The issue of the plague and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is one which displays the egotistical nature of man as well the cunning psyche of a opportunist con man. I have thus decided one blog entry would be overwhelming as there are so many inconsistencies with this episode in the life of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. I will therefore make some simple observations in each episode in no particular logical order. Thus let us begin, inshaAllah, with the following quote:

“Another prophecy was that the plague would rage as an epidemic at the time to such an extent that seven out of ten people would die. Now has this sign appeared or has it not?” (Lecture Ludhiana, Page 61)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/ludhiana/LectureLudhiana.pdf

Is he talking about seven out of ten people in the world would die or seven out of ten people in India would die? Regardless, the following is written by Myron J. Echenberg:

“Between plague’s arrival in 1896 & 1921, an estimated 12 million Indians lost their lives, compared with 3 million in the rest of the world combined.” (Plague Ports, Page 51)

Direct Link: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qw1M_3amPcQC&pg=PP1&dq

Below are the figures for the population of India and the world in 1920-21:

“Population of India:
Year – 1921
Population – 251,321,213”
(Gandhian Perspectives On Population And Development by A.K. Sharma, Page 32)

Direct Link: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=H-O42ZDX5GUC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA32#v=onepage&q&f=false

The above table states that the population of India in 1921 was 251.3 million. According to David Lucas below, the world population was approximately 2 billion in 1920.

“The population of the world was two billion (2,000,000,000) around 1920” (World Population Growth by David Lucas, Chapter 3, Page 1)

Direct Link: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/pubs/BAPS/BAPSChap3.pdf

The World
The world population in 1920 was 2 billion, thus if his prophecy of “seven out of ten people would die as a result of the plague” was accurate and duly fulfilled then accordingly, approximately, 1.4 billion people should have died worldwide as a result of the plague. However an estimated 15 million people died by 1921 throughout the world and thus his prophecy has failed if he indeed was referring to the whole world.

India
The population for India in 1921 was 251,321,213, thus if his prophecy of “seven out of ten people would die as a result of the plague” was accurate and duly fulfilled then accordingly, approximately 175,924,849 people should have died in India alone. However, an estimated 12 million people died as a result of the plague and thus his prophecy has failed on both counts, i.e. if he was referring to the entire world or if he was referring only to India. At this point I would like to remind you that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said:

“Another prophecy was that the plague would rage as an epidemic at the time to such an extent that seven out of ten people would die. Now has this sign appeared or has it not?” (Lecture Ludhiana, Page 61)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/ludhiana/LectureLudhiana.pdf

The answer to his question is, “it has not” and therefore without a shadow of doubt, the prophecy of “seven out of ten” has failed.

May Allah (SWT) guide the Ahmadis back to Islam. All praise is due to Allah (SWT).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

“The Holy Qur’an commands, ‘Obey Allah and obey His Prophet and obey those in authority among you.’ Believers are to obey those in authority, besides God and His Prophet. To say that ‘those in authority’ does not include a non-Muslim Government would be a manifest error. For, a government-or authority-whose ordinances are in accordance with the Shariah (that is, they are not in conflict with it) is ‘authority from among you.’ Those who are not against us are amongst us. The Qur’an, therefore, is unequivocal on the point. Obedience to governmental authority is one of its imperatives.” (Works and Speeches, Vol. (i), p. 261)

Just recently, an individual by the name of Naseem Mahdi, who is an Ahmadi, made some statements on FOX news to the effect that Muslims needed to stand up and denounce terrorism and in turn support the country in which they lived.  In the same breath he announced that this was a directive of the Quran and the Sunnah.  He was asking all Muslims who live in the USA to support the US foreign policy without question or concern, he wanted Ahmadis to know that he considered it an Islamic directive to support the USA in their foreign policy.  All this stems from the yearnings of MGAQ over 100 years ago.  MGAQ wanted to support the British in any shape or form, this was not a queer perspective that Naseem was presenting, in fact it was the rhetoric that the Islamic world had condemned over 100 years ago. 

MGAQ argued from Chapter 4 verse 60 (in the Ahmadi numbering system).  MGAQ contended that this verse had global appeal inasmuch as it explains that a good Muslim will obey any ruler who is above them in any circumstance and in any country, more specifically British India.  This policy was irregardless if the ruler was just or not, MGAQ presented it as a standing policy of support.  MGAQ didnt care that european colonialism was killing the innocent and stealing gold and diamonds.   This was not part of his formula of faith. 

