyin and We know that no prophet would come after him, and any liar making such a claim would be destroyed”

(Tashhiz al-Ahzan, April 1910, by Mirza Bashir-ud-din Mahmud Ahmad).

http://www.ahmadiyya.org/qadis/mahmud-f.htm

 

Scans


Translations of these scans

“In this verse God has said that the Holy Prophet Muhammad is the Khatam-un-nabiyyin, and none shall come after him who may be raised to the status of prophethood, and who may abrogate his teachings and establish a new law. Nay, however many saints (auliya) there are, and righteous and pious persons, they will get all that they get through service to him. Thus God has said that the Holy Prophet’s prophethood was meant not only for his times, but that in future too no prophet would come. …

Another point must be remembered here, namely, that in this verse God says: ‘God is ever Knower of all things’. This does not appear to have an obvious connection here because it was not necessary to say, regarding the things God has explained, that He is the Knower of everything. The fact is that the Holy Prophet’s being the Khatam-un-nabiyyin contains a prophecy. This is that before the Holy Prophet Muhammad there arose hundreds of prophets in the world that we know about and who had great success. In fact, there does not appear to be any century in which, at one place or another, no claimant to prophethood could be found. So Krishna, Ramachandra, Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, Moses and Jesus are those whose followers still exist in the world, and are forcefully doing their work, each group putting forward the claim of its truth. But thirteen hundred years have passed since the Holy Prophet’s claim, and no one who claimed prophethood has ever attained success. After all, prior to his time people used to claim prophethood, and many of them were successful, whom we believe to be true. But why has this arrangement stopped with his advent? Why is no one successful now? Obviously because of the prophecy that he is the Khatam-un-nabiyyin. Now we ask the opponents of Islam, what greater sign can there be than the fact that, after the Holy Prophet, no person who claimed prophethood was successful. It is this which is referred to in the words: ‘God is ever Knower of all things’. That is to say, We have made him Khatam-un-nabiyyin and We know that no prophet would come after him, and any liar making such a claim would be destroyed. This, therefore, is a historical prophecy which no one can possibly refute.”

(Pages 151–152)

Tashhiz al-Azhan was a Magazine founded by Mahmud Ahmad in 1906

Intro
I wanted to post about this magazine by Mahmud Ahmad.  I will post quotes that I have found.

Quotes
“Thirdly, the fate of the people who are not aware of the teachings of the Promised Messiah is known to Allah.  It cannot be said with certainty what is in their minds.  Since the Sahriah takes cognizance of what is patent we are bound to consider them Kafirs”. (Tashhizul Azhan, April 1911, page 139).  Also quoted in Muhammad Ali’s “Heresy in Islam” (1922) see page 34.

“Thus not only the person who does not declare him Kafir but happens to ignore his call is an unbeliever, but even one who considers him truthful in his heart and does not reject him outright but is hesitant to take the pledge, is an unbeliever”. (Tashhizul Azhan, April 1911, page 141). Also quoted in Muhammad Ali’s “Heresy in Islam” (1922) see page 34.  

“It is our faith and belief that Hazrat Sahib was an apostle of God, appointed by the Lord. It is our conviction that Allah has always been sending His prophets. At the same time it is also our belief that the Holy Prophet Mohammad, is Ra’uf, Rahim, Apostle of Allah, and Khataman -Nabiyin. After him, there has been no prophet with a new Sharia ; and he is the seal for all kinds of Nabuwwat in the future. Whosoever will reach God now, he will do so only by virtue of obedience and loyalty, and devotion to him, as we read in the Holy Quran: ` ‘ `Say, if you love Allah, follow me, and God will begin to love you.’ His honour lies only in this. Can a man be called honoured who has no subordinates under him? No, really honoured and high in rank would only be one who has many people of position and power placed under him. Look at things in this world itself. Would you prefer to be a king, or an emperor? The world emperor denotes a higher position than does the word king. It carries the sense that he rules over kings. He stands higher than kings, not lower. Similarly a Nabuwwat is higher which has some prophets placed under its authority, than another Nabuwwat which has no prophet placed under it. So, on this same principle, we hold the Promised Messiah as a Nabi, and a Mamur, duly commissioned, in the light of unassailable Reports in the works of Hadith.” (Tashhizul Azhan ) Vol. 1V & VI pages 130, 131, April, 1911)

“If any one could become alive after death, after three centuries, he would see that the world is as full of Ahmadis as the sea is full of water drops.”
(Tashhidhul Adh-han, January 1913, p 39)

“The reverend says that all Muslims are agreed upon this issue, except Sir Sayyid who has rejected it on rational grounds, but that no one has rejected it on the basis of the Holy Quran. However, I will go on to show that he is wrong in saying that no one has rejected it from the Holy Quran. I will prove that people have shed light on this from the Quran itself and have proved that Jesus was not born without a father, but was born like the rest of the world. What I mean to say is that there have been differences on this issue, and that some people have believed Jesus to have had a father.”

