I have moved!

Please visit me at the new blog on the Ahmadiyya, where I will now be writing along with other great writers insha'Allah. This blog is now inactive. Please join us at TheCult.info/blog and debate at TheCult.info/forum

Wassalaam,

Shahid

The End of Ahmadiyya?

It certainly looks like the end of the road for the Ahmadiyya.

In Indonesia, as in the rest of the Muslim world, the Ahmadiyya are not just considered a heretical sect by Muslims, but a treacherous one. By regularly denouncing Muslims as terrorists (but never overtly of course) they align themselves with those who despise Islam. By claiming victimhood despite claiming ownership to "The True Islam" and thereby expelling all Muslims from Islam in so doing, they come across smelling a bit hypocritical.

They love censorship. Not only did they try and take my YouTube work down, ultimately unsuccessfully of course, but they also failed to respond when I tried to elicit a reason. Mostly of course, they censor Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's work. Not surprising really, as this man, who claimed to be more than just any old prophet, was fond of obscene epithets to describe his opponents when they repeatedly pointed out his fallacies and absurdities. They censor his work by failing to provide English translations of his more obscene outbursts.

The interesting thing is how most of the devotees suffer from cognitive dissonance. I should know. I was once one of them. Lying to yourself is the only way you can cope with the mental meltdown that results from trying to understand the ramblings and chicanery of a seriously doped-up charlatan.

Ahmadis deal with their cognitive dissonance with a standard bunch of retorts. Including:

• "Your references are wrong". (No they're not. I checked them out. Sometimes the Qadianis shift the page numbers in Mirza's books - erm - that's cheating!)


• "You're quoting out of context" (On the odd occasion, yes, but most of his nasty output is nasty despite heavy contextualisation)


• "That's not an authentic book" (Which is why I used only Ahmadi books in my YouTube videos, either bought from them, or downloaded, live, on video, from their web site)


• "The same accusations were made against Muhammad (pbuh)" (Actually, they weren't. Nobody accused the Last Prophet (saw) of using foul language against anyone, or of taking drugs, ever - and more to the point - any accusations made were rejected in the Qur'an)


• "He's not really claiming prophethood" (Err, read his books. Especially "The Removal of a Misunderstanding" and "Lecture Sialkot")

I enjoyed exposing some of Mirza's more blasphemous, but less abusive work last year on YouTube. It provoked a huge amount of interest and a backlash not just against me, but from the ordinary, innocent Ahmadi who has been kept in the dark, against the Qadiani leadership, who have no answers. Intellectually risible and shamefully vacuous, they are being exposed as nothing more than a cheap cult, existing only to extort money from their members and to serve their imperial masters.

I have learned that they send tins with the face of the latest Mirza on to children, poor or not, to fill the cult's coffers. Charging a membership of 6.25% of all salaries after tax, and calling those who don't subscribe to the "Get me into heaven" scheme at a minimum of 10% earnings and property "hypocrites", the leadership deserves exposure to the truth, and ridicule and brickbats from those with understanding.

Now it appears that the foundations of the movement have been smashed as the Indonesian Ahmadiyya has publicly declared that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was not a prophet after all, but just a teacher. This is interesting in the light of Mr. Mirza's repeated proclamations of prophethood and the Ahmadiyya's insistence that those who aren't Ahmadis are in fact kaafirs (infidels/deniers) and outside the pale of Islam.

What kind of a religion categorically denies its own prophet in order to keep going as a headless chicken? Why, the completely nonsensical and utterly pointless Ahmadiyya of course. It has shot itself in the foot. It has lost the wind in its sails. It is lost at sea and listing.

This news will send shockwaves through the core of the movement and no doubt, there will be attempts to explain it away in the time-dishonoured fashion of Mirza, who routinely claimed victory despite being the victim of TKO after TKO against the most average maulvi of the time.

With this massive own goal (switching sports here) it looks like this is the beginning of the end of the Ahmadiyya. One can only hope that they will abandon the teachings of the deluded, opium-eating charlatan Mirza and rejoin the mainstream.