The Ahmadis have purposely not used the biggest piece of the puzzle in terms of understanding Chapter 4:60.  There is a hadith in the traditions of Imam Bukhari that explains the context of this verse. 

Here it is:

Bukhari

Volume 6, Book 60, Number 108:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The Verse: “Obey Allah and Obey the Apostle and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority.” (4.59) was revealed in connection with ‘Abdullah bin Hudhafa bin Qais bin ‘Adi’ when the Prophet appointed him as the commander of a Sariyya (army detachment).

This hadith explains that this verse is conditional inasmuch as it means that if a Muslim is a soldier he should obey the orders of his respective captain or seargent or whoever is in charge over him.  It must be remembered that 99.9% of young Muslim men were in the military in those days, military service was mandatory in the classical period of Islam as well as almost every culture in the earth.  The Ahmadis have distorted this verse (as well as many others) in an attempt to be loyal to the Europeans and receive a kick-back.  It bothers me so much that any “so-called” Muslim would be willing to distort the word of Allah to fit his or her economic needs. 

I then found a paper written by Mirza Bashir Ahmad which was written in the early 1960’s.  In this paper he argued that Ahmadis can kill Ahmadis for the sake of their respective country.  He elaborated on his father’s fascination with connecting their family business/religion with the country that they were in.  Mirza Bashir Ahmad and his brothers considered it essential to the life of Ahmadiyyat that all members of this cult should support the country in which they live.  As Ahmadis spread to different parts of the globe it became essential for the growth and life of Ahmadiyyat to support any and all countries that it was doing business in. 

Here is the quote:

“One imaginary situation is often posed. Two countries, both with Ahmadi populations, go to war, Ahmadis in the two countries profess loyalty to their respective Governments. What are Ahmadis going to do in such a contingency? Will they still side with their respective Governments and engage in mutual killing? The question is not a new one. Neither for us, nor for the rest of the world. Our answer has always been this: Yes, even in such a contingency, Ahmadis will remain loyal to their respective Governments. This belief of ours is not of our making. It is a belief taught by God and explained by His Prophet. It is a belief we cannot alter or dilute. If loyalty to their respective Governments results in the killing of Ahmadis by Ahmadis, well that is there and, there is nothing more to be said or done. It is but a consequence, an obligation entailed by our religious belief. Principles have priority over persons. Persons may be sacrificed for the sake of principles, not principles for the sake of persons. Such mutual killing will be forgiven by the Wise and Merciful God of the Qur’an. It will be the result of His own teaching, of conditions, over which we have no control.”  (The Question of Divided Loyalty Some Parallels from History by Mirza Bashir Ahmad) http://www.alislam.org/jihad/loyality.html

Firstly, the Mirza brothers encouraged Ahmadis to kill one another.  That is just an unbelievable factoid that rips at the fabric of brotherhood in terms of the teachings of Islam.  Here is a hypothetical question: If Mirza Mahmud Ahmad was enlisted in the Indian army and Mirza Bashir Ahmad (his brother) was enlisted in the Pak army. If they met on the battlefield would they try to kill each other for the sake of their country?  I seriously doubt it.  These rules don’t apply to the “royal family”, only the subjects.  It is sickening to read this type of foreign policy.  It is even sickening to see how the Mirza brothers don’t care if Ahmadis begin to start killing Ahmadis.  All they care is that their business investment in all countries continues to thrive. 

After researching the many theories that Ahmadis present as they argue for nationalism, I decided to research this idea myself.  My research results showed that generally Islam is one nation and one culture, a Muslim should never attack another Muslim under normal circumstances.  A Muslim fighting another Muslim should never be encouraged.  This type of lifestyle is frowned upon by the theoretical position of the Quran and Hadith. 

When the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah came to pass.  Allah informed Muhammad (saw) and the other Muslims that it was Allah who had in fact stopped the Muslims from going to war with the Quraysh.  The reason that Allah had stopped the Muslims from engaging in battle with the Quraysh was because Allah did not want Muslims to kill Muslims.  Here are the words of Allah, from alislam.org:

 [48:26] It is they who disbelieved and hindered you from the Sacred Mosque and the offering which was prevented from reaching its place of sacrifice. And had it not been for believing men and believing women whom you knew not and whom you might have trampled down so that harm might have come to you on their account unknowingly, He would have permitted you to fight, but He did not do so that He might admit into His mercy whom He will. If they had been separated from the disbelievers, We would have surely punished those of them who disbelieved with a grievous punishment.