(Tashhiz al-Azhan, April 1913, pp. 165 – 170)

“These quotations prove that except for the Promised Messiah no one else can be a Prophet…After Holy Prophet (pbuh) only one Prophet was necessary and the coming of too many Prophets would have hindered the Wisdom and Schemes of God.”

(Tasheed-ul-azhan, Qadian, No.8, vol.12, p.11 dated August 1917)

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

 

 

In June-July of 1908, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote that the ‘Promised Son’ would not be actual son of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

Intro
The majority of prophecies of MGA failed.  As a result of this, after MGA died, Ahmadi’s scrambled to clean up the mess.  Noorudin tackled the failure of the Muhammadi Begum prophecy directly, but there are many other cases, in fact, we are all late to the party, so to speak.  This entire story and references is taken from the Lahori-Ahmadi website.  This is basically the son of MGA saying that he isn’t the Musleh Maud, however, after he became Khalifa, almost every edition of the ROR was claiming that he was actually the Musleh Maud.  Years later, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s would opine that MGA’s son that died was the Musleh Maud.  Finally, Hani Tahir recently made a video about this entire story herein (at the 4:49 mark).  Hani Tahir quotes a speech of the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer-uddin mahmud Ahmad from the annual jalsa of 1939 wherein the Khalifa argues that he cannot deny the Khilafat like Hassan did, or else he would die and cause his whole family to be killed, like Hasan.  This speech was given on the 25 year anniversary of his Khilafat.  Its Urdu edition was first published by Al-Shirkatul Islamiyyah in 1961 and has now been included in Anwarul ‘Ulum Vol. 15.  The first english edition was published in 2009.

Why so many contradictions?
The sons of MGA contradict each other all the time, this is nothing new.  In fact, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad would always publicly say that a son of a Khalifa should not be a Khalifa, however, behind the scenes he was prepping Mirza Nasir Ahmad to be the 3rd Khalifa.  In fact, after 1956 or so, the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad stopped making public appearances and never led Salaat, Mirza Nasir Ahmad did all of that, and thus acted like a Khalifa as early as 1956 or 1957.  One more point, Mirza Nasir Ahmad was the President of Majlis Khuddam ul Ahmadiyya since its inception in 1939, and thus all the youth of Ahmadiyya knew who Mirza Nasir Ahmad, the Khalifa seems to have taken the president-ship for about 5-6 years (officially) upto 1954, he was also the principal of the Talim ul Islam Highschool at Qadian and the new college in 1944 to 1965.  Other then this, he didn’t seem to write any essays in his daddy’s magazines and newspapers, nor are any of his speeches recorded or written out from the 1950’s.  Interestingly enough, Mirza Bashir Ahmad opined that the Ahmadiyya Khilafat would end (in the 1950’s he wrote about it).

The Data
Shortly after the death of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in May 1908, Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad wrote a lengthy article in the magazine of which he was editor, Tashhiz-ul-Azhan (v. 3, no. 6–7, June–July 1908), answering allegations by the opponents of the Ahmadiyya Movement that some of the prophecies of the Promised Messiah had not been fulfilled in his lifetime. One objection related to the non-fulfilment of the prophecy of the birth of a noble and glorious son who would bring a great transformation in the world (the Muslih Mau‘ood). In answering this objection, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote that the word ‘son’ in this prophecy could apply to a later descendant of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad from some future generation or it could even apply to any true follower who is not physically related to him in any way.

After Mirza Mahmud Ahmad became khalifa in 1914, his followers began to put forward the notion that he was the Muslih Mau‘ood, till in 1944 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad himself laid claimed to this.Starting from within that period till now, members of the Qadiani Movement have been raising the same objection against the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement as the opponents of the Ahmadiyya Movement raised against Ahmadis in 1908, saying: if you believe that the Muslih Mau‘ood has not yet come then it means that the Promised Messiah’s prophecy about a great son was untrue. Our answer is just the same as the answer that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad gave to the opponents of the Ahmadis so emphatically, in full detail, in 1908 as quoted below.

