Thursday, 23 February 2012

Mirza Ghulam Qadiani: Imposter or Prophet?

 Salaam. This was kindly emailed in from a Muslim brother, and it has been requested that I post this up for the benefit of the questioning Ahmadi, who is in genuine search for the truth. This makes for a really good read, especially if logic and reasoning is your thing! Take the time out to read this...
All praise be to Allah lord of all that exists and peace and blessings be on his slave and messenger Muhammed (saw).

The purpose of this article is to try and establish MGA’s claim to Prophethood. We will discuss using the Quran and Saheeh al Bukhari and original texts taken from the Ahmadiyya ‘Al-Islam’ website.    

In an extract taken from the Tajalliyat-e-Ilahiyyah p28  from the Ahmadiyya website MGA says:

“…No law-bearing Prophet can come after him. A Prophet who does not bring a new law can come, but he has to be a follower of the Holy Prophet sa first. On this basis, I am both an Ummati(follower) and a PROPHET. My Prophethood, i.e., my converse with God, is nothing but a reflection of the Prophethood of Muhammad sa. Apart from this my Prophethood is nothing. It is the same Prophethood of Muhammad sa which has manifested itself through me….”
Page 40 of the pdf page 28 of the book

So MGA claimed to be a Nabi, whose “prophethood” was the same Prophethood of the masterpiece of all Prophets’ Muhammed (saw).We will begin with an extract of the Quran which is commonly translated. 

Muhammed is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) The Messenger of  Allah, and the seal of the prophets:  and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
Holy Quran (Yousif Ali Translation) 33:40

The Words Khatum-Annabiyeen in Arabic means the end of ALL PROPHETS, Seal of All PROPHETS, Last of ALL PROPHETS and Muhammed (saw) is mentioned by name.  There are numerous Hadith to support the understanding of this verse, but we won’t quote them all here, we will just give you a reference to one, look it up in Saheeh al Bukhari  The Book of the Merits of the Prophet and His Companions  Hadith number 735 (Abu Hurreira).

This immediately throws doubt on Mirza’s claim.  However we will continue to try and establish his claim to Prophethood. (Although this is a MAJJOOOOORRRRR STUMBLING BLOCK and there isn’t really anything that can be said about this in defence without spinning more than Sri Lanka's Murali).

All the Ambiya (Prophets) amongst various other virtues all had a one thing in common, TRUTH.

The Messenger of Allah, Holy Prophet (saws)  was extremely truthful it is narrated In the book on the Ahmadiyya website “The Life and Character of the Seal of Prophets (Volume 1)” written by Mirzā Bashīr Ahmad M.A on  p147 (p171 on pdf)the following is said:
“It is due to such occurrences that Muḥammad saw became renowned as Amīn  among the Makkans. Moreover, as a result of his honesty, he was greatly revered in Makkah and was known as an exceptionally righteous individual who always spoke the truth.”

There really is no great point in going further, because everyone agrees on this issue, even the Ahmadi leadership, that Muhammad (saws) was truthful.
Again I STRESS, when talking of these matters it is very important to stick to original sources therefore I am only quoting from the Quran, Saheeh Al Bukhari  and the Rohaani Khazaain and the books presented on AlIslam, the official website of the Ahmadiyya.


Have a scan over this excerpt from Ruhani Khazain, a book written and published by MGA, the so called Promised Messiah. Here he makes a claim on Saheeh al Bukhari (whats new?!?):

All these 'Mullahs' always go on about this stuff but until I actually saw it on the website I thought it was all stuff they dug out of some old Tachee/Suit case but it is very much true.The 'Mullahs' were not lying or quoting out of context as Masroor and other Ahmadi leaders claim to be the case. The 'Mullahs' were telling the truth!

My Urdu isn’t great but you can see the words “saheeh Bukari” so he wasn’t talking about any baklava or a Bukhri (female goat) it is the respected book of Hadith Saheeh al-Bukhari and “Bukhari mein hein” which translates to “it is in bukhari” and then mentions “Asmaan se uss ke Ieyeh awaz aye gi”, which translates to “there will come a voice from the sky to him” saying “hatha khalifahtuallah al mahdi” which translates in Arabic as “This is The Khaliph of Allah the mahdi” these translations allow you to see the point in simple terms.  NOW this Hadith of the voice coming from the heavens is not mentioned anywhere in Saheeh al Bukhari, so you begin to question MGA’s integrity and then his motives... why was he fabricating Hadith? Why would a Prophet need to fabricate Hadith? This would be a show stopper in the court of British law and if this evidence was found about a witness where he had lied in open testimony his testimony would no longer be accepted.  However let’s say in the modern printing age where Millions of copies of Saheeh al Bukhari exist this Hadith was magically erased by the wet beards of the mullahs, we will continue. Ahmadis would do well to remember this:

Narrated Salama:
I heard the Prophet saying, "Whoever (intentionally) ascribes to me what I have not said then (surely) let him occupy his seat in Hell-fire.

