Adnan Rashid – Shocking Beliefs Of Ahmadiyya Cult #02
AI: Summary ©
The speakers discuss the use of "igrams and words" in various cultures and the importance of legible works in writing. They also address the struggles faced by the British against the rise of Islam in India, the age of people who have given their lives to the cult, and the negative impact of the climate on Muslims. The conversation concludes that the credibility of the Caliph's work is based on his work with the church and the "verbal" to describe believers. The transcript also touches on the printing of Islam in India, challenges faced by practicing Muslims in the West, and the loss of pride from people criticized for their religion.
AI: Summary ©
Where are those original writings?
We know the Jama'at made an excuse
about Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya because it wasn't completed,
it wasn't finished.
They claimed later on that it was burnt,
without giving any detail.
But what about 80 odd other books?
If possible, a devote missionary, because I have
not come across, up till this time, I
have interacted, Adnan Bhai has already, with most
of their missionaries.
I have not come across a single one
of them who I can say that he
knows 50% of his work.
Really?
Yes.
I asked Razi, I said, Razi, what is
the description or definition of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
about what is a miracle?
Did he know?
He did not know this.
He did not know.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani said, he said that it
is absurd that someone is receiving revelation in
a language which he does not understand.
This is what he said.
And then later on he said, I receive
revelation in languages which I can understand.
Now how to reconcile these two statements?
If Jamaat-e-Ahmadiyya is willing to hire
me to translate all his works, for example,
even if they want to contact me officially
tomorrow, I'll start literally from tomorrow.
Just give me one year.
Within one year, I will translate all his
work in English language with one condition.
You have to put on the title that
translated by Muhammad Imtiaz.
This is my right, right?
Yes.
And I would not charge anything.
Wow.
Okay.
Fair deal?
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Yes.
They strongly deny the allegations that Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani used really foul language, which we win.
We are facing one problem in terms of
interacting with the Ahmadiyya clerics.
And the problem is, when you present something
at a pure academic level, their response is,
he is lying.
Look, you need to deal with the argument.
Just you saying, merely saying that he is
lying is not a response.
Using the word bastard or a bastard child,
do excuse my language, please.
But as I say, you know, sometimes to
clean the mess, you have to get your
hands dirty.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was a magistrate.
A magistrate?
Yes.
And being in like a divinely appointed magistrate.
Okay.
He said that in this capacity, he had
the right to use this language.
But as far as us, the non-magistrates
are concerned, we can't use that.
I was talking to a doctor.
He said that, he also confirmed, he said
that all of my friends around me from
the Ahmadiyya movement, they are all practically atheists.
10 million, no problem.
5,000, you don't even have 5,000
people watching your content.
The caliph, his speeches, or your MTA programs,
or let's say your global productions.
No one is interested.
Because their followers have lost belief.
Now the question is, it means that you
are telling for the last 100 years to
the people that believe in Mirza, you will
be saved.
Jamba group is one of their own offshoot
of Ahmadiyya.
It's called Jamba.
Abdul Ghaffar Jamba is the name of the
founder of this cult.
Now he says, Mirza was a prophet.
He was promised Messiah.
He was the Mahdi and reviver.
Now our question is, Mirza was saying that
believe in me, you will be saved.
Now Abdul Ghaffar Jamba and his group, they
believe in all of the rest of the
Islam, and they believe in Mirza as a
prophet, as a saviour, and everything.
You're still saying they are disbelievers, they will
burn in *.
The question is, then what is that condition
which one has to fulfil in order to
be Muslim?
It's pretty hard criteria by the sounds of
things.
Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim.
Everyone, we are back with another dynamic podcast
slash interview with Declan, who is an author
on the Ahmadiyya movement and Voices of Modern
Islam is one of his books.
You can check his works out on Amazon.
And he's a prolific author.
He has been interested in the Ahmadiyya movement.
He's a researcher.
He's with us again today for the second
episode of this podcast.
It's a very important podcast and today the
second part is even more important because we
have a special guest from Australia.
We have our beloved brother Imtiaz, Muhammad Imtiaz,
who is a researcher on the Ahmadiyya movement.
He has given much of his life to
this particular field.
He has been doing long streams since the
last year.
You can see some of these streams on
his YouTube channel called The Dialogue with Imtiaz.
You'll see that the streams run into hours,
8 hours, 7 hours, the longest he did
with myself, 11 hours.
So today the interview is basically a follow
-up from the last podcast myself and Declan
did in the same vicinity.
So I hope you will find this interesting.
Declan, thank you for joining us again.
I'm not going to conduct the interview.
You will.
I just wanted to introduce myself.
Let's keep it as a conversation.
It's great to be back and it's great
to meet you, Muhammad.
Thank you.
Because I've watched some of your podcasts and
I thought they were absolutely terrific.
Thank you.
And I know that you're a researcher in
Ahmadiyya literature and that's really, really important.
And I'm glad that you're here because today
I want to start off talking again about
the written works.
I'm particularly interested in the written works of
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
And I know that in the last podcast
we touched upon this, Adnan.
But I'd like to talk a little bit
more about it today.
And the first question is why isn't the
complete works of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, why aren't
they translated into English?
That has to be the first question.
Because I need to see them.
And obviously other Christians, you know, I'm a
Catholic.
Other Christians need to see the complete works
of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.
Over the last 18 months, I've listened to
the criticisms and there are many, many criticisms.
But I want to read them myself.
And my preliminary research tells me that perhaps
less than 50 percent of the works of
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad have been published in English.
So why less than, where are the other
works?
Why aren't the complete works?
You know, you can go into any library
or you might have it here in your
books, Adnan.
You get the complete works of William Shakespeare,
one volume.
Why can't we have the complete works of
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in English in one volume?
When you translate them into English, then they
can be translated into other languages, other major
world languages like Spanish, Arabic and so on.
Very good question.
Because Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was supposed to
be the messiah to humanity.
Yes, all humanity, everyone.
And the English language is the most widely
spoken language in the world today.
It's the lingua franca of the civilized world.
And Radim Tiaz, please answer the question.
First of all, I'm feeling honored sitting in
the presence of Declan and Saadan Rashid, an
academic and an author.
And I want to thank Adnan Rashid bhai
that basically all of this endeavor with Ahmadiyya,
it began with Adnan Rashid's encounter in Speaker's
Corner with Ibrahim Noonan.
That's how everything started.
That's the history.
Now, with regard to the question, we are
telling this for the last one year that
whatever Mirza Ghulam Qadiani has written, when you
put everything in its totality on any topic,
it becomes something indefensible.
For example, there are three major issues between
Muslims and the Ahmadiyya community.
One is the prophethood.
Is it continued or has it finished?
Second is, has Jesus died or is he
alive in heaven?
And third is about his second coming.
Would it be literally Jesus coming back or
somebody else in the likeness of Jesus?
Now, in these three fundamental issues, if all
the writings are put together, the narrative becomes
indefensible.
So, for this reason, they are translating the
words selectively to avoid this problem.
So, now, in this past one year, the
reason that this podcast, sorry, the live stream
are really painful for this Ahmadiyya movement because
now we are presenting the complete narrative because
both of us, we have our native language
as Urdu.
So, we can access the primary source materials,
i.e. Mirza Ghulam Qadiani's writings.
So, when we go through his writings and
present the complete narrative on any subject, they
have no response.
So, this is the fundamental reason, i.e.
they want to hide the complete narrative of
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani on any issue.
And tell me, it just occurred to me
when you were saying that, where would the
original works be in the world?
The origin of all his books, do they
still exist?
I would say that if original means that
the copies which left the pen of Mirza
or subscribes of Mirza.
First edition.
So, I don't believe they exist.
They must exist because ever since Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani was writing all of that, because they
were basically, you know, they were the primary,
you know, text for the Jamaat.
So, they must have been preserved in theory,
but in practicality, I don't think they exist.
And the reason, look, again, this is my
own hypothesis.
Somebody can challenge me on this one.
That they have done massive editing in the
works of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.
Obviously, if I will start giving examples, it
will be beyond the scope of this one
podcast.
But because they have gone through, the books
have gone through massive editings, Now, they have
this fear, they had this fear.
And most of this work of systematically destroying
the works, the original works, happened in the
time of the fourth caliph, Mirza Tahir.
And the reason is, they had this fear
that if one day, any historian like Adnan
Rashid bhai, if they are able to have
access to the actual original works, and they
compare to what is in the market now,
they will be problem.
I give simple one example.
In one of his writings, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
actually wrote that God has instructed him to
cut off the complete ties with rest of
the Muslims.
Now, this text is so problematic because they
are preaching love for all.
And Mirza is cutting the ties with the
very Muslims.
So, this was problematic text.
So, they have done the editing.
So, in the current version, this complete word
is missing.
Bakulli, the Urdu word is Bakulli, which means
absolute in totality, totally.
So, this is the reason that they have
done the massive editing because some of the
works were published after Mirza Ghulam Qadiani passed
away.
So, basically, what I'm saying Declan is that,
if we mean by originals that the copies
which left Mirza's pen, then my research is
they don't exist.
And the reason is because they have done
the massive editing.
And if people have access to those original
copies, and then they compare with the published
one we have right now in our hands,
they'll be in big trouble.
And if Jamaat claims, for example, that they
do have the originals, then I give them
an open invitation that then I will prove
to you that if you have the originals,
they are not going to match with what
you have today.
Well, I'd be surprised if they didn't have
the originals because they have some of his
clothes because the current caliph still wears his
coat on special occasions.
So, they've kept his clothes.
I should imagine they would have kept all
his writings.
Not really.
You know why?
Because keeping his clothes is part of the
business because they're going to basically use those
clothes to uplift the emotions of the cult
members to get more and more donations.
There is a deeper problem, Declan.
This individual had followers while he was alive
and some of those followers were affluent, very
influential as well, some of them, albeit in
a small number, but they were there.