And as long as they reject Mirza completely, seeing as his beliefs are impossible to reconcile with mainstream Islam, they will of course, be welcome with open arms. Come back to the fold of Islam Ahmadis, we have a lot of work to do together. Insha'Allah.

What I have been up to

You might have noticed a drop in the frequency of these posts. Insha'Allah, I might well post here again, but in the meantime, I request that you watch my videos on YouTube. My username is shahidkamal and here are some current links:

Mr. Mirza's Revelations
Mr Mirza's Hindlish
We Can What We Will Do
Who is the Messenger?
Mirza Saw God Personified
Breaking Crosses
Words of Satan

The ghulam-Ahmadis had my videos taken down under a DMCA notice. I defended myself and they withdrew. Alhamdulillah, my videos were reinstated under the protection of the law.

Mirza the Atheist

It's really quite simple - Mirza Sahib was plagued by fear. He hated too much. His prophecies were primarily about disasters and the fear of poverty. They were about personal trivia too, the kind that a great man, never mind a prophet, has no concern about.

Yes, Mirza Sahib wrote some good things too, let's not deny that. The point to bear in mind is that when you judge him on his prophecies (and he asked for that), you will find a man plagued by fear and hatred. Fear of poverty, fear of not being accepted. Hatred of those who denied him, who wouldn't accept him. These are natural qualities. These qualities made him an ordinary man, but he lacked the dignity and grace becoming of a great man.

If he thought Muhammadi Begum would come to him, he had only to shut up and let God take care of the rest. Instead of accepting, he tried to justify failure and re-frame it. A prophet doesn't need to do that. Prophets have never done that. He should have just smiled and said "wait and see" nicely. Instead he preached death and calamity and plague and earthquakes and suffering. He was in turmoil. The reality in his mind was incongruent with the events of his life.

These trivial fears and ignoble insecurities are not the qualities of a great man, never mind a prophet. A prophet of God should have an air of acceptance. This man appeared not to believe in God. Sounds radical, right? But hear me out...

If he believed, he wouldn't have to back up the failure of every prophecy with a caveat. He would just smile, wink, and say "My God knows best" and leave it at that. It's not for a mere man to work out what prophecies are working and which are not. He was just projecting his insecurity and hatred and this is not the sign of a man of God.

All of the things we usually hear about Mirza are about secondary weaknesses that arise from a lack of internal congruence and from an almost compelte dissonance with God.

If he was secure in his belief, he would be much more inclusive, all-embracing, a lover of humanity on a constant basis, a shining example serving as an inspiration to humanity for centuries to come. Yet this didn't happen, and ghulam-Ahmadis still believe in him, despite the complete lack of attributable sayings of any lasting merit whatsoever.

He was an ordinary man, plagued by fear of poverty (a quite natural human trait, but not the trait of a prophet) and fear of not being accepted (a quite natural human trait, but not the trait of a prophet). He should not have despaired of the mercy of God on such a daily basis. He tried to put words into God's mouth. If God had put words into his mouth, they would have been congruent, requiring no extended explanation.

Isa (as) is reported to have said "Love they neighbour as thyself". What a beautiful tenet - and there is not a single thing that Mirza Sahib said that could match this. He was so insecure, that he believed that his personal god (oh-no-associate) would spread Mirza Sahib's message to the corners of the earth.

Allah's message had already spread to the ends of the earth, so this was a doubly stupid thing to say. And now, Manchester United and Liverpool and Barcelona and Real Madrid and David Beckham and Michael Owen are more famous than the Ahmadiyya Movement, but none of these people or organisations are considered miraculous.

People will continue to believe in what they want to believe because they have built their lives around it. What they fail to recognise is that Truth is independent of what they believe and does not require them to believe in it for it to be True! They are adrift in a sea of duplicity and contrived interpretations, which are unbecoming of God or His religion of Islam, of which Ahmadiyya is just a faint and corrupted echo, ignored by the wider world.

May Allah (swt) inspire those people with minds to think and eyes to see to abandon the insecurity of Mirza Sahib and grasp the firm rope that Allah (swt) told us to grasp all those centuries ago through the revelations vouchsafed to the Final Prophet sent to manking - Muhammad Sallalaho-Alayhi-wa-Salam.

