Utilities:
• Discussion forums
• Site Statistics
• Contact us
• Search the website

From about the year 1911 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad started to put forward the doctrine that it is not sufficient for a person to declare belief in the Kalima Shahada in order to be a Muslim because Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had now appeared as a prophet and belief in him must be acknowledged as well.

According to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, it is no longer sufficient for the existing Muslims to believe in the Holy Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets before him. Now they must also declare that they believe in the prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as well. Otherwise they cannot remain Muslims but become just like those Jews and Christians who believed in the previous prophets but failed to accept the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

In a book which the Qadianis have translated and published in English, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, while acknowledging his beliefs, writes:

"(3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his [Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's] bai`at formally, wherever they may be, are Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit."

(The Truth about the Split, Rabwah, 1965, pp. 55-56. This book was first published in 1924, and is the translation of his Urdu book A'inah-i Sadaqat. See the scanned pages from the original work A'inah-i Sadaqat.)

In this book, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad also gives a summary of his first article expressing these views which had earlier appeared in April 1911. He writes regarding this article:

"The article was elaborately entitled `A Muslim is one who believes in all the messengers of God'. The title itself is sufficient to show that the article was not meant to prove merely that `those who did not accept the Promised Messiah were deniers of the Promised Messiah'. Its object rather was to demonstrate that those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims." (pp. 135-136)

"Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiah to be one of the prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims." (pp. 137-138)

"not only are those deemed to be Kafirs who openly style the Promised Messiah as Kafir, and those who although they do not style him thus, decline still to accept his claim, but even those who, in their hearts, believe the Promised Messiah to be true, and do not even deny him with their tongues, but hesitate to enter into his Bai`at, have here been adjudged to be Kafirs." (pp. 139 -140)

"And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiah as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable Kafirs." (p. 140)

According to these views, the only Muslims in the whole world at any time are those who have taken the bai`at of the Qadiani leader of the time. In the last quotation above, the closing words given as "veritable Kafirs" are "pakkay kafir" in the original Urdu book A'inah-i Sadaqat, of which The Truth about the Split is the English translation. The word "pakkay" conveys the significance of "real, true, absolute and full-fledged", meaning that all other Muslims are kafir in the fullest sense without the least doubt.

Views of M. Mahmud Ahmad's brother Bashir.

"Thus, according to this verse, every such person who believes in Moses but does not believe in Jesus, or who believes in Jesus but does not believe in Muhammad (peace be upon him), or believes in Muhammad (peace be upon him) but does not believe in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but pukka kafir and excluded from the fold of Islam."
(Kalimat-ul-Fasal, by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, published February 1915, p. 20.)

Qadianis disallow funeral prayers for other Muslims.

Image of the full page 93		Image of the title page of Anwar-i-Khilafat

"Now another question remains, that is, as non-Ahmadis are deniers of the Promised Messiah, this is why funeral prayers for them must not be offered, but if a young child of a non-Ahmadi dies, why should not his funeral prayers be offered? He did not call the Promised Messiah as kafir. I ask those who raise this question, that if this argument is correct, then why are not funeral prayers offered for the children of Hindus and Christians, and how many people say their funeral prayers? The fact is that, according to the Shariah, the religion of the child is the same as the religion of the parents. So a non-Ahmadi's child is also a non-Ahmadi, and his funeral prayers must not be said. Then I say that as the child cannot be a sinner he does not need the funeral prayers; the child's funeral is a prayer for his relatives, and they do not belong to us but are non-Ahmadis. This is why even the child's funeral prayers must not be said. This leaves the question that if a man who believes Hazrat Mirza sahib to be true but has not yet taken the bai`at, or is still thinking about joining Ahmadiyyat, and he dies in this condition, it is possible that God may not punish him. But the decisions of the Shariah are based on what is outwardly visible. So we must do the same thing in his case, and not offer funeral prayers for him." (Anwar-i-Khilafat, page 93)