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 1902, (See Ijaz-i-Ahmadi) it came to MGA’s attention that Abu Hurairah has supported the idea that Esa (as) hadn’t died yet, via Tafsir Thana’i.  MGA thus, discredited 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, wherein he presented the same belief as Sir Syed again.  He also called Abu Hurairah as stupid again.

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.”

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

MGA on 4:159 in 1890 in Izala Auham
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 in Delhi
4:159 seems to have been brought up in one of MGA’s first debate as a Messiah (See Life of Ahmad).

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).

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.


Links and Related Essays

The Quran Discussion Group

New York, NY
869 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…

Next Meetup

Q&A about Islamic Religion

Thursday, Sep 19, 2019, 6:00 PM
5 Attending

Check out this Meetup Group →


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

Noah’s Ark: Criteria to be considered part of the Ahmadiyya community

The following is a quote from the Book “Noah’s Ark” which was written by MGA in the context of a plague outbreak in Punjab.

The overall message of the book was:

Join my community because God has revealed to me that whoever is part of my community will be statistically safer from the plague. And that will be a miracle . He followed that announcement by an outline of his beliefs in a section called “Our Teaching”. There, he has a section which talks about who counts as being part of his community. It goes as follows:

(The numbers were added for ease of understanding and the more ambiguous and harsher criteria has been bolded. No words has been added, removed or changed.)


  1. He who at the time of supplication does not believe that God has power over all things, except that which might be contrary to His promise, is not of my community.

  2. Whosoever does not give up lying and deceit, is not of my community.

  3. Whosoever is consumed by material greed and does not lift his eyes to look at the hereafter, is not of my community.

  4. Whosoever does not truly give precedence to religion over the world, is not of my community.

  5. Whosoever does not repent of every vice and every evil deed, such as drunkenness, gambling, lustful glances, deceit, bribery and every misappropriation, is not of my community.

  6. Whosoever does not observe the five daily prayers, is not of my community.

  7. Whosoever is not constant in supplication and does not remember God with humility, is not of my community.

  8. Whosoever does not discard the company of an evil one who influences him towards vice, is not of my community.

  9. Whosoever does not honour his parents and does not obey them in all matters that are not contrary to the Quran, and is careless in serving them diligently, is not of my community.

  10. Whosoever does not treat his wife and her relatives with gentleness and benevolence, is not of my community.

  11. He who refrains from doing even the least bit of good to his neighbour, is not of my community.

  12. He who does not desire to forgive an offender and harbours rancour, is not of my community.

  13. Every husband who deceives his wife, and every wife who deceives her husband, is not of my community.

  14. Whosoever breaks the covenant of Bai’at in any respect, is not of my community.

  15. He who does not truly believe in me as the Promised Messiah and Awaited Mahdi, is not of my community.

  16. Whosoever is unwilling to obey me in all that is good, is not of my community.

  17. Whosoever associates with my opponents and endorses what they say, is not of my community.

  18. Every adulterer, transgressor, drunkard, murderer, thief, gambler, deceiver, bribe-taker, usurper, tyrant, liar, forger and those who sit amongst them, and everyone who slanders his brothers or sisters and does not repent of his foul deeds, and does not abstain from evil company, is not of my community.


Firstly, If anyone who is part of the community got the plague, they could be scrutinized according to those criteria and inevitably, 1 would be found to be broken. This allows for the rationalization of all failures of the prophecy rendering it practically unfalsifiable. Any way things happen, its still going to be taken as a proof of the existence of God and his influence on our lives.

Secondly, if this passage was to be taken seriously, it makes the creation and growing of a community practically impossible. Most Ahmadis that I know would not qualify to be part of MGA’s community and given how harsh the criteria are, it is fair to extrapolate this to the whole of the community.

I know some people will say that this should be taken metaphorically, but this is not indicated in the way that the passage is written. The paragraph that follows the list explains why this should be taken as both literal and something serious.

All these are poisons. You cannot consume this poison and survive; light and darkness cannot exist together. Everyone who possesses a crooked disposition and is not straightforward with God, can never achieve the blessing that is bestowed on the purehearted.

So the question is, how is this passage reconciled with the fact that: the vast majority of people who would be considered part of Ahmadiyyat today do not meet the criteria set by the prophet they claim belief in?

Is the word of the prophet MGA not important?

Did the prophet MGA give an unrealistic recommendation as to how to determine who is in his own community?