In this reply Mirza Mahmud Ahmad does not even mention the possibility that one of the three sons living at that time, including himself, could in future become the Muslih Mau‘ood. However, his followers later argued that a part of the prophecy, made in 1886, was that the Muslih Mau‘ood would be born within nine years, so he had to be born by 1895. But Mirza Mahmud Ahmad makes no mention of this in his 1908 article!

Extracts from article by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad

Note: Click here to see the extracts below from the original Urdu magazine, presented as scanned images.

 


This point should also be considered that even according to the use of language the word ‘son’ can also be applied to a descendant from some future generation. Accordingly, it is used in this way frequently in Arabic. Thus, many tribes are named after a forerunner and they are called his sons.

— p. 297-298


Considering that people of the world call one man as the son of another who passed away several centuries earlier, and thus Umar ibn Abdul Aziz and Harun Rashid are known as the sons of Umayya and Abbas respectively, why cannot God the Most High call a boy from among the future descendants of the Promised Messiah as being his son? Is God not allowed to do what people can do? When worldly people can consider a man to be related to one who passed away long before, even though he does not deserve it, can God not do the same, Who knows well who deserves to be related to whom? Today those known as Sayyid, despite being embroiled in thousands of kinds of evils and sins, … are considered deservant of being called Al-i Muhammad, but when God the Most High has, for some purpose, referred to a boy from among the future descendants of the Promised Messiah as being his son, this is regarded as unlawful.

… Today, not hundreds but thousands of preachers call out loudly in their speeches ‘O sons of Adam, refrain from doing such and such acts’ and ‘do such and such acts’, but no one asks them: ‘Why are you addressing us by this title when Adam was not our father?’ So what is the problem if a boy from among the future descendants of the Promised Messiah is called his son?

His revelation, kafá háza, proves clearly that the revelation about son refers to a boy from the future descendants, and the revelation ‘your descendants will have fame through your name’ further supports that someone from future descendants can also be called the son of the Promised Messiah. God the Most High knows well who deserves to be known as his son. So what harm is there if a prophecy is given about a glorious boy who would bring a transformation in the world and he is called as the son of Hazrat sahib? The Holy Prophet too said that those among the Persians who accept Islam are included in the Bani Fatima. So do the Persians themselves become the sons of Fatima? One should also ponder over the fact that in the Quran and Hadith this figure of speech is used frequently. So what harm is there if God the Most High spoke to the Promised Messiah in this way? For example, in the Holy Quran the Jews are again and again called the Children of Israel. Although Israel had died some 2500 years previously, God the Most High still called the Jews as the Children of Israel. If this had not been a form of expression used by the Arabs and in the Divine scriptures, the Jews of that time who raised objections on most things would have cried out immediately that they were not the Children of Israel and would have given the names of their fathers. Again, in the Holy Quran it is said about Abraham “We gave him Isaac and Jacob”, even though Jacob was not the son of Abraham but of Isaac. This shows that such expressions occur in the word of God, and there is no scope for objection in this.

— p. 298-300


By son can be meant grandson or great grandson or some other descendant. There is no cause for objection in this.

— p. 300


Ponder that it is stated clearly in the Quran:

“And strive hard for Allah with due striving. He has chosen you and has not laid upon you any hardship in religion — the faith of your father Abraham. He named you Muslims.” (22:78)

Now does this verse mean that the name of the father of every Muslim is Abraham? Most certainly not. It means that he who follows the example of Abraham, walks in the path taught by him and accepts Islam, is in the sight of God like the son of Abraham. Everyone knows that there are hundreds of nations among Muslims who are not descended from Abraham nor is their nation connected with the family of Abraham in any way. Thus when God declares every such person as son of Abraham who is a Muslim and strives in the way of God, giving the word ‘son’ so broad a meaning that it is not necessary to be from among the Bani Ismail or the Bani Israel, then where is the difficulty if the same God today declares someone from the future descendants of the Promised Messiah as his son? To sum up, not only people of Iran, Afghanistan, India, China and Japan but even Europe and America can be called sons of Abraham, and God the Most High calls them sons of Abraham in the Holy Quran. So what is the problem if a man is declared as the son of the Promised Messiah?