The words of Allah clearly shows that Allah is concerned with Muslims killing Muslims, and Allah even caused the Muslims to turn away from Mecca, just because Allah feared that some innocent Muslims who were living in Mecca might be killed. 

Please be advised that Allah never said that the Muslims of Mecca must support the Quraysh in their battle against Islam.  Allah never authorized Muslims to fight Muslims for the sake of nationalism.  Mirza Bashir Ahmad studied the Quran his entire life, but it seems that he totally missed this point.  I am at a loss for words in terms of how it is possible for someone to read the word of Allah and yet encourage Muslims to kill Muslims. 

The Ahmadis are very keen to point towards Jihad and announce that Jihad is conditional, as if this is some type of new discovery.  In fact, almost every injunction in the Quran has conditions that are attached to it.  A very brief conditional injunction is the eating of swine.  Muslims cannot eat swine, unless there is nothing else to eat.  Similarily, a Muslim must Fast during the month of Ramadhan, unless they have some illnesess that prevent them from doing so, like diabetes. 

The verse that the Ahmadis reference here is conditional.  There are other Quranic verses that must be taken into consideration when understanding this particular verse (4:60).  Here they are:

3:74 “And obey none but him who follows your religion;’ — Say, ‘Surely, the true guidance, the guidance of Allah, is that one may be given the like of that which has been given to you’ — ‘or they would dispute with you before your Lord.’ Say, ‘All bounty is in the hand of Allah. He gives it to whomsoever He pleases. And Allah is Bountiful, All-Knowing.”

3:101 “O ye who believe! if you obey any party of those who have been given the Book, they will turn you again into disbelievers after you have believed.”

3:150 “O ye who believe! if you obey those who have disbelieved, they will cause you to turn back on your heels, and you will become losers.”

6:117  “And if thou obey the majority of those on earth, they will lead thee astray from Allah’s way. They follow nothing but mere conjecture, and they do nothing but lie.”

In conclusion, it is obvious that the Ahmadis have taken 4:60 totally out of context.  If a person studies the entire body of the Quran he will quickly learn that a Muslim should never kill another Muslim.  The verses that I presented in conjunction with 4:60 as well as the authentic hadith lead me to understand that 4:60 is highly conditional.  The first condition is that this is a military order and it was used to remind the soliders that they MUST obey those in-charge over them, we all know how Muhammad (Saw) had lost some teeth towards the end of the Battle of Uhud and the reason was that some soldiers failed to obey the orders of those above them, this verse in Surah Nisa was revealed just after this battle and is a reflection of the military society that Islam was born into.  This is main context of this verse. 

Secondarily, a Muslim must live in an Islamic nation that is just and is Islamic in every way shape or form and has a positive aqeedah.   Allah would never authorize any Muslim to fight with those who plunder and persecute the weak.  Allah would never authorize any Muslim to support a regime that has historically killed innocent men and women for the sake of gold and trade.  Allah would never allow any Muslim to work together with those had a hand in raping innocent women and killing their babies. 

I end this paper with a Hadith that explains Muslim vs. Muslim combat.

Sahih Bukhari

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 354:

Narrated ‘Ubaidullah bin ‘Adi bin Al-Khiyar:

That Al-Miqdad bin ‘Amr Al-Kindi, who was an ally of Bani Zuhra and one of those who fought the battle of Badr together with Allah’s Apostle told him that he said to Allah’s Apostle, “Suppose I met one of the infidels and we fought, and he struck one of my hands with his sword and cut it off and then took refuge in a tree and said, “I surrender to Allah (i.e. I have become a Muslim),’ could I kill him, O Allah’s Apostle, after he had said this?” Allah’s Apostle said, “You should not kill him.” Al-Miqdad said, “O Allah’s Apostle! But he had cut off one of my two hands, and then he had uttered those words?” Allah’s Apostle replied, “You should not kill him, for if you kill him, he would be in your position where you had been before killing him, and you would be in his position where he had been before uttering those words.”

Related posts:

1. The Mi`raj in Ahmadiyya Thought The Ahmadis deny that the Prophet (SAW) physically ascended to...
2. Out of Context Vol. 2 4:69 taken from alislam.org KORAN [4:70] And whoso obeys Allah...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

In one of the many claims made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, he declares himself the ‘Hindu avatar‘ awaited by the adherents of Hindusim. However, there seems to be an inconsistency in his claim. This particular contradiction highlights his understanding or as some may more accurately argue, deception, of the word ‘last’. He made the following claim in the year 1900.