Does the current philosophy value quantity more than quality?

Links and Related Essays

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

Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad owned 49 kanals of land in Lahore in 1958

Per the ROR of Sep-1958, the Khalifa, Mirza Basheer ud Din Mahmud Ahmad owned 49 kanals, 11 marlas, 105sq.ft. of land in what is known as 134 Acres Scheme, Samanabad, Lahore.  This was also jointly owned by a Mullah of the Ahmadiyya Movement, Ch. Fateh Muhammad Sayyal, M.A.

What is a Kanal?
kanal (ڪنال) is a unit of area used in parts of Pakistan and in India. In Pakistan different conversions exist in various areas: a kanal is generally considered equal to 5400 square feet, but it is equal to 4500 square feet in Lahore. In India it is generally considered equivalent to 4500 square feet or one-eighth of an acre. A kanal is a traditional unit of land area. In India it is used in the northern states of HaryanaPunjabHimachal PradeshJammu & Kashmir and North Eastern parts of Pakistan. Its use in India is in decline with urban land measurements standardizing on use of square feet, square meters and square yards.  Under British rule the marla and kanal were standardized so that the kanal equals exactly 605 square yards or ​18 acre; this is equivalent to about 505.857 square meters. A kanal is equal to 20 marlas.[1]

The Khalifa and his associate applied for exemptions on this land
It is important to note that the Khalifa was asking for exemptions on this land.  This could be property tax exemptions.  There is a clarification given that was published in the Pakistan Times, Page-3, 8-23-1958.

The full pdf
Land in lahore


Links and Related Essays

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

“Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Review of Religions, Part 1 thru 4, October -1914 to February 1915

Dear readers, we have found another interesting series of articles from the English version of the ROR of 1914, this comes from an essay series entitled, “Ahmad and Jesus as Prophets”, which seems to go back to 1911.  We had published an entry referring to an essay of 1913 which had a similar title. In April of 1913, they changed the title to simply “Ahmad as a Prophet” Part-1.   By February of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet* came out Part-2).  Muhammad Ali added an asterisks and claimed that MGA was only a prophet in the Arabic sense of the word, thus laying the foundation for the split that happened just a month later.  In March of 1914, Part-3 of the series was published, this was specifically covering the age prophecy of MGA which had failed.  In April of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet Part-4” was published.  In September of 1914, “Ahmad as a Prophet Part-4” was published, this edition covered MGA’s prophecies about his sons, namely the Musleh Maud Prophecy, of Feb 20th, 1886, which is quoted herein, for this entire series of essays, no author is names, Maulvi Sher Ali was the main editor, since Muhammad Ali had moved to Lahore.

“Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Review of Religions, Part 1 thru 4, October -1914 to February 1915
Another similar series of essays was started in Oct-1914.  The writer is M. Ata-Ur-Rahman Rajshahi (Bengal), he is relatively unknown in the history of Ahmadiyya scholars, the Ahmadiyya Jamaat in Bengal was also very small at that time, it would be amazing for a Bengali to have learned so much about Ahmadiyya by 1914.  This was a 4-part series entitled, “Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”, it was started in October of 1914 with Part-1.  Part-1 briefly discusses that publishing of Braheen e Ahmadiyya in 1880, however, it doesn’t mention that the BA1 and 2 were the only 2 published in that year and they were mostly announcements, and not a book of knowledge, the 1889 Bait is also mentioned.  It goes on to claim that there are 400,000 Ahmadi’s currently in the world (In October of 1914).  Part-2 came out in November of 1914.  Remember, arguments were raging back and forth between the Qadiani and Lahori-Ahmadi’s about the prophethood of MGA.  Obviously, the Lahori-Ahmadi’s were claiming that MGA was not a prophet, whereas the Qadiani’s were asserting that MGA was in fact a Prophet without a law.  Part-2 quotes Khutbah Ilhamiya and Braheen e Ahmadiyya Vol. 5.  They go on two claim that MGA is equal to Muhammad, MGA had entered into Muhammad, and thus there was no difference between the two, per Qadiani-Ahmadi theory.  Part-3 came out in December of 1914, just before the annual Jalsa it seems.  This was the first Jalsa of Mirza Basheer ud Deen Mahmud Ahmad’s Khilafat.  Braheen e Ahmadiyya Vol. 5 is quoted as well as Haqiqatul Wahy.  MGA is forcefully introduced as a Prophet in his own right, however, without law.  Nuzul ul Masih and Chashma i Marifat.  They assert that Ahmadi’s still believe Muhammad to be the last of the prophets, however, only in the sense of a law-giver.  They also argue that Khatim was not used in 33:40, instead Khatam was used, which mostly means seal, had Khatim had been used, then it would have meant that Muhammad (Saw) was the last prophet altogether.  In February of 1915, “Ahmad’s Place Among The Prophets”–Part 4 was published.  This is the same time-frame wherein the Khalifa’s first book vs. the Lahori-Ahmadi’s was published, “Qaul al Fasl”.  “Haqiqat un Nubuwaat” was published by the Khalifa a few months later.  It also mentions how the Jalsa at Qadian was held on Dec 25th–27th of 1914, which was Christmas weekend.  It was the first time that women were invited to the Jalsa, the women seem to have had their own Jalsa area and held all sessions independently of men.  It goes on to argue how Ahmadiyya has been a major influencer in the politics of British-India.  Ahmadiyya is described as friendly to the extreme in its love of the British government.  Ahmadis have an utmost loyalty to the British throne.  Nevertheless, the series seems to end here.