We also find such figures of speech when we look in Hadith. For example, on the night of the mi‘raj, when the Holy Prophet asked Gabriel about Abraham, he replied to him: This is your righteous father. He said the same about Adam. So when this is proved from the Quran and Hadith, then why is the objection raised against the Promised Messiah that he was given the promise of a son which was not fulfilled. The promises of God never remain unfulfilled. They always come to pass, and the same will happen in this case. These revelations did not mean that the Promised Messiah himself would have a son but that in the future such a man would be born from his progeny who, in the sight of God, would be as if he were his son, and would be considered his fifth son, besides his four sons. Just as Jesus is known as the son of David, so will he be called the Promised Messiah’s son.

This view of mine is supported by the revelation of the Promised Messiah that I quoted above, kafá háza, which meant that he would not have any further male issue. Accordingly, two girls were born after this, and no boy. The Promised Messiah himself also believed this because he too applied a revelation to his grandson which gave news of a son. Otherwise, if he thought that it would be his son, why should he have applied it to his grandson? In that case, he would have thought that he would have a son in the future to fulfil the revelation. So it is evidently clear that those revelations were about a boy from later descendants, whether it be a grandson, great grandson, or later still.

— p. 301-303


Our Holy Prophet had given the prophecy of the railway as a form of transport which has been fulfilled today. Should the people of the twelve centuries in the middle have given up Islam and turned to unbelief because the prophecy of the new form of transport was not fulfilled? As this has been happening to all the prophets, that they made prophecies about future times, then what does it matter if the Promised Messiah also gave some news of the future and foretold that among his descendants would be born a boy possessing such great awe that it would be as if God had descended from heaven to help him? This will further prove his truth and people of that future time will see this prophecy fulfilled and derive pleasure from it. People of the present time should ponder over the promises that are for them … As I have written, this prophecy of a son is about a boy from his descendants who would be a man of great glory, being accompanied by Divine succour. I have also proved that it is not only in the revelation of the Promised Messiah that such metaphorical expressions occur, but they are also found in the words of the earlier prophets and in the Quran and Hadith. A person is referred to as son, but a later descendant is meant.

— p. 305

Links and Related Essays

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/07/12/ahmadiyy-and-2455-of-the-quran-and-their-spiritual-khilafat/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Talim

https://www.alislam.org/library/books/Khilafat-e-Rashida.pdf

http://ahmadiyya.org/qadis/rep-khilafat-speech.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/06/29/the-office-of-khilafat-cannot-be-a-family-inheritance/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/08/even-in-1907-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-still-lusting-for-his-niece-muhammadi-begum/

http://www.muslim.org/qadis/mm/tashhiz.htm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=tash

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/06/29/the-office-of-khilafat-cannot-be-a-family-inheritance/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/17/was-mirza-mubarak-ahmad-the-musleh-maud/

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

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

Intro
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 .

Scan

Additional Links and related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Noorudin

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Amrohi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=arabic

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/06/hani-tahir-exposes-ahmadiyya-lies-again-the-arabic-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=ghost+writers

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=right+arm

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/lecture-ludhiana-was-not-a-lecture-it-was-a-riot/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/10/12/the-story-of-how-mga-hurt-his-right-arm-and-was-disabled-since-his-youth/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-needed-toilet-attendants-his-entire-life/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/15/who-is-mirza-ghulam-murtaza-1791-1876/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/mga-used-scribes/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=ghost+writers

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/04/ahmadiyya-mullahs-have-been-caught-editing-the-writings-of-mga-yet-again/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Noorudin

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=Amrohi

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/?s=arabic

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/06/hani-tahir-exposes-ahmadiyya-lies-again-the-arabic-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/06/was-noorudin-the-ghost-writer-of-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mgas-ghost-writers-argue-on-the-prophethood-of-mga-in-1900/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/09/18/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-and-muqamat-al-hariri/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/02/mufti-muhammad-sadiq-was-a-student-of-noorudin-pre-1891/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/13/life-sketch-of-maulvi-syed-muhammad-ahsan-amrohi-2/

http://www.aaiil.org/text/articles/hope/2007/hope200712_lifesketchsyedmuhammadahsanamrohi.pdf