“There is a prophecy in Hindu scriptures that in the latter days an Avatar would appear, who will possess the qualities of Krishna and will be his reflection. It has been conveyed to me that I am that person”. (Tadhkirah, 2009 Edition – Page 486)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Tadhkirah.pdf

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was adamant that he was the awaited avatar for the Hindus. Many Ahmadiyya arranged events hold up banners reading, ‘Krishna has arrived’ a misconception in itself, pushing forth the belief that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad came to guide the Hindus as stated below in 1904.

“…my advent in the present age is not for the reformation of the Muslims alone, but I have come to reform the people of all the three religions: Muslims, Christians and Hindus. Just as God has appointed me the Promised Messiah for the Muslims and Christians, so am I the Avatar for the Hindus”. (Lecture Sialkot, Page – 38/39)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/LectureSialkot.pdf

However, if he was the awaited avatar for the religion of Hinduism as he claims then how do Ahmadis reconcile this with the following statement?

“…Nanak undoubtedly came as a blessing to the Hindus. He was, as it were, the last Avatar of the Hindu religion”. (A Message Of Peace, Page – 6)

Direct Link: http://aaiil.org/text/books/mga/msgpeace/messagepeacepaighamsulh1993.pdf

Guru Nanak was born in the year 1469CE, approximately 370 years before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He died in the year 1539CE at the age of 69 and is the founder of Sikhism. The above translation is taken from the Lahori branch of Ahmadiyya, the Qadiani branch have translated the above as “the last bearer of a message from God for Hinduism” which in effect has the same undertone as declaring Guru Nanak the last avatar for the Hindu religion. The Qadiani translation is some what of a mystery as the Urdu transliteration (thanks to brother Zia Ahmad) reads “...aur yoon shamjo whoa Hindu mazhab ka akhri avatar tha. Jis nay is nafrat ko dur karna chaha tha jo Islam kay mutalq Hindion kay dilon mein thee” (Roohani Khazain, Paigham-i-Sulh, Volume 23, Page 446) which quite clearly translates as “…he was like last avatar of Hinduism”. It is quite strange that the Qadiani branch have translated this differently leaving out the word ‘avatar’ altogether. This book, as stated in the introduction of both versions, is the last written work of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Conclusion
If Guru Nanak is the “last bearer of a message from God for Hinduism” and thus “the last avatar of the Hindu religion” then where does that leave Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? Prior to declaring Guru Nanak the last avatar of the Hindu religion, he himself declared that he was the avatar for the Hindus. It is almost as if the word ‘last’ has lost all meaning in Ahmadiyya. You cannot help but contrast how Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in the early stages of his life believed as all Muslims believe that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last of the Prophets but then went on to declare that he is a Prophet himself abolishing his earlier belief and destroying all meaning of the word ‘last’ as he does in a less cunning manner with this claim. The Hindu religion is awaiting the return of their tenth and last avatar (who is in actual fact referred to as ‘Kalki‘ not ‘Krishna‘, a completely different entity) and if as per Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Guru Nanak is that ‘last avatar‘ then he diminishes his own claim of being the awaited Hindu avatar himself.

The blind argument that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad declared Guru Nanak to be the last avatar prior to claiming that he himself was an avatar is effortlessly refuted. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed he was an avatar in 1900 prior to declaring Guru Nanak the last avatar in 1908. The movement constantly produces oxymoron’s which a majority of their followers know nothing about, this is just another example. In conclusion, the question remains, who is the last avatar? Is it Mirza Ghulam Ahmad or is it Guru Nanak? Either answer would contradict the belief of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad yet in Ahmadiyya the answer can only be one of the two.

May Allah (SWT) guide the Ahmadis back to Islam. All praise is due to Allah (SWT).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

With literature explicitly geared towards Muslims, it is no secret that the Ahmadi faith is primarily interested in spreading its beliefs amongst Muslims. However, it is unlikely that their beliefs will spread in the North American context. This is for many reasons. Here is a short analysis of why not and my prediction of the direction their community will take.

Ibn Khaldun, the 8th century-Hijri social scientist, observed that when the socio-economic status of an area is depressed, Islamic intellectual thought tends to suffer. While only 28% of Americans have post-high school degrees, roughly 60% of American-Muslims have college or masters degrees, making American Muslims one of the most educated communities in the country. And following Ibn Khaldun’s observation, this has led to the rise of effective Islamic institutions in the US (which I commented on here). These programs tend to be energetic, enriching and serve both the intellectual and spiritual needs of Muslims.