And they knew by 1902 or they had
come to believe that he is a prophet
of God, some of them, and if he
is a prophet of God, they surely should
have taken care of his writings, which are
basically holy.
This is God's word on paper.
The originals.
And he would have handwritten all his…
Exactly.
And we have reports that he was busy
writing and reading for long hours.
He was writing for long hours because a
lot of these books that are attributed to
him were actually written by him.
And there are other works that are disputed,
whether he actually wrote them or not.
This is a controversy that will go on
forever.
The point is, where are those original writings?
We know the Jamaat made an excuse about
Barahin-e-Ahmadiyya because it wasn't completed, it
wasn't finished.
They claimed later on that it was burnt,
without giving any details.
But what about 80 odd other books?
Yes, absolutely.
Where are the manuscripts?
Close to the time of his death.
Where are the originals?
Where are the manuscripts?
So the question is, if the Jamaat has
those originals, it should open up the doors
for the researchers to come in and actually
look into them.
Put them on display in the big mosque.
They have the money.
The Jamaat has the money.
They are building projects and they are doing
a lot of mosque projects around the world.
And they are buying buildings to open up
the branches.
So they have the money.
So would you say, Muhammad, if you were
to guess, that the originals probably have been
destroyed?
That's what my belief is at this stage.
Right, okay.
So if we were to do translations, it
would be...
It would be based on the current...
Revised from the original.
But still, even with the revised, at this
stage I would settle for that.
His complete works in English.
Yes.
I mean, the thing is, as Adnan hinted
already, we can present circumstantial evidence from within
the text, internal evidence, that these are not
writings of one person.
Yes, no, absolutely.
Skilled, skilled people can always spot that.
It's called feature creep or something.
If you and I wrote something together, a
skilled editor would know that that's not the
continuous...
Hence the debate on Shakespeare.
Hence the debate on Shakespeare.
Scholars are still arguing today that Shakespeare is
actually not the author of his works.
Because of the high level of learning demonstrated
in those works.
And because Shakespeare, he never completed his school.
So people think that he wasn't actually the
author.
So this is a very living science.
It's like a literary forensic examination.
Exactly, exactly.
And you know, for a layman, I give
them a simple example.
And Adnan bhai knows this because of being
an Urdu native speaker.
That we had these two different writing styles
in different eras.
For example, one is called...
This is a typical style.
He will come or he will go.
But the way you say this or the
way you draft this thing.
Yeah, the expression.
Now, the other one in later part was...
But the interesting thing is Mirza is writing
within that same era.
How come you have found both of those
styles in his writings?
Because when we look at the other writers,
they are using either one of them.
One writer is not using both styles of
writing.
But within Mirza's writing, number one, we find
both styles.
Number two, the level of contradictions.
It's hard to believe that one person can
contradict his speech or statement at this level.
I'm glad you've said that because I was
going to ask you.
Because obviously, you're a researcher into Ahmadiyya literature.
And you've read most of his works or
all of his works.
What's your verdict?
You know, in terms of, for example, once
you're reading any work.
The first thing is the literary beauty in
that work.
It's just coincidence.
As a Muslim, I'm sitting in a state
of evolution.
And I can say this under oath.
There is zero literary beauty in his writings.
Really?
Zero.
It's a painful exercise to read Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani.
One is, there's no literary beauty.
Two, it's too much unnecessary repetition.
If you read ten pages, you may end
up reading one event maybe five times.
So it's very long-winded.
And third thing is, I have not come
across, and you may have in English, I
don't know, but in Urdu.
I have not come across any author.
For example, you know, you give a main
text, and then you give a footnote.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani gives main text, then footnote,
then a footnote to explain the footnote.
And sometimes this footnote to explain the footnote
goes so long, you forget the actual text.
So that's not the style of a well
-versed author, you know.
So I can go on and on, but
I can say in a nutshell, it's very
difficult.
I would say that there are two types
of people.
They can read Mirza Ghulam Qadiani in totality.
One is a researcher, because he has to.
Secondly, if possible, a devout missionary, because I
have not come across up till this time.
I have interacted, Adnan Bhai has already, with
most of their missionaries.
I have not come across a single one
of them who I can say that he
knows 50% of his work.
Really?
Yes.
I would have thought that those young missionaries,
that they would have been...
Razi has claimed that he has read his
works.
That it would be compulsory to...
You know, for example, Razi, Astaad mentioned about
the Razi.
I asked Razi, I said, Razi, what is
the description or definition of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
about what is a miracle?
Did he know?
He did not know this.
He did not know.
I repeated my question, and then I had
to give him the definition.
And then still, I said, okay, now can
you explain this definition?
He wasn't able to.
And then he would always say, oh, we
are not...
I can understand, and I agree.
Nobody can claim, neither can I claim, that
I know everything in my memory.
I can't claim that.
But at least I know the major concepts.
Now, what is a miracle is a major
concept.
Okay?
So, what I am trying to say is
that, either a researcher would take the pain
of reading his entire work, or a very
devout missionary would read his total work, which,
and no such missionary up till today exists.
Are you aware of his English revelations, Declan?
Have you seen them?
No, I haven't.
Okay, he claimed to have received English revelations.
When Imtiaz Bhai was talking about the painful
nature of his writings, they are so absurd
and so inconsistent, that one is baffled by
the sheer sub-standardness of his writings.
He claimed to have received, or claimed to
have, you know, received English revelations.
For example, one of the revelations was, I
love you.
Okay?
Another one was, I am with you.
Then, I shall help you.
Then, this is where it becomes more confusing.
I can what I will do.
I can what I will do.
Okay?
We can what we will do.
And he stated about these revelations, I felt
at the time, from the tone and pronunciation,
that an Englishman was standing over me, and
was uttering these phrases.
Despite the awe-striking tone, my soul delivered
a pleasure from these revelations, which was comforting.
I definitely have never ever heard that before.
This is from his writings.
This is from Ruhani Khazain.
Yes.
Yes, it's there.
Just on the same note, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
said, he said that it is absurd that
someone is receiving revelation in a language which
he does not understand.
This is what he said.
And then later on he said, I receive
revelation in languages which I can understand.
Now, how to reconcile these two statements?
Yes.
So, he would say something, and then indict
himself by those statements he has made himself.
So, he would say, such and such, such
and such is a crime, but he would
commit that crime himself, later on, somewhere else
in his writing.
So, he was clearly not very aware of
his own principles.
He writes down principles, and then he breaks
them, repeatedly.
And this doesn't happen once.
Okay.
In those 22 odd volumes of Ruhani Khazain,
this is a very common pattern.
You will see it, every single volume is
filled with riddles.
Okay.
And tell me, if you were to get
all his works together, because some of them
were quite large, some of them were just
a couple of pages, how many thousand words
are we talking about?
What sort of size of a book, if
we were to get the complete works of
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, are we talking about a
huge...
Currently, we have 22 volumes.
23.
23.
Yeah, 23 volumes.
What sort of word count?
How many pages, for example?
I don't know off the top of my
head, but it's hard to put a number,
to be honest.
Right.
Yeah.
So, we see a wordsmith in the sense,
obviously, you said he's very repetitive.
There's a lot of writings there.
Yes, yes, a lot.
I mean, there are 80 odd books.
Approximately 80 books.
How long would it take a translator to
go through, to translate all of that into
English?
If they have a team of translators working
on it, it could be done in one
year.
Oh, really?
Six months.
Depending on, you hire 20 people, okay?
You hire 20 people and give all of
these 20 people a volume each, it can
be done in months.
Can I give them an invitation, okay?
I can translate Mirza's work within one year,
if they want to hire me, just by
myself.
Well, that would be brilliant.
No, no, that would be brilliant, because obviously,
you know…
We have an offer.
We have a serious offer.
And I know that you're a highly skilled
and you obviously come from an academic background,
because you need highly skilled translators.
You cannot, you know, don't hire amateurs.
Yeah, yeah.
Declan, the issue is, these are not just
words of a common man to the Ahmadiyya
Jamaat.
These are the words of a prophet.
Yes.
And by that virtue, the words revealed by
God.
Yeah.
Why are they so reluctant to translate all
his works?
Well, we need to say them, because, you
know, there's 7 billion of us and he's
our promised Messiah for all humanity.
Exactly.
So, I need to see these works.
Actually, you know, Declan, somebody might be saying,
oh, Imtiaz just made this as a joke.
No, I mean it.
If Jamaat Ahmadiyya is willing to hire me
to translate all his works in its entirety.
Well, there's obviously some reluctance and there's some
difficulty.
They obviously do need some help, because Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad is dead 116, 117 years next
year.
Now, this major publishing house, they still can't
give us the complete works in English, the
universal language.
So, they need help.
Yes, I am ready.
I'm ready that, for example, even if they
want to contact me officially tomorrow, I'll start
literally from tomorrow.
Just give me one year.
Within one year, I will translate all his
work in English language with one condition.
You have to put on the title that
translated by Muhammad Imtiaz.
This is my right, right?
Yes.
And I would not charge anything.
Wow.
Okay.
Fair deal?
Absolutely.
That's, yeah.
Yes.
And now, you have basically a point to
tell them as, look, I have got Muhammad
Imtiaz.
And by the way, somebody might say, oh,
look, his English is not that.
No.
I will make sure that you can go
in the review through somebody.
For example, I can give you a sample
translation, take it to a well-versed translator.
If he approves it, then go for it.
You do a trial?
Oh, yes.
Okay.
I'm ready to do a trial.
Because I really want this to happen.
Well, look, that's, what can you say to
an offer like that?
You see?
Yeah.
Because the reason I said this, Declan, I
really want the white man, the English-speaking
person, to know what Mirza has written.
Yes.
And not only the white people.
We're talking about majority of the Ahmadiyya, the
next generation.
Right?
They don't speak Urdu.
They don't read Urdu.