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/10/04/maulvi-sher-ali-told-the-world-that-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-would-send-his-arabic-writings-to-noorudin-and-ahsan-amrohi-for-editing/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/ahmadiyya-leadership-published-books-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-on-30th-may-1907-see-al-badr/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/10/ahmadiyya-leadership-admitted-that-mga-used-lots-of-editors-and-ghost-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/27/maulvi-abdul-kareem-lived-exclusively-with-mga-on-the-3rd-floor-of-mgas-house/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/27/muhammad-ali-lived-exclusively-within-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-house-for-almost-10-years-1899-1909/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/06/16/dr-mir-muhammad-ismail-mgas-brother-in-law-lies-about-mga-leading-salaat/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

Tags

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

 

Another claimant of prophethood within Ahmadiyya

No automatic alt text available.
Image may contain: 1 person, beard, hat and closeup


Intro
From time to time, a new claimant of prophethood emerges in the Ahmadiyya Jamaat.  The last one was Asad Shah, who was eventually murdered, however, he had basically left the Qadiani-branch of Ahmadiyyby claiming prophethood, nonetheless, the Khalifa pretended that he was still an Ahmadi, just to ensure that he could claim this as terrorism.  However, there are many others, Zahir-uddin Akmal claimed prophethood in the 1911 era.  This is precisely why Allah stopped prophethood with Muhammad (saw), Muhammad was the 124,000 and final prophet.  Muslims don’t need new prophets, since we have the quran.  We don’t need divine revelation either, or good dreams and etc.

Related Essay’s
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

Meet Shah Mohammad Faisal
https://www.facebook.com/yazaulharb?fb_dtsg_ag=AdzuqynYTh_eoKzbPCiEvapr_14TnXfMOO_SBMvg3tJSJA%3AAdzVM2HQcfJ2PnFdXJvkVwycbOXq2a77XqW_7rCoSoNmeg—FB page

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/11/eik-ghalti-ka-izala-aka-correction-of-an-error-was-re-published-on-march-1-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/

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

Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad never wrote any books or never penned any articles

Intro
Just like his father, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad barely wrote anything.  Even in the Talim-ul-Islam school of Qadian, the Ahmadi-mullahs passed him even when he failed.  He stared the Tashhiz al-Azhan magazine in 1906 and was allowed to create his own sub-organization within Ahmadiyya, the Ansarullah.  The friends and well wishers of the Mian Sahib wrote for him and on his behalf.  In fact, in that same era, and in response to an argument by Muhammad Ali, the Qadiani-Khalifa seems to admit that his own newspaper, the Tashhiz al-Azhan continued to write the name Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad as the editor of the newspaper (as late as 1913), even though he was not, he claims that he had no connection with his own newspaper since 1911.  Further, Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad never wrote any books either, he dictated what needed to be written and then proof read it or had another mullah proof read it.  This even holds true for those commentaries of the Quran that Mirza Basheer-uddin Mahmud Ahmad takes credit for, which are incomplete.

The quote
“””In the first place, the words of Maulawi Muhammad Ahsan possess no special authority. They may be regarded as possessing the same value as the words of any other learned man. In the second place, the publication of his article in the Tashhidhul Adhhan cannot lend any special value to the views expressed therein, because the article was published in October, 1913, when I had already for two years ceased to have any active connection with the magazine. At that time Qazi Muhammad Zahuruddin Akmal was the de facto editor of the Magazine. The managing body of the paper, however, continued to print my name on the cover in order to retain its popularity, inasmuch as it was I who had been editing it since its foundation. Under the circumstances, if any particular view was at that time published in the magazine, it cannot justly be cited against me. I was not then its active editor nor were the articles published in the magazine shown to me whether in original or in proof.””””  (See “Truth about the split”, online edition, page 125,https://www.alislam.org/library/book/the-truth-about-the-split/ ).  

Mirza Sultan Muhammad from Patti, District Lahore, married Muhammadi Begum (MGA’s niece/daughter), not MGA

Intro
Dear readers, to full understand who Mirza Sultan Muhammad from Patti is, you have to do lots of reading, this is by no means an easy subject to learn.  Nonetheless, start here.  Mirza Sultan Muhammad married MGA’s daughter/niece and MGA also predicted his death within a few years, which never happened.  Ahmadi mullahs went to the extreme of making up fake stories that Mirza Sultan Muhammad repented or apologized, or in some way was neutral in this whole matter.  However, that is a total lie.  Firstly, Mirza Sultan Muhammad served in the British military and even fought during WW-1 (1914–1918).  He was shot and survived and became a hero of sorts.  In the below we sill present lots of info….pay attention.