This has a strong effect on Ahmadi youth. First, those raised in the US are disconnected from the day-to-day struggles of Pakistan. The stock hatred levied by their leadership against the ‘mullahs’ for their ignorance (and I do not deny that there is much ignorance) fails to characterize the Islamic authorities they encounter in the West. As a result, rhetoric that otherwise works so effectively falls upon deaf ears. When Western Ahmadis experience Islamic scholarship for the first time, many question what they have been taught about Muslim leaders, some question Ahmadi-specific doctrines, and yet others the legitimacy of Ahmadiyya all together.

Ahmadiyya is largely stagnant in the US. Yes, from time to time individuals convert, but there is no exodus from Islam to Ahmadiyya, relegating Ahmadis to live as a minority within a minority.

Islamic institutions have essentially crowded out Ahmadi-based ones. Muslim Students’ Associations across the country are dominated by mainstream Muslims and the scattered Shi’a populations tend to conform to Sunni norms. Major events, such as lectures, social activities, and Jumu’ah prayers, and iftars are entirely Islamic, not Ahmadi. National Islamic spokesmen tend to be from CAIR, or MAS (Muslim American Society). Both Congressman Keith Ellison and Congressman Andre Carson (may Allah bless them both) are within the fold of mainstream Islam. And key social figures representing Islam in popular culture, such as Shaquille O’Neal, Siraj Wahhaj, Tariq Ramadan, Malcolm X and others, adhere to mainstream Islam, not Ahmadiyya.

So where does this leave Ahmadiyya? A few predictions:

I predict that it will exist as a faith largely in antagonism to a Muslim community. For example, despite the fact that CAIR has managed an anti-terrorism campaign for over a decade and even released a 68-page document highlighting 10 years of fatawa (religious edicts) and condemnation of terrorism, an Ahmadi spokesman appeared on Fox News to say that CAIR was “appeasing the terrorists” and that only Ahmadis were “taking the lead” in the effort against terrorism. In more recent weeks, the entire Muslim community joined together to financially and morally support the Cordoba Initiative’s plan to build an Islamic Community center in New York City. But, an Ahmadi spokesman has condemned the project, while highlighting his own faith.

Secondly, I predict that their members will slowly but surely be re-absorbed back into the fold of Islam. Undeniably there are many who are theologically convinced of Ahmadi-specific beliefs. But even historically, the vast majority of members of any faith, including Islam, have only concentrated on the essentials. The logical gymnastics required to justify key Ahmadi beliefs are all but apparent without social conditioning. And the lack of an ominous campaign of oppression against them, will allow them to get comfortable with their Muslim neighbors, colleagues and friends. Therefore, with time Ahmadis will only culturally maintain their Ahmadi identity, while their beliefs will entirely conform to Islam. With marriages, education and time, they will re-assimilate back into the Muslim community.

The last prediction runs contrary to the second. I predict that they will take an Ismaili-approach. Historically, the Batiniyya, a now defunct sub-sect of Ismaili Shi’ism, were so active that they conquered Makkah and spread their faith in the Muslim lands. It took Salah al-Din al-Ayubi to expel them from Egypt and Imam al-Ghazali to refute their theological positions. Nowadays, Ismailism exists as a highly organized and wealthy but inviable religious order that is isolated, inclusive and unable to propagate its beliefs – and guess what, they still think they’re the “True Muslims”! This is precisely what many break-away sects have become, and I predict that Ahmadiyya will follow the sunnah of the ones that came before it.

Again, merely my predictions. Allah knows best.

In this Holy month of Ramadan, we ask Allah to continue to guide Ahmadis from the false beliefs of Mirza Ghulam to the true beliefs of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و سلم

Related posts:

1. Ahmadis Condemn Terrorism on Fox News bismillah, alhumdu lillah wa Salaatu wa salaam ‘ala Rasool Allah...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Alexandrina Victoria (1819-1901) was the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from the 20^th of June 1837, and the first Empress of India of the British Raj from the 1^st of May 1876, until her death. She became the Queen at the tender age of 18 and her reign lasted 63 years and 7 months making her the longest reigning British monarch. The time of her reign is known as the Victorian era, a period of industrial, political, scientific and military progress within the United Kingdom. She died from declining health on the 22^nd of January 1901, succeeded by Edward VII.

Queen Victoria had many titles included in her name and after the Indian Mutiny of 1857, the Government of India was transferred from the East India Company to the Crown and in 1877 Victoria became ‘Empress of India’ under the Royal Titles Act. She was also known as ‘Defender of the Faith’ due to her position as head of the Church of England, and she was also known as the ‘Supreme Governor of the Church of England’.