The majority of the Ahmadiyya youngsters, youth, born
and raised in the West, in Canada, in
Britain, in the US, they cannot read Urdu.
Few words here and there.
Exactly.
Because of the family, you know, because they
speak the language at home.
But that doesn't mean you can read it.
What about the African converts?
Not a chance.
No way.
Not a chance.
No.
Okay.
So, obviously, the Ahmadiyya Jama'at, and this
is what I'm going on from, from obviously
some of the responses that they've done to
some of the podcasts.
They strongly deny the allegations that Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad used really foul language, which we went
through the last time where you give me
examples about Jesus and Mother Mary.
They said that, you know, that somebody from
a Muslim background like his would never ever
use such filthy language.
Obviously, you've read these works.
What's your thoughts on this type of an
allegation saying, you know, a response saying that
we strongly, he just, he wouldn't, he could
never use that type of language.
Actually, you know, Declan, we are facing one
problem in terms of interacting with the Ahmadiyya
clerics.
And the problem is when you present something
at a pure academic level, their response is,
he's lying.
Look, you need to deal with the argument.
Just you saying, merely saying that he is
lying.
It's not a response.
Secondly, I say, obviously, you know, I would,
I speak from a faith context, from a
faith background.
I say this under oath that whatever filth
and the foul language Mirza has used, especially
in particular regarding Prophet Isa or Jesus Christ
and his mother, Maryam.
May Allah be pleased with her.
I say this, I said, look, if you
have confidence, I am so confident to the
level that you take me to a court
of law and put a case that this
man is claiming that our founder has disrespected
these noble figures like Jesus, who is respected
by close to 4 billion people on planet.
And same is the case with Maryam.
And they should make a case, look, this
guy is saying that our founder used this
foul language.
Then I will present my evidence because there
has to be a third party who has
no biases, neither Ahmadi nor with us.
And they should see, okay, this is the
argument being presented and what is the counter
argument.
And the one thing I want, we do
have the examples in the history of interacting
with the Ahmadis in which we do have
the precedent of having an independent judge.
And it did happen.
And guess what?
When we had independent judge between Muslims and
Ahmadis, Muslims won.
They won the debate.
And people know what I am referring to.
So, I would say that instead of us
presenting evidence, you just merely say he is
denying, oh sorry, he is lying, he is
fabricating, he is against the Jamaat.
Why don't you organize or have something?
To make clear examples.
Exactly, exactly.
And I give one example now, just to
clarify this point.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani said that Quran titles Yahya,
John as Hasuran, which means that someone who
has no sexual desire.
But Quran does not title Isa as Hasuran.
And then Mirza gives the reason.
He said the reason is the drinking issue
of Isa and his relationship with the prostitutes.
He said these two issues were actually a
problem for God to title Isa as somebody
Hasuran, i.e. someone with no sexual desires.
So, now in this case, in this particular
case, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani is bringing, quote-unquote,
evidence from the Quran to prove his point.
So, there is no way to say, oh,
he was giving accusative answer to the Christians.
No, he quoted Quran.
So, this is just one example.
I was looking for a dictionary or like
a short dictionary of Mirza's abusive words.
I couldn't find it.
Someone sent it to me in a PDF
format.
And it has alphabetical, basically, abuses starting from
the Urdu alphabet, Alif, all the way to
Ya.
So, it's like A to Z of Mirza's
abuse in his works.
So, abuse means words, extreme words, extreme language,
something...
It was pretty vulgar, wasn't it?
Yeah.
What you said last week.
Yeah.
Using the word bastard or a bastard child,
do excuse my language, please.
But as I say, you know, sometimes to
clean the mess, you have to get your
hands dirty.
Right?
So, I am only using these words because
they are actually...
Oh, yeah.
There you go.
Okay.
Alphabetical dictionary of his swearing and abusing.
Okay.
This is a very short one, right?
Oh, my goodness, mate.
This is a very short one, by the
way.
The one I have is more extensive.
It's a much longer...
It's a translation.
Yeah.
So...
What I wanted to ask, Adnan, is when
can this be shut down?
When can they accept that he has said
these things?
They do accept.
Because this goes round and round in circles.
Yeah.
Declan, what they do is they do accept,
but they put a completely different spin on
it.
They say the word bastard doesn't actually mean
bastard in the true sense of the word.
Rather, it means mischievous.
It means...
It's one of the meanings in the dictionaries.
For example, if you go to a dictionary
like Johnson's dictionary, you pick up the English
dictionary, and you see an English word, and
you have five or six meanings given, right?
It could mean this, it could mean this,
it could mean...
There are primary meanings used most commonly, and
there are secondary meanings used in certain contexts.
They ignore the primary meaning, and they go
to secondary meanings to claim that this is
what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Khan All the time.
All the time.
When it comes to the abuse.
When it comes to the abuse.
They will not...
Mirza used the word bastard child against his
opponents repeatedly in different languages.
In Urdu, in Persian, in Arabic.
And he used creative expressions to say that.
Not only words, he used sentences to insinuate
that these people who are my opponents are
bastard children.
Whether you don't agree with him, whether you
reject him, whether you think he lost a
debate, for example.
When he felt frustrated or angry at people,
he simply lashed out at them in this
language, calling them bastard children.
And the terms he used was harami, haramzada,
waldul haram, suratul baghaya, durriyatul baghaya.
All of these things mean the same thing.
I have a very interesting answer which was
given by Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood on this topic.
What did he say?
He said that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was a
magistrate.
A magistrate?
Yes.
And being like a divinely appointed magistrate.
He said that in this capacity he had
the right to use this language.
But as for us, the non-magistrates are
concerned we can't use that.
Now, Declan, look, you are an academic.
Just weigh the worth of this answer.
Number one.
And number two is when they stopped coming
on our live streams, they said, oh, you
guys are disrespectful towards our founder.
He's a prophet for us.
You call him Antichrist, etc.
I said, hang on a second.
Are you setting a principle that if somebody
has a foul language, this person must not
be interacted with?
And as soon as I said this, they
knew where I'm heading to.
They would.
Exactly.
And then they said, no, no, no.
If you're talking about Mirza Ghulam Qadiani, he
did all of that in response to Christian
missionaries because they were disrespecting our prophet.
I said, okay, let's put a caveat.
Are you saying that if somebody has a
disrespect towards our prophet, then you can do
this in response?
No, no.
So they are not giving us any answer.
Just go round and round.
They're shifting the goalpost.
It's very disappointing.
It really is very disappointing because, you know,
I've known them for a long time and
up until probably 18 months ago, even though
probably before that, there were maybe one or
two red flags.
But it's only really 18 months ago that
I'm zooming in much more closely on Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad and what Muslims are telling me.
You know, before that, you know, I suppose
the ordinary Ahmadiyyas that you meet, they're nice
people.
They're likeable, nice people.
Absolutely.
But you almost have to distance, you know,
you have to compartmentalize them and this.
Yes.
We do.
We differentiate.
Because there were times, you know, I almost
felt guilty, you know, speaking to, you know,
yourselves and some others.
Yeah.
I had an emotional conflict because, you know,
I knew them.
I thought they were really, really nice people.
Well, they are nice people.
But there's just something not right about this.
Actually, you know, And we couldn't be making
this up, Declan.
We could not possibly be making this up.
No, because you're highly intelligent men.
You have really, really crystal sharp minds and
intellect.
And we have integrities to defend.
We have, we are well known in the
Muslim community, Declan.
We can't just sit here publicly, put this
content out publicly and lie to people outrightly.
People can easily come back and expose us
publicly.
They can make videos and say, look, we
misquoted Mirza.
These things are actually not there.
And these Qadiani Murabbis, the missionaries, actually attempt
to challenge every single thing we put forward.
But they fail miserably.
They fail because any sensible person listening to
them simply cannot make sense of their responses.
Their responses are so either out of context
or irrelevant or outright red herrings.
There's no spontaneous debate.
Because, I mean, I've watched you, I've watched
you, I've watched several others, you know, the
podcasts on YouTube.
I've watched them and there's no spontaneous debate.
You ask a question, there's a hesitation to
answer it.
Yes.
You have to ask the question so many
times before you get an answer.
Exactly.
If you know this subject, if you feel
so passionate about this man and you know
so much about him, just let it flow.
For example, when we ask them a simple
and straight question, Declan, Mirza claimed this.
Can you produce the evidence?
You will not get a straight answer.
They will take you around the world.
They'll take you around the world.
They will simply not admit that this information
does not exist.
He simply made it up.
For example, when he attributed information to Ibn
Kathir that many truthful companions of Prophet Muhammad
apostatized at the incident of Udaybiyyah.
Right?
Ibn Kathir never wrote that.
We have his published works all over the
world.
We have manuscripts of his commentaries and his
history.
He did not say this.
And when you ask the Jamaat, they will
play games, they will go around the world,
they will simply not admit that this information
does not exist.
Ibn Kathir did not write this.
This is the difficulty we face.
We are dealing with disingenuous people.
I'm talking about the missionaries.
I'm talking about the establishment, not the common
Ahmadi.
The common Ahmadi had no idea that this
stuff exists.
They are the victims.
They are the victims, yes.
Just to add one thing, if you allow
me, because it's very important here.
Sometime myself and Adnan Bhai said, is it
that they really don't understand that how apologetics
work.
For example, now we are asking them that
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani in 18, just as one
example, that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani in 1879, he
said that, I have written completely documented 300
arguments which are irrefutable to defend Islam and
anyone who will read those arguments will have
no choice but to become a Muslim.
And then he said, I have written all
of that under revelation, through revelation.
Right?
Now, then, obviously he did not produce that
work.
So then he ended up saying, for the
first one decade, when people had paid money
in advance to Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.
Because he asked for money to publish.
He said, give me money, I'll be publishing
and sending to your addresses.
Okay.
He got the money, did not produce the
work.