Ahmadiyya sources lied and told us: these were taken from alislam.org, https://www.alislam.org/library/ahmadiyya-history/prophecy-muhammadi-begum-truth/

“I have always, and still consider the late Mirza Saheb, a righteous and respected person who was a servant of Islam; who had a noble spirit and who was constant in his remembrance of God. I entertain no opposition to his followers and regret that for certain reasons, I was not able to have the honour of meeting him during his lifetime.” [Tashizul Azhan: May 1913]
AND….

“At the time of the prophecy, the Arya Hindus, because of Lekh Ram and the Christians, because of Athim offered me a hundred thousand rupees to file a case against Mirza Saheb. If I had taken the amount I would have become rich but it was my great faith in him that prevented me from doing so.” 

“I declare on oath that I have such firm faith in Hazrat Mirza Saheb which I think even you, who profess to be his followers, cannot claim”
[Al Fazl: 9th June 1921]

We found the original scan of the Al-Fazl of June 9th, 1921

3 years later, Mirza Sultan Muhammad was tracked down and he clarified in the below

The weekly Ahl-i-hadith newspaper of 1924 tells us
Weekly Ahl e Hadis Amritsar in its publication of 24th March, 1924 brought an interesting report in this regard. Urdu version of which may be seen in screen shot of weekly. English translation is as under:-

“”“Mirza Sahib Qadiani ,s each prophesy proved to be a decisive one for him. Because he always prophesied for a decision from Allah. So his prophesy regarding his heavenly wed bride was clear in its meaning but the man to whom the lady was married, was Mirza Sultan Muhammad of Patti, District Lahore. It was all important that Mirza Sahib Qadiani pays attention to him because he was the main irritant in the acquisition of his prophesied bride. Therefore, a stern time line of the death of Mirza Sultan Muhammad was prophesied which was to expire in August 1894. But when he did not die in the given time line, Mirza Qadiani starts saying that my prophesy scared Mirza Sultan which earned him extension in life. Finally Mirza Sahib Qadiani wrote that he would be a liar, if Mirza Sultan did not die in my life time. Facts are that Mirza Sahib Qadiani died in 1908, but Mirza Sultan is still alive. During a debate at Sikandarabad, Qadiani Muballigh Abdur Rehman Desi Misri stated that Mirza Sultan had written a letter to Mirza Sahib Qadiani assuring him that he (Mirza Sultan) considers him a saintly person. Although this writing do not affect the prophesy in any manner, yet Mirza Sultan was asked of this, he verbally replied he has never been a believer of Mirza sb Qadiani. On request he wrote the following text:- When Mirza Qadiani announced my death prophesy I never thought it to be true nor I was scared of it. I have always been and am a follower of my elders of Islam to this day.”””

Signature 
Sultan Muhammad Baig Resident of Patti dated 30-03-1924.
Witnesses
Molvi Abdullah Imam Masjid Mubarak
Molvi Ahmadullah sb Amritsari 
Molvi Mola Bakhsh Khateeb Jama Masjid patti Distt Lahore.
Molvi Abdul Majeed Rasheed Resident of Patti.
Mistari Muhammad Hussain Naqsha Nawees Patti.

The scan

Molana Muhammad Hussain Batalvi has also confirmed from Mirza Sultan Muhammad thru one of his relative whether he has given Qadianis any such writing in their favour, he denied it

Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/13/mirza-sultan-ahmad-mgas-eldest-son/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/09/who-is-mirza-ghulam-muhi-ud-din-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-paternal-uncle-died-in-1866/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/11/24/mirza-imam-ud-din-the-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/07/16/the-punjab-chiefs-by-lepel-griffin-1890-edition-doesnt-even-mention-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/12/11/who-is-mirza-nizam-ud-din-1845-the-first-cousin-of-mirza-ghulam-ahmad/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/10/new-data-on-muhammadi-begum-found-2017/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/24/mirza-sultan-muhammad-and-wife-muhammadi-begum-lived-and-died-as-muslim-had-5-sons-and-two-doughters/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/07/29/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-wanted-muhammadi-begums-husband-to-be-killed/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/05/14/mirza-sultan-muhammad-from-patti-district-lahore-married-muhammadi-begum-mgas-niece-daughter-not-mga/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/10/new-data-on-muhammadi-begum-found-2017/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/02/14/in-terms-of-muhammadi-begum-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-guaranteeing-that-she-would-eventually-taqdir-e-mubra-be-married-to-him/

https://www.alislam.org/library/book/haqiqatul-wahi/

Tags

In 1891, when MGA made his big claims, he denied prophethood–Mufti Sadiq was heavily involved