Mirzayam

"God named me Mary in the third volume of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya. I was nurtured for two years as Mary and was raised in a womanly seclusion. Then, the spirit of Jesus was breathed into me just as was done with Mary. Hence, I was considered to be pregnant in a metaphorical manner. After a period of several months, not exceeding ten, I was made Jesus out of Mary by the revelation embodied in the last part of the fourth volume of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya; and thus, I became Jesus, son of Mary. But, God did not inform me of this secret at that time."

(Kashti-i-Nuh, Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 19, P. 50; Kashti-i-Nuh, P. 46-47)

If Mr. Mirza was Mary, does that mean Mr. Mirza was also the reincarnation of her?

More importantly, when he/she/whatever the hell gave metaphorical birth to Jesus, was Jesus already a fully-formed man emerging from the metaphorical womb?

And finally, what happened to the metaphorical Mary after the metaphorical grown Jesus was born - did she die during metaphorical childbirth? Or did she live on as Mirzayam and Jesus 2.0 combined - a metaphorical conjoined mother/son hybrid, placenta permanently in place!!

Having been Muslim (AlHamdolilah!) for over two years now, what I find especially offensive is his claim that God wrote the text of Mirza's book! Is Mirza confusing himself with God? After all, he says "God named me Mary in the third volume of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya". And almost as offensively, this was the series of books where 50 volumes were promised and he delivered only 5, 23 years later, having taken advances many years previously. His excuse? "There is only a dot difference between 5 and 50 therefore the promise is fulfilled"

Don't ghulam-Ahmadis ever stop and think about the garbage this man came out with?

Reason to Leave...

Why did I reject Mirza? There are many, many, many reasons. It wasn't a case of there being a "drip-drip" effect either. Every individual item made him look like a buffoon. Every single thing on its own made him look a little crazy. Take it all together and only the height of self-deceit could allow any sane person to believe his contradictory outpourings of blasphemy.

I would like to present another example of Mirza's peerless stupidity, but first, let me start with something beautiful - we shall proceed from the sublime to the ridiculous if you like! So first - a beautiful safeguard from Allah (swt) against the likes of Mirza and other impostors, from Surat al-Ibrahim, ayat 4:

We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. Now Allah leaves straying those whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases: and He is Exalted in power, full of Wisdom.

Understand this very clearly. Your soul is at stake. Let's pretend Mirza might have been a prophet (naudhubillah)

What was the language of Mirza's people and to which nation was Mirza sent?

Well, Mirza was sent to what, Punjab or Hindustan? (Zero marks to those who say he was sent to the world - as the world was not the nation he was sent to - clearly!)

• If Punjab, his revelation should have been in Punjabi


• If Hindustan, his revelation should have been in Hindi

Mirza actually claimed revelations in the following languages:

1. Urdu


2. Arabic


3. Farsi


4. Punjabi


5. Sanskrit


6. English


7. Hebrew

Mirza himself said:

It is surprising that many of my inspirations occur in languages that I have no knowledge of such as English, Sanskrit, Hebrew etc.

He is immediately ruled out as a prophet. Not just by God. But by Mirza ghulam Ahmad himself as he wrote in Ruhani Khazain:

It is quite absurd and illogical for a person to have a language and for his inspirations to occur in a different language, because this will be a cause of inconvenience for him. What is the point of such inspirations which are beyond human comprehension?

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: You have been found guilty, guilty, guilty through self-incrimination. You are sentenced to an eternity of ridicule and pity.

Thank God for the Internet - I would never have learned how big a liar Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was otherwise.

The Blasphemer

No prophet has ever claimed revelations as blasphemous as those claimed by Mirza.

How can any sane person say that this is the thinking of a Muslim? Muslims understand the Unity, the Majesty and the utter Incomparability of Allah (swt).