However, despite her clear allegiance to Christianity and her position as head of the Church of England, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was of the following belief:

“The honourable Queen, of whom we are the members of her country, chooses Islam in her heart rather than any other religion. I even heard more than this but I don’t want to mention it. However, the conclusion is that she is generous and Allah (SWT) has put the love of Islam in her heart and she wishes that Islam would spread in her country.” (Roohani Khazain, Hamama-tul-Bushra, Volume 7, Page 229/300)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/rk-7-21.pdf

The above statement by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad from ‘Hamama-tul-Bushra’ was made in 1894 and he unequivocally claims that Queen Victoria is a Muslimah. However, on the occasion of the ‘Diamond Jubilee’ to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Queen’s accession, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote a letter entitled ‘Tohfai Qaisariyya’, translated as ‘A Present to the Queen’. This letter which took the form of a book concluded with a prayer offered for the Queen. This prayer was published in Urdu, Punjabi, Persian, Arabic and English at the end of the book.

“…we earnestly ask Thee all powerful Lord to grant us one more prayer that our benefactoress the Empress, before leaving this world, may probe her way out of the darkness of man-worship…” (Rohaani Khazain, Volume 12, Tauhfa Qaisiria, Page 299)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/rk-12-37.pdf

There is a glaring inconsistency within this letter which is dated 23^rd June 1897. In this letter Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is asking for one more prayer to the effect that the Queen, prior to her demise, leaves the falsehood of Christianity. However, just three years preceding this prayer/letter Mirza Ghulam Ahmad explicitly declared that this had been achieved as the Queen “chooses Islam in her heart rather than any other religion”. If that were true then how could he accuse her of being in the “darkness of man-worship”? Quite clearly Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had forgotten about his previous statement whereby his God allegedly told him that the Queen was a Muslimah. Is this something you would expect from one who claims he is divinely guided?

To serve as a reminder, he also had the following ‘revelation’:

I shall accept all your prayers but not in the matter of your collaterals. (Tadhkirah, 2009 Edition, Page 33)

Direct Link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Tadhkirah.pdf

Aside from the clear contradiction, was this prayer accepted? Did Queen Victoria become Muslim? Queen Victoria was at no point a Muslimah and Allah (SWT) knows best. She personally had the following inscribed above the mausoleum of her final resting place:

‘Farewell best beloved, here at last I shall rest with thee, with thee in Christ I shall rise again’. (The Official Website of the British Monarchy)

Direct Link: http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensoftheUnitedKingdom/TheHanoverians/Victoria.aspx

In addition to this, the Queen had the following desire before her demise:

Years later, when Canon (later Dean) Farrar served the Queen as chaplain, he visited her when she was sick. She had been reading a leaflet on the return of Christ and said, “Chaplain, what do you think about the return of Christ?” It is not known what the chaplain answered, but when he left he said, “Your Majesty, why have you asked me that?” “Oh,” she said, “I wish that He returns while I am still alive, because nothing would give me more joy than to pass on the crown of Great Britain and India to Him with my own hands.” In her youth, with most of her life still ahead of her, she crowned Jesus King of Kings and Lord or Lords; and then much later, in her latter years, with grey hair and with the many sorrows that she had borne, she wanted to give Him every crown that God had given her. When you grow older you might have less strength, but you have got more that makes you happy and more that you can share.

by Ernest A. Francis
Translated from the German: “Königin Viktoria”
Source: ‘The Pentecostal Testimony’, December 1980

I think we can all agree that at no point did Queen Victoria hand over the Crown to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. He of course made her well aware that he fulfilled the prophecy regarding the return of Hazrat Isa (AS) in his book ‘Tohfai Qaisariyya‘ as well as other numerous letters. One must consider, if she did not proceed to hand over the Crown to him then quite clearly she did not believe he was the second coming of Hazrat Isa (AS), thus she rejected his claim. With this in mind recall that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has stated that “God Almighty has disclosed to me that whoever has been apprised of my advent and does not accept me is not a Muslim and is accountable to God.” Therefore even his initial claim that God told him she is a Muslimah is pure deception even in terms of Ahmadiyya as she does not meet the Ahmadiyya criteria to be considered within the fold of Islam. Moreover, Allah (SWT) caused him to forget his claim that the Queen is a Muslimah and this was exposed three years after his initial claim in that he requested in a prayer that she leave “the darkness of man-worship” though according to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad she was already following Islam. This is not mockery, this is a reminder to Ahmadis to come back to Islam and leave the falsehood of Ahmadiyya.