For the first one decade, he kept saying,
he said, look, it's a matter of delay.
It's going to happen.
I am doing more research Now the question
is, you said initially that I produced already.
Now you want research.
Number one.
Number two, you said it's a divine revelation.
Now you say it's a research.
And then he took a third stance.
He said, in 1905, he said that, look,
I was going to publish 300 arguments in
50 volumes.
But I am going to give this fifth
volume and the difference between 50 and 5
is only a dot.
So don't worry about that.
Only a zero.
So now these are three different stances.
So the reply or the refutation of the
Ahmadiyya should be how to reconcile these three
statements.
Instead of doing that, as Adnan bhai said,
what their first response is, Imtiaz is lying.
Adnan is lying.
They are anti-Jamaat.
This is not the refutation.
No, no, no, no.
You have to answer the question.
So you have to reconcile those categorical statements.
In 1879, this man writes, I have already
finished the job.
300 arguments have been penned and are ready
to be published.
I need money.
Money comes.
But the work is not coming out.
It's not being published.
Because he hasn't finished his research.
Yes.
But the research issue is...
The research was never an issue.
But the research is already done.
Declan, in 1879, is saying it's finished.
The job is done.
I just need to publish it.
Right?
And it never came out.
And later on, when the Jamaat could not
produce that work, what was the excuse?
Oh, it got burned.
It got burned.
It got burned.
Yes.
And Adnan bhai, just regard to...
This is the point, Declan.
With regard to this got burned point, guess
what?
I mean, somebody has produced unprecedented work.
Okay?
Rohini Ahmadiyya.
And his original work is burned.
He never said this in his life.
It is only once Mirza Ghulam Qadiani passed
away and his son Mirza Bashir Ahmed Ammi,
he realized the problem.
People are going to say the same thing.
Where is the work?
He said that it was burned and destroyed.
But Mirza never said in his life that
it was burned.
So you need to tell us that if
it was burned, Mirza Ghulam Qadiani should be
the first person to say this.
He wasn't honest about it.
Or he should have said it's burned, accidentally,
there was some accident, it got burned and
we're going to reproduce it because the mind
is still alive.
Mirza is still alive.
He could have finished because it's, you see,
a prophet of God cannot be a fraudster.
He cannot be someone who deceives people.
Okay?
The greatest possession of a prophet or the
greatest evidence for his truthfulness is his integrity.
Prophet Muhammad was known as the truthful man
and the trustworthy man among his people in
Mecca.
No one could point a finger at him
and say this man deceived us or lied
to us at certain point.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani doesn't qualify to be that
man because in the very beginning of his
own ministry, his own career, he basically was
guilty of fraud.
He claimed to have written a book which
was completed and finished and then he couldn't
produce it having received tens of thousands of
rupees.
He became rich with this money.
There was a point he himself writes that
he didn't know when the next meal is
coming and where it's coming from.
He wrote this and then ten years down
the line, he writes that he is already
in possession of ten thousand rupees.
Yes.
Actually, that's an interesting thing.
Now, obviously, we are talking to those thinking
Ahmadis.
When Mirza Ghulam Qadiani had second marriage in
1884, this is exactly the time when he
has collected all of those donations to print
Rahim-e-Ahmadiyya which he did not eventually
publish and we see him having a second
marriage and within that second marriage, his son
has mentioned that how affluent he became.
Initially, he was saying that I was someone
as Adnan said that I could not even
bring meal on the table and now he
is having a second marriage and living a
very rich life.
Privileged life.
No.
Should a holy man live such a privileged
life?
Would be my question.
Well, if it's earned.
Legitimately.
If that money is earned legitimately, yes, there
is nothing wrong in being rich.
We are not condemning.
No, but being a holy man.
Yes.
I mean, you can be, we have prophets
who were kings.
Yes.
Okay.
Solomon, King David, King Solomon, right?
They were kings.
So, they lived like kings.
There is nothing wrong.
Yes.
Islamically speaking, there is nothing wrong with living
a decent, good life or even a lavish
life, let's say.
Right?
But it has to come by legitimate means.
Mirza Ghulam al-Qadiani was making money from
gullible Muslims and not delivering on his promises.
I have always got the impression that he
came from this very rich, privileged background, anyway.
You know, there are two things here, Declan.
One is, I just want to finish this
topic then we'll come to this question as
well.
The point is this.
Mirza Ghulam al-Qadiani said God appointed him
and inspired him to produce Baheen-e-Ahmadiyya.
The first, yeah.
Okay.
Now, the question is, if it was burned,
I'm sure that God knew it's going to
be burned.
Why would God inspire someone to produce something
which was not going to be published and
was going to be burned in the future?
Now, either God does not know the future
or it wasn't God inspiring Mirza Ghulam, one
of these two.
Now, secondly, I agree with Adnan Abbas in
principle that through legitimate means you can live
a good life.
There's no problem.
But guess what?
Mirza said, I am second coming of Prophet
Muhammad, peace be upon him.
And we know from the biography of Prophet
Muhammad, he said, his wife said that the
two months would pass and we could not
have a meal.
We could not burn the fire.
This was the level of poverty he had
at home.
Now, if you are second coming of this
Prophet, then how come you're living this lavish
life?
And lastly, why this issue?
Obviously, people can say, why they are discussing
too much about one book, Baheen-e-Ahmadiyya?
No.
You need to understand.
This is how Mirza Ghulam Qadiani came on
the scene.
Baheen-e-Ahmadiyya, that is the first work
which Mirza Ghulam Qadiani used as his publicity.
He said, I'm going to produce this work
and that will be irrefutable.
This is magnum opus.
Now the question is, if it is proven
with overwhelming evidence it was a fraud, which
means that right in the beginning we have
a fraud.
So his ministry starts with a fraud, with
a lie, with deception.
What about his life?
Because I was going to ask you, there's
always this controversy about the year that he
was born.
Have you delved into that?
Oh my goodness.
I would like to request that we keep
our answers as short as possible so that
we can get as many questions as possible.
I agree.
But continue, please.
Actually, you know Declan, first of all, people
need to understand the context that why the
age or the lifespan of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
is crucial.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani said that God has decided
that he wants to give a sign to
the future generations so they can verify the
truthfulness of my claims.
And then he said that in order to
give that sign, this is the sign God
has decided to give me.
He said that God has told me that
my lifespan would be 80 years or close
to it.
Now, this is the significance because if we
miss this perspective, then the whole thing is
just blurry.
So this is the actual perspective.
This is how the thing started.
Now, the question is their entire response is
revolving around one thing and that is back
in the days, it was not customary to
document the birthdays.
Hang on a second.
That's not the question.
God was going to give the sign and
God knew very well that in order for
people to verify this sign, they need two
things.
Date of birth, date of death.
Date of death, no problem.
Everybody will know that eventually.
Date of birth was one single piece of
information which God must provide.
If God was going to give the sign,
then it is God's responsibility to provide the
information, i.e., the date of birth.
Otherwise, what is the sign?
What's the point?
What is the sign?
What sign?
So basically, this is again the academic thinking.
If this is the context, then their official
response, as they gave to you as well,
that back in the days, it was not
customary, no, no, it was not customary to
document the date of birth.
That's not the question.
It was God to give the sign and
I guess that God knew his date of
birth.
I guess, okay.
Now, the next thing is that when they
are trying to cover up this whole thing,
I want to ask them a question.
How come that up until 1908, there was
no controversy on Mirza's date of birth?
Lahori Jamaat, Qadiani Jamaat, first Caliph Hakeem Nuruddin,
Mirza himself, all of them unanimously said 1839
or 1840.
Wow.
Unanimously said.
Okay.
And Mirza himself?
Yes, yes.
On oath?
Yes.
That's very important you mention him, tell me.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani appeared in the court of
Gurdaspur in 1900 or 1901, one of these
two.
And he said that, he said under oath,
he said, I am close to 60.
When?
In 1901 or 1900, one of these two.
We know for sure he died at 1908.
So, if you do the math, he's 69,
number one.
Number two, when they are coming up with
their number of 1835, they are being unacademic.
Why?
Because the parameters they are using, they are
using other people.
Mufti Sadiq, one of the disciples of Mirza
Ghulam Qadiani, he says that, Mirza told me,
we have no evidence by the way, he
said Mirza told me, he was born in
such and such month of the Indian calendar.
Now, the question is, how come that you
want to depend on Mufti Sadiq, a secondary
person, and leaving Mirza Ghulam Qadiani, his son
and his caliph?
And secondly, how come?
That's the main key point now.
Because the whole context is, quote-unquote, divine.
God is giving the sign, right?
If Mirza Ghulam...
Now, they say that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was
mistaken when he was telling his date of
birth.
Hang on a second.
You still have no response.
Why?
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani said, a prophet cannot die
on a mistake.
If Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was making a mistake
by telling his date of birth, it was
God's responsibility to correct him.
Because it's a sign.
It's a sign.
You see why this is a big deal,
Declan?
Do you understand?
Why the Jamaat does so much gymnastics about
the age of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani?
What's the big deal?
Who cares?
Whether he was 60, 70 or 80, who
cares?
The reason why Qadiani Jamaat does so much
gymnastics is because Mirza himself made his age,
the number, to be a sign from God.
Yes.
Otherwise it wouldn't be a problem.
So the number becomes very important.
That's why there is so much discussion in
the literature as to when he was born.
According to Mirza's own testimonies, he stated that
he was born in the last year.
That's the one you have to go with.
Yes.
Because he's the prophet.
He tells you when he was born.
And they ignore that.
The entire Jamaat ignore Mirza's own testimonies and
create another date of birth to fit him
into that.
Well, they're very disrespectful to the promised Messiah.
Absolutely.
You know, Declan, just to add two last
things because I would say that through this
podcast, this should be documented in the history
that why this question matters, the date of
birth thing.
Now, the cover they are using is that
God never said it would be 80.