However, Mirza claimed the following as a revelation, to this day, such garbage makes me shudder and I thank God that when faced with such nonsense, I had no choice but to leave falsehood:

O Moon, O Sun, you are from Me and I am from you. We give you good news of a boy who will be an addition for you, an addition from Myself.
(Al Hakam Vol. X, No. 1, Jan. 10, 1905, p.1)

Now the question for Ahmadis is - when you see such nonsense, do you not feel a twinge of conscience that God gave you as a gift? Can you not be your own personal conscience arbiter?

Did God not give you eyes to see?

The Fabricator

We will start with the greatest man and the greatest prophet this world has ever had the fortune of knowing - Muhammad, peace be upon him, the Last in the Line of Prophets, the Khaatam an-Nabiyeen.

Allow me to quote a hadith from Bukhari on the nature of revelation:

Volume 1, Book 1, Number 4:
Narrated Said bin Jubair:

Ibn 'Abbas in the explanation of the Statement of Allah. 'Move not your tongue concerning (the Quran) to make haste therewith." (75.16) Said "Allah's Apostle used to bear the revelation with great trouble and used to move his lips (quickly) with the Inspiration." Ibn 'Abbas moved his lips saying, "I am moving my lips in front of you as Allah's Apostle used to move his." Said moved his lips saying: "I am moving my lips, as I saw Ibn 'Abbas moving his." Ibn 'Abbas added, "So Allah revealed 'Move not your tongue concerning (the Qur'an) to make haste therewith. It is for us to collect it and to give you (O Muhammad) the ability to recite it (the Qur'an) (75.16-17) which means that Allah will make him (the Prophet ) remember the portion of the Qur'an which was revealed at that time by heart and recite it. The Statement of Allah: And 'When we have recited it to you (O Muhammad through Gabriel) then you follow its (Qur'an) recital' (75.18) means 'listen to it and be silent.' Then it is for Us (Allah) to make It clear to you' (75.19) means 'Then it is (for Allah) to make you recite it (and its meaning will be clear by itself through your tongue). Afterwards, Allah's Apostle used to listen to Gabriel whenever he came and after his departure he used to recite it as Gabriel had recited it."

Revelation was not easy, and the Prophet (saw) used to be under strain and even on a cold day, he would be drenched in perspiration when the force of revelation came to him. And God promised to safeguard it and explain it.

Rasulullah (saw) would be concerned that he might not grasp it all, but Allah (swt) assured him that it was His responsibility to safeguard it. The Qur'an would not be forgotten.

Compare such dazzling beauty to the following claimed by Mirza, who also claimed to be the exact mirror of the greatest man to walk the earth (naudhobillah):

I received a revelation today of which I do not remember all the words, but what I do remember is clear and certain. I do not know whom it might relate to, but it portends great danger. The words I remember were: His breath stopped in a moment.

He didn't remember the words???

He doesn't know what it was about?

Was this revelation or just a song he heard some old man singing whilst riding a tanga?

Ahmadis, the man you venerate as a prophet was a complete fraud and a laughing stock. No person in their right mind could revere such a shameless charlatan.

Mirza's Christmas Gift to Jesus

I thought it might be interesting for the readers of this blog to read some revealing thoughts that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had about Isa (as), a prophet revered by Islam and mentioned often in the Noble Qur'an.

I swear by Him in Whose hand is my life, that my God has honoured me with certain and absolute converse, and this is a daily occurrence. I find that the God Who was adjured by Jesus the Messiah (as) in the words: "Why has Thou forsaken me?" has not forsaken me. Like the Messiah (as), I too have been atacked many times, but my enemies have always been frustrated. A conspiracy was hatched to have me hanged by my God delivered me at the time of ever trial, and I was not put on the cross like the Mesiah(as). He has shown many great miracles in my support and has exhibited His mighty power to the same purpose. Through thousands of signs, He has proved to me that He is the same God Who revealed the Qur'an and sent the Holy Prophet (sa). I do not see how Jesus, the Messiah(as), is to be preferred to me in any way. As God's word descended upon him, so it has descended upon me, and I do find myself blessed with the same miracles as are attributed to him and even more so. All this honour has been bestowed upon me by following the Prophet(sa) of whose rank and standing the world is unaware, that is, our lord and master Muhammad, the Chosen One(sa).