Full PDF
Ahmad’s Place Among Prophets Part 1—4

Links and Related Essays

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

“A Mighty Prophecy Fulfilled in the Balkan War” by the editor of the Review of Religions

We have found an un-dated Ahmadiyya pamphlet, which we think is from 1913, Maulvi Sher Ali was the editor at that time.  The title is “A Mighty Prophecy Fulfilled in the Balkan War” by the editor of the Review of Religions.  The Balkan Wars (TurkishBalkan Savaşları, literally “the Balkan Wars” or Balkan Faciası, meaning “the Balkan Tragedy”) consisted of two conflicts that took place in the Balkan Peninsula in 1912 and 1913. Four Balkan states defeated the Ottoman Empire in the first war. In the Second Balkan War, Bulgaria fought against all four original combatants of the first war along with facing a surprise attack from Romania from the north. The conflicts ended catastrophically for the Ottoman Empire, which lost the bulk of its territory in Europe. Austria-Hungary, although not a combatant, became relatively weaker as a much enlarged Serbia pushed for union of the South Slavic peoples.[1] The war set the stage for the Balkan crisis of 1914 and thus served as a “prelude to the First World War“.[2]

This pamphlet has some weird predictions of MGA
They quote MGA saying that the Turks aka the Ottoman’s will soon face defeat.  They also claim that MGA had predicted the partition of Bengal.  They also assert that MGA had prophecies about Persia, Korea and Japan come true.  Another prediction is as follows:

“In the state of Kabul, there shall die 85,000”


“In Europe and other Christian countries there shall appear a kind of plague which will be very severe”. 

A mighty Prophecy Fulfilled In The Balkan War

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

“My Attitude Towards the British Government” (1895) by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

In late 1894, MGA made an announcement which was converted into a book that seems to have been lost by Ahmadiyya sources.  It is also called, “A Refutation Of An Incorrect Statement”.  MGA starts off by telling us how the Civil and Military Gazette of Oct. 24th, 1894 had called MGA as someone who had evil intentions.

My Attitude Towards British Government

Links and Related Essays

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

Who is Hakim Fazl Din of Bhera?

He was also from Bhera like his close friend and brother-in-law, the famous Maulvi Noorudin.  He seems to have owned and operated the famous press in Qadian wherein the majority of MGA’s books and announcements were published from.  He seems to have died in roughly 1909.

MGA mentions Hakeem Fadl Din of Bhera as a sincere friend in his book, “Fath e Islam”, or in english as “The Victory of Islam” (see the Lahori-Ahmadi translation).

The quote
“”””Another one of our friends is Hakim Fazal Din of Bhera. I have no words to describe the depth of love, sincerity, goodly devotion, and spiritual connection which the Hakim Sahib bears towards me. He is a true well-wisher and sincere sympathizer of mine, and has the power of discerning the truth. After God the Most High had directed my attention to writing this pamphlet, and gave me good hope by His special revelations, I mentioned the idea to several people, but none agreed with me. This dear brother of mine, however, even without my mentioning it to him, urged me of his own accord to write this pamphlet, and contributed Rs.100 from his own pocket towards its expenses. I marvel at his spiritual foresight, as to how his exhortation concurred with the will of God the Most High. He is always rendering service without show, and has contributed many hundreds of rupees to this cause confidentially, merely to attain the pleasure of Allah. May God the Most High grant him a goodly reward!””””