It would be close to 80.
Guess what?
Bring a single statement because Mirza was telling
his age close to as well.
For example, he says in 1901 under oath,
I am close to 60.
In 1907, in his book Haqiqatul Wahi, 1907
he said, I am close to 70.
Did he ever say I'm close to 80?
That's the question.
It was going to be close to 80.
Okay.
The second thing is when he said that
I am close to 70, there's a possibility
it could be a bit over 70 or
a bit less 70.
Guess what?
Close to 70.
He closed that door.
68 and a half.
69.
Actually, he's 69.
71, 72, 73.
That's the thing.
He closed that door.
When he said that I am close to
70, in the same book, he said 69.
And he died over one year afterwards.
1907 he's saying this.
That I'm 69.
And he dies in 1908.
Yes.
And you've read all this.
Yes.
there are two things.
One of his final books.
Yes.
This will be in the translation.
It is available.
Okay.
Now there are two things, Declan.
One is in 1907, Mirza says I am
close to 70, number one.
Then close to 70 could open the possibilities.
He closed that.
He said I am 69.
Then he died after one year.
Do the math.
It's never close to 80.
So, and him, now that's a case closed
now.
The checkmate thing is Declan.
Mirza says that the future generation will know
the truthfulness of my claim through my lifespan.
But what will they come back and say
on that, Adnan?
They'll have a response to that.
They won't just take this lying down.
Oh, they have a response to everything.
So what likely response will they have?
We have had an entire stream that runs
into ours.
Yes.
And they had the chance to come and
defend their position.
And they couldn't.
The math simply doesn't work.
So how do they justify that?
Mirza was mistaken about his age.
Yes.
Okay.
The Prophet was mistaken about his age.
If he was mistaken about his age, he
might be mistaken about a lot of other
things.
But there's another catastrophe for them.
Even by their own calculations, the numbers don't
match.
So even after they've done their calculations, the
numbers don't match.
Okay.
They still couldn't make him 80.
What's their explanation for that?
You know, Akram, if you want me to
tell you...
It's just a charade, isn't it?
It is.
They have three responses.
One, which they gave to you, that back
in the days in India, it was not
customary to document the date of birth.
But the way they have worked it out...
No, but Mirza...
If you look at Mirza's own statements, Mirza
said, I was born in the last year
of Maharaja Ranjit Singh.
Maharaja Ranjit Singh died in 1813 and not
Sikh Raj, Maharaja Ranjit Singh.
Okay?
Is that...
Can we check that?
Because he said Maharaja Ranjit Singh, if I
remember correctly.
He said, Sikhon ke aakhri door mein.
Aakhri door can mean anything.
Yeah, yeah.
Because aakhri door starts from 1839 all the
way up to 1849.
No, no, no.
There are two things.
He had two statements.
One is that, in the last period of
the Sikhs.
And then he said, 1839, 1840.
1830.
What he means by the last year of
Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Okay?
Maharaja Ranjit Singh died in 1839.
By all history accounts, he died in 1839.
Okay?
And this is how people would remember important
births or their own births that such and
such child was born when that happened or
when this happened, for example.
Okay?
And Mirza Ghulam al-Qadiani writes himself that,
and let's say, let's say, if it's the
last days of the Sikh rule, it can
never be 1835.
Because the last days of the Sikh rule
started after 1839.
Yes.
So his date of birth has to be
after 1839.
Not before 1839.
Because up to 1839, the Sikh rule in
the Punjab was the most powerful entity in
the region.
And there was no question about the power
of the Sikh rule and whether, no one
could imagine that within the next seven to
eight years, this rule will be completely dismantled
and the Punjab region will be annexed by
the British so easily.
Because Maharaja Ranjit Singh had created a very
powerful empire, okay, in the Punjab region.
So, whether Mirza meant it was the last
year of Maharaja Ranjit Singh or the last
years of the Sikh rule, in both cases,
it must be 1839 onwards, not backwards.
It cannot, it cannot possibly be 1835 by
any account or by any calculation.
Okay?
1835 year doesn't make sense.
The last statement, Declan, I would make on
this age thing, that Ahmadis, those who are
sincere to the truth, they need to ask
the Jama'at two questions on this topic.
Question one, did God say to Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani that I am going to make your
lifespan a sign for the future people to
know the truth?
If the answer is yes, then the second
necessary thing is that God must tell Otherwise
what sign?
What's the point then?
I mean, I'm going to make something a
sign for you, but then I'm going to
make it blurry.
I'm going to make it so vague, I'm
going to make it so questionable, so unestablished,
so uncertain that it loses its meaning.
What sign?
If I tell you there is a signboard,
if you want to go to the Heathrow
airport, let's say, and there's a signboard, but
then the signboard is telling you go right,
and then it says go left.
The same signboard is telling you right and
left, and you're standing there confused, right or
left?
It doesn't explain.
So God is telling you right and left.
He's been very mischievous.
Yeah, so this is a mess.
It's an absolute mess.
And the reason why we are doing this
campaign, Declan, is to save the common, gullible,
decent Ahmadis who have given their lives to
this cult, and they are giving their money
to this cult.
I think it's too late.
I think anybody over the age of 40,
it's probably too late.
I wouldn't say so.
I think there are people, I mean, we
have people, Declan, who are beyond the age
of 40, and they're coming back.
Oh, yes.
Yes, 100%.
The reason that I say that is that
they are so devoted.
Yes.
They are so devoted.
The elderly, I must, yes, over 60, 70,
those people, but even then.
But I don't under, I'm kind of looking
at why are they so devoted if they
haven't read his works and if they haven't
done their own research, their own analysis.
It's the culture.
You see, when you are raised as an
Ahmadi child or as a Qadiani child, Of
course, yes.
You see Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani with a
halo around his head.
Yes.
He's shown to be a divine personality.
They are not shown these contradictions.
They're not shown these problems.
But they are now.
Yes.
They are being exposed to it.
They are being exposed to this.
And now the kids, the youngsters are asking
questions.
Declan, they sent out a bulletin to their
private WhatsApp chats that we received from one
of the insiders and it states categorically, block
Muhammad Imtiaz and Adnan Rashid from the devices
of your children.
Just like you block *.
Do not let them watch their content.
Do not let them watch their content.
We have the bulletin.
When was that sent out?
This was, how many months?
Nearly three months ago.
I put it up on my Twitter.
Yes, on Twitter.
I actually put the screenshot on my Twitter.
They never challenged that bulletin.
They never said this is not true because
it came from the inside.
Yes.
And we have people, Declan, in the Jamaat
who are Muslims.
They are not Ahmadis.
They have accepted Islam and they remain inside
so that they can help people inside.
Undercover.
Undercover.
Wow.
And they run into many.
Not few individuals.
They are everywhere, almost in every single major
country where they have major operations and they
are inside, including the house of the Caliph.
I am saying it publicly.
I am announcing it.
We are not going to say the names.
We are not going to tell you who
they are.
I have personally met people who have direct
contact with the Caliph.
They are Muslims.
They are Muslims.
They have accepted Islam.
With myself, they repeated the Shahada.
When we say the Shahada, that means making
the declaration of Islam again to enter Islam
again from the Qadiani religion.
So they left the Qadiani religion and we
requested stay in and help more people to
come out because this is a money-making
scheme that's conning people.
You know, Declan, with this question of devotion,
obviously I won't mention any, but you coming
from a Christian tradition, you know there are
cults, and if you see or if you
study any cult, There are common denominations.
Yes.
Those cults are always very devoted.
Why they are?
Why they are?
We can discuss the reasons, but this is
a common trait in cults, devotion.
Blind devotion.
Yes.
Blind devotion that is inherited from ancestors.
And sometimes people die in this blindness.
We have so many examples around the world
why people end up following erroneous ideas and
religions.
Yeah, because devotion itself is not in question.
The in-question subject is a devotion that
even you are confronted with facing the evidence
contrary to that, you say, no, I don't
want to see that.
This kind of devotion which has no evidence
based.
Yeah.
It's not looked at, it's not studied, it's
not analyzed.
It's just anti-Amadeo.
That's it.
That's it.
You see, in Islam, Declan, we are encouraged
to contemplate the question.
And that's why I think about the younger
generation because obviously the younger generation are very
well educated, they've been to university, they have
degrees, they have professional careers, that's one thing,
that's academia.
What about their own personal research, they've moved
away from home, from their parents, they're out
into the big bold world, they'll meet lots
of Muslims, mainstream Muslims.
They must do their own analytical thinking.
And they are, and they are, this is
why the Jamaat invited us, actually not invited
us, the Jamaat was forced to allow us
on their biggest channel.
MTA.
MTA.
Oh yes.
It's their official international channel.
Were you both on that?
We were both on that channel.
They indirectly gave us a message by putting
a post on Twitter and on YouTube.
They said, look, you anti-Ahmadis are asking
questions here and there.
Don't worry about that.
We're going to start a program every Friday,
8pm, come and join us and ask any
of your questions.
I said, that's a good opportunity.
So myself, Adnan Bhai, we joined the live
stream and I said, you said this thing
in your public announcement that you want to
have a dialogue.
He said, we never said that.
Who said, who told you?
We never said that.
It's a Q&A.
Ask your question and listen to our monologues.
And then we did.
We were fine with that.
We said, okay, no problem.
You don't want to have a debate?
You announced on Twitter the word they used
was Mubahita in the Urdu language, which means
a dialogue.
Argumentation.
Argumentation.
Which literally, actually means a debate.
So, we went and Asif was there.
Asif Basit?
The person you interviewed.
He was there.
You should watch that episode.
It's very interesting by the way.
It's in Urdu, right?
Yes.
It's in Urdu.
Unfortunately, it's in Urdu.
You see, you're getting deprived.
But he was there.
Why didn't you do it in English?
Good question.
And they themselves avoided the English discussion because
they wanted to discuss it for the Urdu
audience.