May Allah (SWT) guide the Ahmadis back to Islam. All praise is due to Allah (SWT).

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

((My opponents wished my death; they spread the news everywhere about it, but my Lord gave the good news that I will live for eighty years or more. He also gave me an organization, sons and a shelter)) – RK, vol 19, Mawahib-ur-Rahman, page 21

Now let us try to find out the exact date of birth of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (MGAQ) based on his own writings.

Year 1839 or 1840

MGAQ wrote: ((My birth took place in 1839 or 1840, during the last part of the Sikh period, and in 1857 I was 16 years of age or in my 17th year; my beard and mustache had not yet started)) – Rouhani Khaza’in, vol 13, Kitab ul Bariyyah, page 177

 

Friday, 14th of the Lunar Month

MGAQ wrote: ((This humble one was born on Friday, on the day 14 of the lunar month)) – Rouhani Khaza’in, vol 17, Tuhfa Golravea, page 281

During Phalguna Hindu Month

A follower of MGAQ, Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, wrote ((The Promised Messiah peace be upon him said “my month of birth was Phaagun/Phalguna (a month of the Hindu calendar); it was the day 14 of the lunar month; the day was Friday, and the time was the last part of night”)) – Zikr Habeeb, pages 238 & 239.

The date which satisfies all the above mentioned conditions is:

• Gregorian Calendar : Friday 1-March-1839 A.D.
• Islamic Calendar: 14 Dhu’l Hijjah 1254 A.H.
• Hindu Calendar: Phalguna 16, 1895 V.E.

Online Gregorian-to-Islamic dates conversion

http://www.rabiah.com/convert/convert.php3 OR http://www.islamicfinder.org/Hcal/index.php

Online Gregorian-to-Hindu dates conversion

http://web.meson.org/calendars

Personally, I don’t really trust MGAQ’s claim that he was born on Friday or 14th of the lunar month or during Phalguna. Apparently, MGAQ wanted to claim that his date of birth was somehow special, for Friday is a special day for Muslims, day 14 of the lunar month has a full moon night and Phalguna is a special month in Hindu religion. However, I have done this small research just to expose the lies of the Ahmadiyya leaders who finally claimed that MGAQ’s actual date of birth is 13-Feb-1835 based on his writings.

It is crystal clear that the Ahmadiyya leaders just wanted to push MGAQ’s date of birth far away from 1839/1840 to give him closer age to 75. However, the date 13-Feb-1835 which they suggested didn’t fall in the Hindu month of Phalguna.

Ahmadis claim that 13-Feb-1835 is 1-Phalguna-1891 V.E., while the correct calculation shows that 13-Feb-1835 falls in the previous Hindu month, exactly on 15-Magha-1891 V.E.

Here is the result as per http://web.meson.org/calendars

However, just for the sake of argument, if we’ll accept the Ahmadiyya’s false claim that 15-Magha in the calculations of http://web.meson.org is equivalent to 1-Phalguna, this will still expose their shameful lies. Based on the same Ahmadi’s false assumption, the nearest Friday 15-Megha to the years 1839/1840, 14th of the lunar month is 9-Feb-1838.

Here is the result as per http://web.meson.org/calendars

Moreover, based on the Ahmadi’s false calculations, the date 1-March-1839 can be considered 30-Phalguna-1895 V.E. since they should accept +/- 1 day accuracy for the Hindu lunar date calculations.

I wonder when the Ahmadiyya Cult’s leaders would stop their dirty tactics and their continuous attempts to hide the truth.

Related posts:

1. Mirza Ghulam, The Brave Prophet! Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (MGAQ) claimed that he had received...
2. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was an Uncle Tom In the history of European conquest one person stands out...
3. “Gardens of the Righteous” – Gems of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad #1 Khushu` – Mirzai style “Dr. Mir Ismail narrated to me...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

ALL Arabic Writings Are from God (Yalaash)

Urdu  ((Hazrat Messiah Mauod said “all my Arabic writings are type of Ilham since all have been written with special support from God. Sometimes I write many words and sentences without knowing their meanings, then I check in the dictionary after writing them to know their meanings)) – Seerat-ul-Mahdi , part 1, page 91 (Click Here)

Not a Nabi

Arabic  ((I am NOT a Nabi)) – Rouhani Khazain, vol 5, Aina Kamalat al-Islam, page 383 February 1893 (Click Here)

A Nabi

Arabic Qadiani Wahi  ((Oh Ya Nabi / Prophet)) – English Tadhkirah, p 884 (Click Here)