1891 Delhi Debate
Hakim Fadl Din was there in Delhi with MGA as he debated lots of the ulema (See Life of Ahmad also).

He helped financially to get lots of new buildings built around MGA’s mansion.

Hakim Fadal Din started a press at Qadian in 1895. It was named Diya’ul Islam. This press produced MGA’s publications at cost price (MGA’s statement in Karam Din’s case, Section 420. I.P.C. dated. 19.8.1903). It was for this reason that MGA produced, on 15.8.1898 a detailed account of this press in the income tax case. (See statement of Hakim Fadl Din in Karam Din’s case on 20.7.1903)(See Dard also).

He is listed in the first 313 list of Ahmadi’s.  He is #23.  He already had 2 wives by 1896.  The status of his children are unknown.

He was MGA’s co-defendant in the famous Karam Din defamation case wherein MGA had initially lost (see Also Tadhkirah).

1909—1910 era
He dies.  His property at Qadian seems to have donated to the Anjuman at Qadian.  The Anjuman wanted to sell the property at full price.  (See pages 251-257 of “Truth About the Split”).  The Khalifa wanted the property to be sold to last owner, before Hakim Fadl Din, however, the Sadr Anjuman disobeyed the Khalifa and sold the property to the highest bidder.

Links and Related Essays

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

“Kishti-Nuh” publish dates, in english as “Noah’s Ark” (1902)

We have come across some interesting information on MGA’s book, “Kishti-Nuh”, which was published on Oct 5th, 1902, as indicated by the Cover of the original edition. Although the title of the book displays the date 5 October 1902, its publishing had already begun in Al-Hakam newspaper by 24 September 1902, which continued to be published in 5 consecutive issues of the newspaper in the form of a series. Below are those dates of Al Hakam newspapers in which Noah’s Ark was published:

– The first 25 pages of Noah’s Ark were published on 24 September 1902, page 1 to 12

– Pages 25 to 48 of Noah’s Ark were published on 30 September 1902, page 1 to 7

– Pages 49 to 62 of Noah’s Ark were published on 10 October 1902, page 1 to 7

– Pages 62 to 72 of Noah’s Ark were published on 17 October 1902, page 1 to 7

– Pages 72 to 76 of Noah’s Ark were published on 24 October 1902, page 1 to 3

Hence, Noah’s Ark was already being published in Al Hakam from 24 September 1902, prior to its publication in book form.

MGA’s additional comments on the plague: 
Al Hakam of 17 September 1902:

“We stand on one side with respect to the plague inoculation as we are given the promise of protection by God Almighty and on the other, there are those who are totally dependent upon it. Allah the Almighty has not forbidden to utilise the means [for curing the disease] but [a person] should not get absorbed by the means to the extent that he reaches Shirk [i.e. leaves God and puts full trust in the vaccine]…

“Countless persons know full well that (as it has been predicted) when people benefit from taking the inoculation against the plague, how happy would that person be who says that others benefited by the inoculation but, ‘I was [saved] from God Almighty’ and how great a sign would this be …” (Al Hakam, 17 September 1902, p. 15, heading “An Extract from the Diary”)

Links and Related Essays

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

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Coco Wine

As we all know, MGA used alcohol, wine and opium in his medicines and lied about it.  We have found yet another reference which proves our point.  Maktubat was published after MGA died, it is unclear as to who ordered for its publishing.  We have reproduced a letter from Vol-4, which was published in roughly 1915.  This letter gives us additional insight on the medicines that MGA was taking.

The quote

My dear brother Dr. Khalifa Rasheeduddin sb,

Assalamo Alaikum wrwb, 

Rs.29/- as sent, has been received and has been distributed as desired. As advised by you, I have stopped taking “Arq e Kafoor” (Camphor extract) and started using Coco Wine and Scottish Emulsion instead. However, it is surprising to note that once I used this, next night I felt great distress at night . I felt myself very hot and wished to remove all my cloths out of body heat. I don,t know why I was feeling so hot when it was so cold and peoples were using warm clothes. I felt my pulse rate was also high. I thought i must drink that old arq e Kafoor. Then I drank it along with Arq e Khajoor. It restored my health condition and soon I got well. Rest is Ok.

Humble self

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

The scan work

Links and Related Essays

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

Up ↑