Can you believe the disgraceful comparisons of this man? That Mr. Mirza was not forsaken, but look at the invidious parallels he draws with Isa (as) on the cross!

He suggests that he (Mirza) is blessed with more miracles!

And the dirty slander that Isa (as) cannot be compared to Mr. Mirza in any way! What, not even in the aspect of prophethood? Let us assume, God forbid, that this evil charlatan was a prophet. Surely, he knows that God has commanded us not to make distinctions between the prophets? And what is this slandering blasphemer doing here, but denigrating Isa (as)? Ghulam-Ahmadis - why not go and tell your Christian friends about this?

Later, this shameful blasphemer goes onto say:

I have been asked why I claim to to be the Promise Messiah. Let me tell you, in all truth, that through perfect obedience to this Prophet(sa), a person can be exalted above Jesus(as). The blind ones call this infidelity. I retort: How do you know what infidelity is when you yourselves are without faith! Infidelity is within you.

So - Mirza believes thaat an ordinary person, not even a prophet, can be raised in rank above Isa (as) through perfect obedience to the Prophet (pbuh).

I find much of this terribly distasteful. I praise God that I left the clutches of this blaspheming lunatic. It actually gives me great pleasure to call him a charlatan and a lunatic, not because I enjoy debasing "revered figures" but because it is cathartic, and serves as a reminder to me that this was not a religion I was part of, but a mind and soul-destroying cult. And I thank God that I am free of this drivel and that the veil has been removed from my heart. Alhamdolilah.

Please - Ghulam-Ahmadis - read and contemplate the blasphemies of your prophet who worshipped "yalesh" and re-consider your position in this life - and the next. Think also of your children.

(ref: Chashma-e-Masihi, Roohani Khazain, vol 20, pp. 353-355)

Prophets as Warners to the People

In every case in the past when prophets came as warners - the cataclysmic events that ghulam-ahmadis cite as favours to Mirza, happened in the lifetimes of those prophets.

• Moses? Locusts, rivers of blood and Pharoah's army drowned, thus saving Moses? Check.


• Noah? Flood killing everyone bar those on the ark with him? Check.


• Lot? Stones from sky killing all bar him and his family - except his wife who stayed behind? Check.


• Salih? Thamud - destroyed in his lifetime? Check!

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is dead - even if he was a prophet, his forecasts were vague and bogus and he missed key events too whilst busily burying his nose deep in Queen Victoria's ample butt. Such a man, who was more subservient to a tyrannicaly empire than to God, could never have the character to be a prophet of God.

The Lat Prophet (saw) passed way long before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - and in the interim, many Muslims suffered and died in cataclysmic events.

A key point of the Qur'an is that prophets come as warners to their people - and the cataclysms happened while they were still alive.

Al-A'raf:94
Whenever We sent a prophet to a town, We took up its people in suffering and adversity, in order that they might learn humility.

So - where was the suffering in Qadian above and beyond what happened in the rest of India at the time?

According to Mirza, Qadian would be safe - everywhere else would suffer. but like all his lies, this too was a lie.

1) From Qur'an - it is proven that people were punished at the time of a warner for their disbelief. The world was not arbitrarily punished decades later.

2) From Qur'an - it is proven thaat since the town of Qadian did not suffer any adversity significantly greater than the rest of the land - that Mirza was not a prophet.

Don't call Muslims "kafir"

I would like to present a straightforward case. It is very simple (like me) - and very easy to understand.

Since I started calling the followers of Mr. Mirza Ghulam-Ahmadis I have found myself immensely disliked. I obviously struck a nerve. Good. Perhaps Ghulam-Ahmadis would like to know why I and other Muslims are justified in using this perfectly respectable and valid epithet to label a group that has for a century been calling Muslims 'non-believers' - or kuffar - to this day.

GA apologists have been screaming like the thief in the market who shouts "THIEF!!!" to create a diversion that Muslims are the ones with the kufr-labelling problem.

So I shall now explain why it is, that we have more right as Muslims to be offended by what Ghulam-Ahmadis call us than they do by the accurate label I use for them.