A Messenger

Arabic Qadiani Wahi  ((You have been made a MURSAL / Messenger)) – English Tadhkirah, p 591 (Click Here)

The First Nabi

Arabic Qadiani Wahi  (([We sent you] so that you may warn a people whose fathers were not warned)) – Tadhkirah, page 230 (Click Here)

The Last Nabi

Arabic  ((Allah wanted to end the matter and to complete the building (of Islam) through the LAST BRICK. Oh you who are witnessing, I am that LAST BRICK)) – RK, vol 16, Khutba-Ilhamiyya, page 178 (Click Here)

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

بسم الله الحمد لله و صلاة و سلام على رسول الله و على آله و سلم

By the blessing of Allah, we have been allowed to witness another Ramadan. May this be a month of spiritual cleansing and intense worship of Allah, the Most High!

In this holy month, with blessings raining down upon us, I want to encourage two things for our readership.

For our Ahmadi readers, I encourage you to devout yourself to private worship- specifically private. In the deepest parts of your Sujood and Du’as, ask Allah with a sincere heart: What is True? Islam or Ahmadiyya? Recite the following Du’a:

اللهم ارني الحق حقاً وارزقني إتباعه وارني الباطل باطلاً وارزقني اجتنابه

(Allahumma aranee al-haqqu haqqan wa arzuqnee itiba’ahu, wa aranee al-baatilu baatilan wa arzuqnee ijtinaabahu)
O Allah, Show me the Truth as Truth and allow me to follow it. And show me falsehood as falsehood and allow me to avoid it

In psychology, we know of externalization. This is when people pass on advice to others without applying it to themselves. Do not do this! Instead, I want you, O Ahmadi reader, to internalize this Du’a and recite it yourself, for yourself, on yourself. May Allah bless you in this life and the next!

For our the Muslim, in your nightly Du’as, Qiyaam al-Layl, Taraweeh, and Dhikr, ask Allah to guide Ahmadis to embrace Islam, the religion of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, and reject Ahmadiyya, the false religion of Mirza Ghulam.

And in this months, do not forget the plight of Muslims suffering around the world…

و صلى الله على سيننا محمد و على آله و سلم

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Ironically, this is the same argument that has been used by right wing extremists who have threatened violence against the mosque for similar reasons. He also claims, without citing any sources, that the Saudi government is funding the mosque; again, fomenting hysteria about Saudi plots to take over America is a common tactic of neo-conservative Islamophobes.

With New York being home to over 800,000 Muslims, the fear-mongering in response to the Ground Zero mosque at times borders on absurdity. This is how Clyde Haberman of the New York Times summed up the controversy: “The center, which could rise as many as 15 stories and has the blessing of local officials from the mayor on down, makes some people uneasy. The reasons are understandable, if not entirely admirable. Some opponents, mostly political conservatives, have exploited the discomfort with statements that are inflammatory or misleading, or both.”

Naseem Mahdi, one of the foremost Qadiani clerics in the United States, recently claimed that his group represented “one of the leading movements” aimed at “bringing Muslims out of the dark ages.” Again, the resemblance to radical neo-conservative dogma is striking. For it was none other than Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defense secretary under Pres. Bush, who said “We need an Islamic reformation” and then proceeded to lead the invasion of Iraq.

More to the point, such remarks lead one to question how the Qadiani leadership reconciles their laudable doctrine of “Love for all, Hatred for None” with their apparent support of intolerance and bigotry towards Muslims in America.

Related posts:

1. “In a Chino mosque, Ahmadis can worship freely” From the LA Times, Qadiani propaganda machine in full swing:...
2. Qadiani Ahmadiyya Chatter on Pakistan We have been saying Qadianis pray for Pakistan’s destruction and...
3. Shahid Kamal Speaks at Hendon Mosque I was invited by Shaykh Suliman Gani to talk on...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Notice anything funny about this picture?

Look at the English text.

I’d like to introduce you all to a new writer to the blog, a Muslim brother by the name of Hamid. He will be making his first contribution imminently insha’Allah and I can tell you now, it’s well worth waiting for. His piece shows us a link between the Ahmadiyya and the Islamophobes which is as close to a smoking gun as you’re going to get.

On another happy note, we’re delighted to announce that we will soon be introducing a section of the site that contains Dr. Rashid’s ground-breaking articles. He has kindly given us permission to reproduce his articles at thecult.info and we hope that insha’Allah you will read them again if you have done so before, and if not, you’re in for a treat.

Peace unto those who follow the guidance.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.