And then we posed questions because they said
no debate, just questions.
So, we posed questions and when we posed
questions How long was this podcast?
A bit over one hour.
Was it live or recorded?
We were only allowed to speak for what?
Five minutes each?
It was live but as soon as we
tried to say something they would mute our
mics and remove us from the screen.
Yeah, it was Zoom.
It was on a Zoom meeting.
Basically, a couple of times what happened is
I thought maybe I am being heard by
the audience but I was told to message
other people you are not on the screen
man, just stop.
Yeah, and the funny thing is the questions
we posed were so devastating for them that
they actually Give me an example of the
questions you might have asked.
For example, the topic they chose and they
thought they will do well on that topic,
the topic they chose who was the last
prophet?
Muhammad or Jesus?
Who was the last prophet?
By Jesus they mean Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani
by the way.
Oh, I was going to say I would
have been able to answer that.
Yeah, but that's the assumption.
Okay, the assumption is that Jesus or actually
the claim is that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani
is the second coming of Jesus Christ, right?
So, by posing this question they are being
very clever and they are trying to raise
this confusion.
So, our question was when we were allowed
to speak, our question was first you tell
us and determine who was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
Qadiani?
Was he Muhammad or Jesus Christ?
Okay, because Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani claimed to
be both personalities.
He claimed categorically that he is Muhammad Rasulullah.
He claimed categorically he claimed categorically that he
is Isa A.S. or Jesus the son
of Mary second coming.
So, we asked them before you pose this
question to us you need to clarify who
is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani?
Is he Muhammad or is he Jesus?
Then we can address the question.
And they were rattled by that.
They were completely blown away by that question.
And they went on trying to explain.
And then the next week they did another
program, a follow-up program on Friday.
We both appeared.
We both went.
They kept us waiting for one hour, did
not allow us to go in and had
long monologues addressing the same question.
And then finished
the program.
We are in the backstage and we are
waiting to be taken on.
And they did not care.
I am quite shocked by this.
We were also surprised.
We were shocked by the fact that they
allowed us.
Because, you know, you are too high profile
people, too high.
To ignore.
Yeah.
It's very insulting.
But also, you know, since these debates have
started, Adnan and Muhammad, you know, they have
always said to me throughout all the time
that I have known them, Sunni Muslims, they
do not want to talk to us, they
do not want to engage with us.
Well, they have not that excuse anymore, have
they?
No, they don't.
Absolutely not.
But the way they're treating you guys, you
know, debates should be taking place every week,
you should be on the television channel every
week, you should have a weekly slosh.
Actually, guess what, Declan, we made a statement.
I said that let me give you this
invitation.
Have just five live streams on your official
channel.
Let me see that if Jamaat remains intact.
And let's see that how many of your
members would still choose to stay part of
this cult.
Just five live streams.
Instead of, okay, you're so confident, come, let's
have five live streams.
No, they said that, oh, you guys have
always been saying this, Jamaat will always remain.
Look, I'm asking you, I'm giving you a
simple invitation, then let it happen.
And you know, Declan, here's the thing, as
I mentioned before, on every single topic, they
have a prepaid script, prepared in advance.
So, now, the reason they're finding it hard
to deal with us, our questions are not
within the script.
Of course, yeah, yeah.
So, in the last hundred years...
And sometimes they are taken by a shock.
Yeah, because they have done a massive work
in the last 100 years, their teams, and
they have come up with a script for
every topic.
Pocket book.
They call it pocket book.
But the moment you bring something which is
not in the script, they are finished.
Yeah.
And, you said, you know, you said this
thing about the young generation.
It's a very important thing.
Now, again, I'm telling you, I'm
telling you, I'm telling you, I'm telling you,
you, I'm telling you, you,
I'm telling you, you.
It's an Theуч And even though Mirza Ghulam
Qaidani has written extensively on this thing and
Mirza Ghulam Qaidani himself doesn't believe in supernatural.
That's interesting thing.
He was He was a naturalist.
He was a naturalist.
Secondly, today's Ahmadi youth, majority of them, acceptance
is always there, but majority of them, they
are also on the same track.
They are naturalist.
Anything that cannot be explained through naturalistic explanation,
they reject it.
Which means that from a purely Islamic point
of view, they are not Muslims.
No.
Right?
So this is what I...
They wouldn't even be Christians.
No.
They are people of...
Because Christians believe in miracles.
Yes.
Yes.
Jesus Christ, he committed miracles as per the
New Testament.
Likewise the Quran.
Yes.
The Quran tells us Jesus Christ did magnificent
miracles.
So did Moses.
Yes.
So did Prophet Muhammad.
Exactly.
Okay.
So all these prophets were known as prophets
because they were not ordinary people.
They had supernatural powers.
Yes.
Okay.
So they completely reject these miracles as we
discussed in the last podcast that even the
miracles of Jesus Christ that are categorically stated
in the Quran, Mirza calls them mesmerism.
Yeah.
Trickery.
And you know, Adnan bhai, because your question
was what I mean by the majority of
the Ahmadi youth is basically atheists for all
practical purposes.
Then the question is then in which sense
they are still quote unquote Ahmadis or Muslims
for example.
In this sense, for example, for their social
gatherings, you know, they are part of the
Jamaat.
They are in the list as a statistics
in Jamaat list in their computers.
They would gather together on the social events,
etc.
But if faith means to believe in what
Allah and his messenger have told us, then
they are not Muslims or atheists or they
are not Muslims, even Ahmadi Muslims.
Even by Ahmadi standard.
Yes.
They don't follow the religion.
I'm using their terms, Ahmadi Muslims, they're not.
And they are in large numbers.
Yes.
They are in large numbers.
And you know that for a fact.
Yes.
Oh yes.
Yes.
Perfect.
Most Ahmadis, youngsters, the youth, the next generation
or the upcoming generation is agnostic or atheist.
The ones that have left school and gone
on to college or whatever.
Because I'm telling you this, for example, I
was talking to a doctor.
He said that he also confirmed, he said
that every, all of my friends around me
from the Ahmadiyya movement, they are all practically
atheists, all with exception.
But let's return to the numbers.
You know, again, there's this huge controversy about
the numbers.
Is it 10 to 12 million?
Is it 15 million?
Is it 40 million?
Or is it 1 million?
Because again, insiders.
To be honest with you, Declan, they have
certain countries where they have some concentration in
certain areas.
Okay.
And they don't amount to that number.
10 million is out of the question, in
my opinion.
But even if they have 10 million, let's
say, even if they have 10 million, what
value do they have as followers?
For example, I'll give you an example to
judge the value of followers if they are
not active followers, if they're not even listening
to you.
You go to the biggest YouTube channels, okay?
You go to the biggest YouTube channels, okay,
with the highest number of subscribers.
And when you watch the videos, okay, they
have 200, 300, maybe 1,000 views at
a time, right?
Okay.
You see any common Muslim YouTuber who's producing
religious content and is eloquent and is able
to present the evidence in a very articulate
way, you will see that they will have
tens of thousands of views.
I'll give you one example, Mufti Menk, one
of the Muslim figures who is very famous
and internationally renowned Islamic figure.
He has millions of followers on Instagram, on
YouTube, on Facebook, all social media accounts and
his videos easily get, within an hour or
two hours, hundreds of thousands of views, right?
Okay, they can come back and say, oh,
you have higher numbers.
But we say proportionally, let's speak proportionally, you
have 10 million followers.
At least 10,000 of them should be
observant.
At least 5,000, let's say, should be
watching you.
Okay, 10 million, no problem, 5,000.
You don't even have 5,000 people watching
your content.
The caliph, his speeches, or your MTA programs,
or let's say your global productions, no one
is interested because their followers have lost belief.
They don't actually have proper religiosity.
They don't, but the numbers, as we all
are guessing, are hugely exaggerated.
Actually, you know, we can actually give evidence
that they are lying about their numbers.
Simple piece of evidence, which is verifiable, Mirza
Tahir said in around 2001, he made a
statement, he said that in one year, just
in India, just in India, we have 40
million new converts, which means that number should
be more than 40 million.
I only read that the other day, and
he got very angry when he was challenged
on it.
Yeah, now the question is, if there are
40 million just new converts, let's say actual
number was 50 million, okay?
And now you're saying 10 to 15.
So what happened to the rest of 35
million?
Number one.
And number two is that, is it that
difficult for organized, I would call it, you
can disagree, cult.
Well, insiders said that you've got to pay
a membership fee.
Yes, basically, basically.
So the caliph suffers, we should know.
In terms of their system, Declan, they have
a, they have a complete record of their
members in each and every town and city.
Okay.
And it is just a matter of maybe
10 minutes for the caliph from his office
to issue a public statement that this is
our total number.
And this is the breakdown of that number.
The reason they are not doing that, and
even, guess what, they were asked this question
in the National Assembly of Pakistan in 1974.
And the caliph said, I don't know what's
the number.
So now, whoever you ask, they deny it
was a number.
But on the other hand, those people who
left the cult, they are telling us that
every member is given a unique ID number.
And it's not difficult.
So the reason they are not telling us
the number, Declan, very simple, whatever number they're
going to state, two things will happen.
What Mirza Tahir was saying will be officially
disproved.
The 40 million.
40 million.
Number one.
And number two, people will get at least
some official number and then people can verify
that and they'll be in trouble, that you're
lying.
So that's why.
Well, they'll come back to you and they'll
say, well, I'm imagining this.
They'll say, well, no, he didn't say 40
million.
You've taken that out of context.
He was talking in a metaphorical sense.
He was saying that maybe one day the
world will be 40 million in one year.
And you were thinking he said 40 million.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Just two things on this, Adnan.
One is, one is, if words are metaphorical,
if numbers are metaphorical, how is it possible
for a human being to know anything about
them?
Absolutely.
I agree with you.
What isn't metaphorical?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Absolutely.