I will present the logic from a Ghulam-Ahmadi perspective. Ready? It's really very simple:

1. Ahmadiyyat is the "True Islam"


2. Everything that is not True Islam is NOT Islam! (i.e. it is False Islam - which is meaningless)


3. Therefore "Muslims who are not Ahmadis" are part of false Islam and therefore not Muslim


4. Therefore Muslims, outside the "true Islam" are kuffar (non-believers)

Get it? Every time a Ghulam-Ahmadi calls me a Non-Ahmadi, or a Ghair-Ahmadi - they are effectively calling me kafir. They do it every single day. Whereas I call them Ghulam-Ahmadi (i.e. followers of Ghulam Ahmad) which is exactly what they are, they are quite happily calling over a billion Muslims on a daily basis - KAFIR.

The truth is, most Ghulam-Ahmadis don't even realise what they imply when they use such abominable and objectionable terms as "Non-Ahmadi Muslim" or "Ghair-Ahmadi-Mussalman" - which are in essence ridiculous oxymorons anyway.

Now who has a more legitimate reason for complaint?

Finally, if you are the "true Islam" and we are by inference, outside that, why not be straight about it and call yourself Muslim and just outright call us non-believers? Ghulam-Ahmadism is a separate religion. Case closed.

Dead Religion of Ghulam-Ahmadism

If there are 200 million Ghulam-Ahmadis...

1. In the last 25 years, how many books in any recognised field published by the Ghulam-Ahmadis compared to Muslims?


2. In the last 25 years, how many journalists produced by the GAs compared to Muslim journalists?


3. In the last 25 years, how many prominent politicians produced by the GAs compared to Muslim politicians?


4. In the last 25 years, how many prominent philosophers, authors, scientists, artists, composers, film-makers, anything at all - compared to Muslims?


5. In the last 25 years, how many famous religions scholars produced by GAs as opposed to Muslims?

Ghulam-Ahmadism is culturally, scientifically and spiritually dead already.

"A Very Good Idea"

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his followers are lovers of imperialistic hubris, plundering, genocide and destruction. Of course, no right-thinking-GhulamAhmadi (now there's an oxymoron) could ever admit to such thinking, but it is pervasive. GhulamAhmadism is not about submission to the Will of Allah (Islam). It is about submission to the powers-that-be.

While the British empire were plundering India, causing millions to die, Mirza was kissing Queen Victoria's plump ass in the most crawling, obsequious, loathsome manner. He was busy raising funds for an army that was killing women and children in the Transvaal concentration camps. He was recording names of Muslims to give over to the incumbent looters. He was writing cupboards of books denouncing Jihad - and yet Allah (swt) is crystal clear about oppression. It is worse than slaughter. The British Empire were guilty of both, but Mirza thought it was fine. No prophet would behave in such an unsightly, treacherous manner. He was the Uncle Tom of the Punjab.

It's a shame he couldn't sum it up like a truly great thinker, who despite non-violently opposing oppression and winning (unlike Mirza, who opposed only opposition to oppression) - never claimed prophethood or anything like it. He lived a simple life. Unlike Mirza, he was not obsessed with signs and money. Unllike Mirza, he did something for India.

And how did Gandhi, this truly great thinker sum up his oppressors? When asked about Western civilisation - he responded thus:

What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea.

Chanda vs. Zakat

I've heard from Ghulam-Ahmadis that I focus on financial matters too much. How absurd. Their number skills are lacking, go through these posts and do the maths!. Whenever I mention money on Ahmediorg I'm told to leave jama'at Ahmadiyya alone, it's not my money and I'm apparently jealous. Please, gimme a break. I write passionately against it, because I believe it to be false and I want my friends out of the delusion.

One of the issues that crops up is the confusion over Zakat and chanda. Ghulam-Ahmadis claim that chanda is zakat and that it's used for the propagation of Islam. That's nonsense. Some of the chanda is used for the propagation of Ghulam-Ahmadism. Every time there's an issue about Islam in the press, Ghulam-Ahmadis stand opposed to Islam and are quick to distance themselves. So here, let's set the record straight about the issue of Zakat and chanda.