Intro
MGA denied prophethood as early as 1884, some ulema of India had already issued a Fatwa of Kufr.  As we have recently learned, MGA was already claiming to be the Messiah in 1889, Ahmadiyya leadership has always suppressed this data, the Ahmadi-mullahs lie about almost everything in their pursuit of gainful employment.  We can come across some additional data about MGA’s denial of prophethood in 1891, it is posted in the below.  This is a longer story…MGA and his team denied prophethood until November of 1901, and even a bit earlier to the summer of 1900.  A reader would have to be very well versed in the dynamic of the split to fully understand the brevity of this data.  Finally, it should be noted that MGA and his team vehemently denied prophethood using the argument that the word prophet should be replaces in all of MGA’s books and revelations to muhaddas.

Summary

In 1891 Mirza Qadiani had to flee from Ludhiana to Amritsar after a complaint was lodged against him for creating Law and order situation.From Ludhiana he came to Amritsar. Peoples of this city were against him too.

Mirza was so petrified that he sent Mufti Sadiq to offer prayer in the Masjid of Ghaznavi Scholars, Where Mufti Sadiq managed to have a meeting of Mirza Qadiani with Ahle Hadis Scholar Molvi Ahmadullah.

Mufti Sadiq a, close disciple of Mirza Qadiani writes in his book ZIKR E HABIB (screen shot attached), that:-

“During meeting Molvi Ahmadullah said to Mirza Qadiani that some of your writings reveal that you are a claimant of prophethood that is why peoples have turned against you. Hazrat SAHIB (MGQ) explained the actual meaning of his claim (ie he do not at all means actual prophethood). Molvi Ahmadullah sahib said ok you give us in writing that wherever the word nabuwwat appears in your writings, it does not mean Nabuwwat it means MOHADDISIYAT AND IN NO WAY IT IS AGAINST THE FAITH OF KHATM E NABUWWAT. Hazrat sahib immediately wrote this on a piece of paper and handed it over to Molvi Ahmadullah Sahib which was kept by Molvi sahib for showing to ulema who were to excommunicate MGQ because of his claims.”

Scans


Links and Related Essays
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-causes-of-internal-dissensions-in-the-ahmadiyya-movement-by-kwaja-kamaluddin-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/08/01/prophethood-among-the-followers-of-muhammad-by-maulana-sayyid-muhammad-ahsan-of-amroha-oct-1913-in-tashhizul-azhan/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/05/20/an-ahmadi-claimed-prophethood-in-late-1901-or-early-1902-and-was-boycotted-by-ahmadis-chiragh-din-of-jammu-jamooni/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-abdul-kareem-claims-prophethood-per-mga-maulvi-amrohi-disagrees/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2019/01/13/what-is-arbain-a-book-by-mga-and-his-team-of-writers/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/04/23/in-1891-when-mga-made-his-big-claims-he-denied-prophethood-mufti-sadiq-was-heavily-involved/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-accused-of-claiming-prophethood-in-the-1879-1884-era/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/09/mirza-ghulam-ahmad-was-considered-a-kafir-in-1884-before-his-wild-claims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/12/26/some-rare-books-from-the-1901-1902-era-which-refute-mgas-claim-to-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/maulvi-sanuallah-acknowledges-that-mga-claimed-prophethood-in-nov-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/10/12/mirza-sultan-ahmad-son-of-hazrat-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-on-finality-of-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/12/11/eik-ghalti-ka-izala-aka-correction-of-an-error-was-re-published-on-march-1-1914/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/01/16/hani-tahir-explains-mirza-ghulam-ahmads-prophethood-and-pre-1901-vs-post-1901/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/11/21/a-few-months-after-becoming-khalifa-mirza-mahmud-ahmad-waffled-on-his-fathers-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/06/27/do-ahmadis-believe-in-the-same-kalima-as-muslims/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2016/09/30/mga-explains-how-he-misunderstood-his-prophethood-in-1880-and-realized-it-later-on/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/

https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2018/03/19/mga-lost-the-debate-with-molvi-muhammad-bashir-bhopali-1891/

#ahmadiyya

Up ↑