I think it's an excuse.
This is the official YouTube channel from the
UK.
True Islam UK.
This is the official Ahmadiyya Jamaat YouTube channel.
It has only 7,000 subscribers.
If you watch their video record, okay, you
will see every video they have a Sunni
Muslim figure depicted on the thumbnail.
They get 5,000, 6,000, 4,000
views.
Every time they are speaking to the audience
on their own, they are getting, what, 351,
okay, 656, right?
And the most watched video in the entire
history of this official YouTube channel of the
Ahmadiyya Jamaat is the interaction myself and five
of the Murabbis had, 132,000 views.
That is the most watched video on their
entire channel.
Who did you do that with?
There were five of them.
Oh, I think I've seen them.
They went live.
They went live.
I was in Tanzania at the time, in
Africa, sleeping in my bed.
They went live without warning and they started
taunting me live, where are you, Adnan Rashid?
You coward.
You're running away from us.
We are sitting here to debate you.
Where are you?
Where are you?
So I was called and tipped off and
then I was told, are you a coward?
I was asked, are you a coward?
I said, I'm not a coward.
What do you mean?
They said, they are calling you, they're taunting
you on live and five of the Murabbis,
two Arabs and three Pakistanis, they are sitting
there and they're calling upon you.
Where are you?
So I quickly washed my face and turned
on my phone and I could see them.
So I went live.
I'm from Tanzania and the rest is history.
You can watch.
You can go and watch.
Right?
Five of them against one, right?
And this is the only video on their
channel which crossed 100,000, right?
Because I'm not saying it's because of me.
I'm saying this is the level of disinterest.
It's no coincidence.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So their audience is not interested in what
they have to say.
Their own Imams and missionaries and Murabbis are
not even taken seriously by their own followers.
If they were, Declan, they would be, if
not, let's say, if not hundreds of thousands,
they would have thousands of views on their
videos.
But they're not.
They're 10 million people.
Yeah.
Where are they?
14 million.
15 million.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So it's a lie.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Well, yeah.
There's definitely some.
Something fishy.
Massive.
There's a massive contradiction.
And it's not something that they could easily
fix.
But anyway, can I just ask you, because
you've just reminded me there about young missionaries
and young Imams.
They go to college for seven years.
How much do you think that they know
about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?
Do you think that they would have read
all 84 books?
First of all.
Regardless of which denomination you go to, they
study some standard books in terms of Quranic
exegetical works, ahadith, etc.
We recently interviewed an ex-missionary who left
the cult.
We interviewed him on our platform.
He said that, no, I have not read
that syllabus, number one.
So that is the first thing, that they
do not read that standard literature of Islam.
This is basic.
Basic.
Very basic.
After that, whatever they read is, it's only
revolving around one agenda.
That we have to defend Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.
So let's roam around the entire Islamic literature,
try to find something.
That's all they learn for their seven years.
And in terms of knowing Mirza Ghulam Qadiani,
not me, that ex-missionary said, he said
that what I learned about Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
afterwards, through my own research, that's how I
came to know that who he was.
But when I was for those years in
the seminary, I did not learn that.
Even to the missionaries, they give selective quotation.
And he said that any of those missionaries,
during that study in the seminary, if he
is questioning something, he is being confrontational, he
will be out of the class.
They can't tolerate that.
They can't tolerate that.
So this is who they are.
So no, the answer is no.
And look, we have a test case.
So therefore, somebody like that, so one of
these young missionaries or imams, even if they
were imams for 10 years, they wouldn't be
able to debate you if they haven't read
the written works about him.
You'd be able to...
I would say yes.
And the thing is this, Declan, look, somebody
might say, oh, look, they are sitting in
their room and boasting and all of that,
but not boasting, okay?
Again, we give them invitation.
Let's have a live Q&A.
You are more than welcome to ask us
whatever you want to ask.
And then let us ask you as well,
the basic things from Mirza's writings.
So people can see if you know him
or not.
No, I absolutely agree.
That's how you can decide.
Just by saying, we are lying.
It's no good just, yeah, it's no good
doing, choosing a topic.
Exactly.
And for it to be pre-recorded and
so on.
It has to be live.
It has to be spontaneous.
Ask anything.
And I would say that, for example, I'm
not sure, whatever, if they trust you, for
example, I would ask you that, okay, you
sit between us, invite them, invite us, let's
have a live discussion.
Oh, I've tried that.
I've tried that.
I've tried that for negotiations were going on
for about six months and it's not going
anywhere.
Dither and delay, dither and delay.
And you give up in the end.
Yes.
You give up in the end.
They actually engaged with me from the start.
I tried.
I tried.
I tried to engage with them in the
first instance.
I tried to do it.
And that's why I've moved on to, you
know, you have to move on after a
certain time because you, you know.
And look, we can even offer for a
dialogue, for a discussion, like a podcast setting
where you can sit as a neutral...
As a moderator.
As a moderator.
Okay.
You're a Catholic.
You're not Muslim.
Okay.
They are Ahmadis.
We are Muslims.
So maybe you can propose to them that
why don't you come and sit with me
and I will serve as the middle ground
or let's say the moderator between the two
parties so that we can have a moderated
discussion.
If they are not giving an answer to
our question, you can probe them.
And if we are not being honest and
straight about our questions, you can probe us.
I can do that, Adnan.
But the thing is they'll come back with
such a long list of conditions and it
just goes on and on and on.
And we have no conditions.
We have no conditions.
We have no conditions.
And the list of questions has to be
verified.
And from what I know about them is
everything goes through this huge chain of command.
Well, we might be, even, even, even, even
if, even what you're proposing, even if this
did go ahead.
We're talking about this time next year.
Declan, are we paying...
Are you coming back next year?
Are we paying you to say this?
No, you're not.
We won't pay you for next year, next
trip.
Because you're saying these things, Declan, on record,
you're saying these things on record.
They are the kind of people...
Nobody is paying me for this.
I wish they were.
They said this to us, that you're being
paid to do this.
We wish we were being paid.
We are struggling to make ends meet.
We have expenses.
I'm doing this because I'm really, really interested.
I'm really interested in it.
Absolutely.
I wouldn't be doing it if I wasn't
interested.
I just wanted to get that out of
the way.
But I'm also interested in finding out the
truth.
Because, you know, any Catholic or any Christian
that I tell them about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad,
they haven't got a clue who he is.
He's supposed to be our promised Messiah.
I think you need to write another book.
You'll have to write another book.
I've thought about it, but I cannot write
it until I've read it.
Yes.
I want to read every single word he
wrote, whether it's the revised edition or whatever
edition.
Well, you'll be waiting for a long time.
I would say, in that case, I would
say you should push to them for my
invitation.
Well, if they ever invite me back again
to talk to Asif or someone else, I
will definitely ask that.
I will definitely push for you.
Oh, I've got a good question for you.
So imagine now, you know, the Caliph, the
present Caliph, if you were invited to his
office, if you were invited to be like
going to see the Pope, a special audience
with his soul in us, and they're relatively
short audiences.
I think if you go to the Pope,
let's say in Rome, he'll give you 20
minutes of his time.
He's very busy.
So imagine if you were going to the
Caliph, he was going to give you 20
minutes of divided attention, and you were invited
to ask him just two questions, Adnan, just
two questions in 20 minutes, 10 minutes per
question.
What two questions would you ask?
The first question I would ask him, basically,
is how can you believe in an individual
as a prophet of God, who not only
praised the British colonial rule in India, but
also expressed his heartfelt desire to serve that
rule.
So he didn't stop at praise.
He expressed a desire to serve the British
rule in India.
And what's the problem with that?
So you'd be asking him about his great
grandfather.
Exactly.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, the founder of the
movement, the founder of the religion, who wrote
a lavish tribute to Queen Victoria, which is
not a problem.
I've already acknowledged that Queen Victoria as a
person was a very noble person.
She had noble intentions.
She was a good woman.
But she had no idea what her administrators,
colonial administrators, were doing around the world.
Every time she got the news of their
oppression and their racism and their tyranny, she
did her best to stop it.
So the problem is not with Queen Victoria.
The problem is with the British colonial rule
that Mirza was communicating with.
How can you believe in such a man
who could not see the oppression, the racism,
the tyranny, and the destruction caused by this
rule?
Now, especially Declan, especially when he himself was
active as a reviver, as the promised messiah,
or even a prophet of God, I'm saying
in inverted commas, right, all of this.
He was active from 1880 to 1908 until
he died.
These are his active years, about 28 or
30 years, let's say, give and take.
It was in this period when the greatest
number of people died in India under the
British colonial rule.
There are two historians who have put together
research and they claimed 100 million people died
between 1880 and 1920 due to the British
colonial policies in India.
In India alone, we're not talking about Africa,
we're not talking about Australasia, we're not talking
about Canada, what was happening to Native Americans
because all of this is British territory.
At that time, British colonial territory.
We cannot blame the current British government and
the British people for that today because they
have nothing to do with those crimes.
But those people at that time, in the
18th century and the 19th century, and the
early 20th century, these crimes were committed, especially
when Mirza was active as a prophet or
as a reviver of this religion.
Was he made blind by God?
And every single example we have of a
prophet in history, prophets stood up to oppression.
They stood up to the tyrants.
For example, Moses against Pharaoh, Abraham against Nimrod,
Jesus against the Romans and his temple authorities.
And this is why he was allegedly crucified.
Because he stood up to oppression.
He challenged the oppression of time.
So why didn't Mirza Ghulam Ahmad do that?
Why didn't Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani stand up
to the greatest oppressive power in the history
of humanity?
That committed some of the greatest crimes.
More than British...
What do you think could be the possible
reason that he didn't?
Because he himself was...
First of all, he wasn't even a decent
man, let alone a prophet of God.
He wanted privileges.
He wanted support.
He wanted the good wishes of...
Did he get all that?