1. Zakat is not chanda


2. Chanda is not Zakat


3. Check your receipts, you will see separate line items for zakat, chanda aam, chanda this, chanda that, tehrike-those, waqfe-thus etc. showing you clearly that Zakat is not chanda


4. Zakat can be used for the propagation of Islam, but it is used for many other things too. Chanda is also used to enrich the Mirza clan and their closest buddies


5. Zakat is 2.5% of your wealth, chanda is 6.25% flat


6. Zakat is compulsory and has a name - it is repeated along with the word "salat" many times in the Noble Qur'an. Chanda is an invention and you will get different answers at different times in different settings from different people on whether it is compulsory or not. Like much else in Ahmadiyya, it is Schrodinger's Chanda. It fixes itself as different values depending on the above factors. Nobody really knows the complete state and vector of a sub-atomic particle. Nobody knows the true stance of Ghulam-Ahmadiyya on just about any issue of note.


7. Nobody in Ahmadiyya talks about Zakat. When the finance secretaries go through their call lists, they ask for donations to every scheme and for chanda at risk of expulsion, but they never ask for Zakat.

Nobody argues with using Zakat to propagate Islam. That's fine, but Ghulam-Ahmadi office-bearers in practice put the word of Allah (swt) behind their backs and defend the Mirza clan's chanda to the death. Get a clue.

I hope that's clear enough.

Face Values

The recent furore over some provocative and deeply offensive cartoons printed in the press across Europe raises some interesting questions, not least of which relates to Muslims' strict adherence to the principle of no pictorial depiction of ANY of the prophets, or of Allah (swt). The reasons are straightforward, but the outstanding reason is for the avoidance of shirk or idolatry.

The question is this: The picture of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is widely circulated and displayed proudly in the manner of idol-worship in the homes of his followers everywhere - for a man who claimed to be the second advent of the Messenger (pbuh) - who claimed to follow him so perfectly, that only he could lay claim to his mantle, why did he not follow him in this vital principle?

If the prophets must not be depicted pictorially, then why is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad depicted pictorially in home after home after idol-worshipping home?

GhulamAhmadism

Rasulullah (saw) was not a Ghulam-Ahmadi, and his rightly guided caliphs were not Ghulam-Ahmadis either. Are you Ghulam-Ahmadis suggesting that the Messenger (saw) and his rightly guided caliphs were not "true Muslims"?

I have recently started to use the tag "Ghulam-Ahmadis" instead of "Ahmadis". This is not meant to be derogatory, it is meant to be precise. It is also a defence of Islam, in that Ahmad was the name of Rasulullah (saw) and Mirza Ghulam-Ahmad hijacked this name, as did his successors. Mirza Sahib's name was Ghulam Ahmad, which means "Servant of Ahmad". He cannot suddenly remove the Ghulam portion and become the master! That is called hijack.

GhulamAhmadis call themselves Ahmadis and they call Muslims kafirs (non-believers) and followers of a dead and Satanic creed. For this reason, I feel it important to use the correct term "GhulamAhmadism" to indicate followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Ahmadis are also called Mirzais. This is also an appropriate epithet, but it carries negative connotations for some reason. Perhaps I will get to the bottom of this one day.

Even using the term "Ghulam-Ahmadi" is not 100% accurate, and lends more credence to the cause of Ghulam-Ahmadism, as Ghulam-Ahmadis and their founder certainly don't behave like the Ghulam of Ahmad - and there is only one true Ahmad as described in the Qur'an - the Messenger of Allah, sallalaho alaihe wassalam.

The Day of Arafah

I only learned of the Day of Arafah once I had left the cult.

Not a single elder, office-bearer, official, wannabe-khalifa-of-part-of-the-punjabi-nation EVER mention this day to me.

And if they put their hands on their hearts and think for a minute, I'm sure a lot of GhulamAhmadis who are here, either contributing or silent, will not have heard about it before. Sure, many will lambast me and say "sure we knew about it, you were the stupid one for not knowing about it" and many will of course be lying to cover their shame. Some will surely go to google to get their deen about this issue and will not find the top searches listing any site of their creed.