Another claim of MGA is that there is reference to Qadian in the Quran! Again, the Ahmadi leadership often throw it back at the 'Mullahs' saying they are 'lying' and he 'never said that', so I went straight to the horses mouth:

Here it reads: “khudah neh quran mein aur rasool neh Hadith mein jo kuch furmiyah tha woh uss(referring to himself in third person) keh aaneh seh pora huwa”. This translates to “whatever Allah and his messenger have said in the Quran and Hadith by him (third person reference) coming it has been completed” in the context this means he has come to complete the prophecies of Islam and is claiming to be the messiah isa (as). Mirza is constructing an argument here and he is establishing himself as an expert and adding weight to this opinion by reminding the audience claims to be.
He carries on until “Yaani mekah aur medina aur qadian ka”. Translates in Urdu as “for example mekah, medina and qadian”. I have highlighted this here so there is no mistake Mirza is talking about Qadian.
“Jo kuch burahain ahmdaiyah mein qadian ke bareh mein kushfi tuwr pur mein neh likha”. This translates in Urdu as  “what ever is written in burahain ahmadiyah about qadian It has been revealed to me and I have written what has been revealed to me”.
So from claiming prophethood, the author Mirza goes on to claim the divinity of his book implying burahain ahmadiyah is revelation that has been revealed to him as wahiy (divine revelation) so he positions himself as an expert in his field i.e. a prophet and then infers his book as the authority manifest so to speak. “kushfi tuwr pur mein neh likha”, “I have written what has been revealed to me” ”yaani ye keh uss ka zhikr quran shareef mein majood hein dur haqeeqat ye baat hein kyuunkeh ye yakeen umr hein”. This translates to in urdu “meaning that it(qadian) is mentioned within the quran and definitely this a true and that is certainly a fact”. By using the word “zhikr” which means mention, citation, recitation in this context along the word “majood” which means to be present. It cannot be argued this is a metaphorical proposition. Unless your name is Graeme Swann.  

Qadian is not mentioned in the Quran. Put simply, this is false. I challenge any Ahmadi out there to prove otherwise but as far as the Ulema is concerned, it is what it is: there is no mention of the word Qadian in the Quran anywhere. Ever. Period. However the argument construction is such that the reader listener feels inclined to accept what is said because it has been done on the authority of their spiritual leader and more importantly on the authority of the Quran and Hadith.

So let’s analyse this claim in logical terms mirza constructs an argument from authority also known as known as appeal to authority this being the authority of quran and Hadith to position himself as an equivocal authority.  So no one would dare question him, because if you question this, you are questioning Allah. Arguing from authority is a classic form of argument construction and is fallacious if the factual matter is incorrect as with any fallacy or if the expert is not credible.  Both nullifications have been satisfied here. 

He also uses Circular Reasoning – supporting a premise with the premise rather than a conclusion.  He did this by claiming:

Predicate (A)
“Quran and Hadith’s prophecies have been completed through me appearing.”
I have completed the word of Allah by coming.
“I have written what has been revealed to me.”
I only write what Allah reveals to me.
Predicate(C) (THIS FACT IS FALSE) 
“I say Qadian is mentioned in the Quran.”
I am divinely revealing qadian is in the Quran.

A =>B, B =>C, C =>A ,  so if C is false in the factual sense. This destroys the whole chain of premise and invalidates the whole argument.  Not only this argument but all assertions, premises and conclusion he has ever made.  

So Mirza attests with certainty to something that is untrue and he KNOWS THIS. Bomb shell. This GUY INVENTED A LIE ABOUT THE QURAN (GODS WORD) what else is he capable of?  Then you have to ask why? Why would the so called messiah do this?  Can anyone answer why? If it is true, if it is a fact, then what will you say to AL-Mu’Adhib (the Punisher) on the day of judgement?  When hellfire sees you, roaring with rage.  (Q25:12). Your Mirza will not be able to help you then, as you line up behind your false Prophet. Come to the light side and the right side and the safe side before its too late!

Before we conclude I would like to remind you of this Ayaah in the quran

Who doth more wrong than such as forge a lie against Allah, or deny His Signs? But never will prosper those who sin.
(The Holy Quran, Yunus, 10:17)

Links to the al-islam website references have been provided for your convenience you can click on the links and it will take you right to the page(may take some time to load).  Rub your eyes and make sure its YOUR WEBSITE because it is.  And if this magically made to disappear from the wet beards of the mullahs I will not be surprised.