It is a sign of the falsehood of GhulamAhmadism that such an important day, is not generally known about amongst the false creed.

What an important and beautiful day. Muslims know what I'm talking about. Most GhulamAhmadis do not. Google it. See what you're missing. Better still, kick the kult and go to your local mosque - one in which Islam is known about and ask the friendly Imam.

The point I'm making here is not one of education. It is one of ignorance of the traditions of Islam amongst those who follow Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.

Whose Message?

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed a revelation in 1898 from God:

I shall cause thy message to reach the corners of the earth

(Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya, volume IV)

All previous messengers were appointed to spread the word of God. Suddenly, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claims a revelation where apparently, God Himself will spread Mirza Sahib's message!

Masroor the Clueless

The record of Masroor the Clueless

So what has he contributed?

Well, he has expanded the scope of Wassiyat. It's now even easier to join the higher rate tax club that guarantees you paradise. Of course, the descendants of Mirza Sahib, including Masroor Sahib's family, are exempt from this tax.

He has stressed the importance of Ahmadi khilafat and is getting ready for a centenary celebration three years ahead of the event whilst keeping quiet on the real problems of the day.

He has stressed that office-bearers must be respected no matter what.

Has extended the scope of chanda to unbelievably noxious, odious and utterly repugnant levels. Money boxes are being sent to children so that they can contribute to the coffers of jama'at Ahmadiyya and make promises of what they will contribute in this box to Waqfe Jadid. They are urged to return these boxes full. That's right. Get 'em young. This action alone makes me want to puke. I know many Ahmadis who have found this latest step disgusting and are now talking about leaving as a result of this action alone.

But what about his wise words?

In response to the South East Asian tsunami that took the lives of over a quarter of a million people, mostly Muslims:
Absolutely no mention in the first khutbah. From memory, minimal mention in the second.

In response to the repeated outrages committed against civilian Palestinians including mass murder:
Nothing.

In response to the repeated outrages commited against civilian Afghans including arbitrary bombing:
Nothing.

In response to the repeated outrages commited against civilian Iraqis including murder, rape of boys and women in Abu Ghraib and bombing of wedding parties:
Nothing.

In the wake of the 7/7 bombings in London:
Apologetic press release within hours distancing itself from Islam and the bombings, which at this stage had absolutely no connection with Islam and without an independent enquiry, never will.

Ahmadis, this is your leader.

Is this the kind of leadership Muslims should be jealous of?

Double Standards

Ahmadis have played shameless and devious word games when questioned about jihad. They have twisted meanings and ducked and dived between definitions of violence, qital, jihad and other concepts without conforming to the rules of fair debate.

From their website:

It (The Ahmadiyya Movement) strongly rejects violence and terrorism in any form and for any reason.

Two things arise from this statement.

First, when one needs to use violence to defend one's honour, home, property and land, then it is not only permissible, it is mandatory. By making the above unequivocal statement, they are going against the Noble Qur'an. They are by their own declaration, de facto non-Muslims as they reject an aspect of the Noble Qur'an.

And second, if they reject also terrorism in any form and for any reason then why aren't the hypocrites of the cowardly jama'at not standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Islam against the terrorism of the illegal invasion of Iraq, the contemptible treatment of prisoners, male, female and child in Abu Ghraib, the terrorism against Afghanistan, the terrorism against Palestine? Remember, they said in any form. Which must by definition include state-terrorism.

Their two-faced attitude towards Muslims is deplorable and their rhetoric execrable.

Fear & Loathing in Rabwah

Ahmadis say about themselves (from their website)

This (Ahmadiyyat) is the most dynamic denomination of Islam in modern history.

Note please "of" Islam. And yet they reject Islam as a "dead and satanic religion". So someone explain to me how Ahmadis can be part of something they reject as "dead and satanic". Would they not by association be "dead and satanic" themselves?

Either they are part of Islam, or they are not. If they are part of Islam, i.e. there is a mutual overlap, then they are dead and satanic according to their founder. If they say Islam is dead and satanic, then they need to stop considering themselves part of Islam.

JFK