Not in his lifetime, I don't think so.
But his son, Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood, definitely had
the support of the colonial establishment.
He even sent men to fight the Ottomans
during the First World War from India.
Qadiani men were sent from India to fight
in the British...
Sorry, during the First World War on the
front in Iraq against the Ottomans.
And amazingly, Mirza had written Jihad, physical struggle,
fighting is not my religion.
But for some reason, for the British empire,
for the British colonial rule, it was okay
to fight for them.
For the cause of Islam, you could not
fight the British in India.
Because many people, they wanted to fight the
British colonial rule in India.
Because it was oppressive, outrightly racist, tyrannical, genocidal!
Genocidal!
And by the way, Declan, I'm not making
this up.
This is not Adnan Rashid speaking.
This is academics today who are writing works
on the British colonial rule who are saying
this.
There is a very excellent book I invite
you to read by Shashi Tharoor, an Indian
politician as well as an author.
His name is Shashi Tharoor and he is
a Congress Party member.
He wrote a book titled Inglourious Empire.
Inglourious Empire.
Like we have this movie Inglourious Bastards, right?
About the Nazis.
I mean, sorry about the title.
Because they are talking about the Nazis.
Just like that, he wrote a book titled
Inglourious Empire and in this book he puts
down all the evidence of the oppression and
the tyranny of the British Empire.
I would ask Mirza Masroor, coming back to
the question you asked, why would you believe
in a person like this to be a
prophet of God?
This person is not even a decent man
let alone a reviver, the promised messiah, or
a prophet of God.
That's the first question.
I was going to say, what's your second
question?
The second question would be, how can you
believe in this man to be a prophet
of God when his writings are riddled with
contradictions?
Irreconcilable contradictions.
These contradictions cannot be reconciled.
It is impossible to reconcile some of those
contradictions that we can find in his writings.
His writings are riddled.
When I say riddled...
We're talking about hundreds of contradictions.
We're talking about thousands.
Thousands.
In his 23-odd volumes, Ruhani Khazain, each
and every single volume has content that contradicts
with another volume.
Directly.
Sometimes mathematically.
There are mathematical contradictions.
These contradictions cannot be from someone who is
inspired by God.
This is impossible.
It is absolutely impossible.
Well, we'll have to imagine what sort of
answers you would get.
Yes.
I can only imagine.
Okay.
Adnan had his 20 minutes with the caliph.
Next in comes Muhammad.
What questions would you ask him?
Two questions, 20 minutes.
First of all, I would not be excited
at all.
You wouldn't?
No.
The reason is because I know the knowledge
of the caliph.
Not about Quran and Sunnah.
About Mirza Ghulam Qadiani's own writings.
He must have read the originals.
Okay.
Let me tell you this thing.
If I say that he knows 5%
of Mirza's work, that would be exaggeration.
Really?
Yes.
And again, this is not an exaggeration.
What he said is not an exaggeration.
Really?
We can give you evidence.
The thing is, the thing is, Declan, now
there are two ways.
Would he not be interested of my great
-grandfather as a writer?
I would I met I would devour everybody.
I met one of his one of his
frontmen.
I met, personally, one of his frontmen who
accepted Islam with us.
Again, his identity is secret because he doesn't
want to reveal his identity.
Okay.
He said he had private, personal meetings with
Mirza Masroor and he believes that Mirza Masroor
does not believe in this religion.
Or that Mirza was a prophet.
Or that Mirza was a prophet.
This is coming this is coming from the
mouth of a person who has had private
interactions with Mirza Masroor.
Now, again, this is the reason I would
not be excited.
So, if you still want me to give
it a try, I can try.
Okay.
We can give you examples.
He made public statements that contradict Mirza Ghulam
-ud-Qadhi and his identity.
Okay, example now.
Because, just putting in perspective, there's a discussion
happening between Mirza Masroor and the congregation in
front of him and he is surrounded by
the murabbis and the senior people as well.
And the question in discussion is about the
children which were born between Joseph the carpenter
and Mariam or Mary after the birth of
Jesus.
Now, Mirza Ghulam-ud-Qadhi has clearly written
he said that after this birth of Jesus
they had * and these were the children
born after the *.
And now, in spite of the fact that
the marriage was illegitimate according to the law
of Moses.
There was another caveat obviously.
We discussed this last month.
Now, the thing is I was surprised number
one Mirza Masroor did not know that Mirza
Ghulam-ud-Qadhi has written about this marriage
while Mirza has written extensively on this one
number one.
So, the son didn't read the daddy's the
father's writings.
Exactly.
Now, the second thing is he is not
only the son.
He is not only a great grandson.
He is the caliph.
He is supposed to be the face of
the religion.
And then he doesn't know basic things like
this.
On which Mirza was writing extensively.
A second interesting thing is that in that
gathering obviously just imagine the missionaries or the
knowledgeable people around Mirza Masroor to cover up
if he makes a mistake should be very
highly qualified, right?
None of them knew this.
This is embarrassing, isn't it?
Why would I be excited if I am
given an opportunity to sit and ask him
a question?
Absolutely.
And what answers are we expecting?
I thought this was going to be a
really good question.
I thought oh yeah you jump at the
chance I meet him and ask him But
guess what you know despite my disappointment or
frustration I already have I would ask him
not to one question.
Okay.
That Mirza Ghulam Qadiani is supposedly the awaited
one for the entire humanity.
Yes.
Seven billion of us.
Yes.
Currently.
Be it Hindu.
Yes.
Be it a Jew.
And he came to save us.
Yes.
And be it a Christian or a Muslim.
Now our question is we want to see
the evidence Mr. Caliph any letters you have
written to Modi.
We need to see everything.
For example when was the last time or
the first time ever you wrote to Modi
that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was second coming of
Krishna.
If you don't believe in him you will
burn in *.
Krishna is the Hindu deity.
Now the problem here is if they did
claim that by the way.
He claimed to be Krishna.
The avatar of Krishna.
He used the word avatar.
Yes.
Avatar.
And he also claims to be the soul
of Muhammad.
Yes.
Not the soul.
I mean this is the embodiment and his
son claimed that he was very Muhammad.
Now just to complete my question you know.
It's very confusing.
Yes.
More than confusing.
So the question is if you believe Mr.
Caliph that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was the savior
for Hindus and he was the reincarnation of
Krishna.
Right.
Is it not your responsibility divine responsibility to
write to Modi to tell his people that
believe in Mirza as Krishna or you'll be
doomed to *.
Why not doing that?
That's a good question.
Secondly I will ask him at the end
of the day Mirza is a promised Messiah
and a waited Messiah for the Jews as
well.
I want to see that letter which Caliph
has written or is thinking to write to
Netanyahu or the Jewish rabbis to tell them
Mirza Ghulam
why Mirza Ghulam Qadiani is Caliph Mirza Masroor
is not writing to the Pope to the
Pope that Mirza was the second coming of
your Isa Jesus Christ and if you don't
believe in that you will burn in *.
Actually if your prophet is universally savior is
a universal savior Mirza Ghulam Qadiani literally he
said I am the last savior of humanity
now the problem is here now there are
two things again two things ok if they
are not writing these letters to Modi to
Netanyahu and Rabbi and to Pope it shows
us one thing they do not believe in
Mirza's writings yeah they don't have the confidence
and the thing is he is dead 116
years now as I said they have had
a long time recently passed away exactly and
secondly and second thing is now how come
how come they are telling their numbers etc
we want to see the Jewish converts to
Ahmadiyya well produce one absolutely and and it
weighs a little on that one and if
you look at the life of Prophet Mohammad
he sent letters to the Persian Emperor he
sent letters to the Byzantine Emperor he sent
letters to the Patriarch of Egypt Cyrus who
received a letter from Prophet Mohammad inviting him
to Islam and he warned him
that if you do not accept Islam the
sin of your people will be on your
back it will be on your shoulders for
rejecting Islam because they will die as disbelievers
because you
know don't believe in this position he's going
to * okay but the problem is if
Mirza was their saviour as well why aren't
they telling to the Pope and to all
of the rest of humanity all they are
doing is they are just swearing it as
non Imtiaz or the rest of our Muslim
scholars who do they call true believers when
I wrote the Lahori book the Lahoris told
me the break up between the two communities
after the death of the first Caliph and
when Mulana Muhammad Ali met with the second
Caliph when they had a disagreement the second
Caliph correct me if I'm wrong here he
said to Mulana Ali that if people didn't
accept his father as the promised Messiah that
they weren't Muslims that's correct that's correct even
if they have never heard of my father
definitely that's correct and guess what my thesis
which will be published next year by March
which is on this very topic excommunication of
Ahmadiyya on rest of the Muslim Ummah the
Muslim nation in its entirety now just look
at the terms they use if they are
true Islam then by necessity the rest of
the Muslims are on false Islam because something
in comparison to truth has to be falsehood
so there's nearly two billion mainstream Muslims on
falsehood number one number two is with regard
to this conversation between the second caliph Muhammad
Ali Lahori they actually have a evolution of
their stance in the beginning they were very
open when he was writing books on this
very topic and telling everybody if you don't
believe in
this topic from 1953 onward they started to
change their stance .
Now the thing is currently this is something
they are not telling their own audience or
community members.
The current stance of Qadiani Ahmadis which means
that the Ahmadis who are under the Khalifa
Masroor.
So their today's stance is the stance of
Lahori Jamaat.
I mean back in the days they used
to refute this stance they used to write
papers and now quietly they have adopted their
stance in which sense they would say that
as long as someone says I'm a Muslim
we will not excommunicate him.
But how come Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood was saying
all of that and writing books on all
of that and Mirza Bashir Ahmed Ammi.
He wrote a famous booklet it's called Kalimatul
Fusil which deals with this very topic that
if you don't believe in his father as
a prophet of God you are disbeliever in
the same sense as you do not believe
in Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
Now just imagine if somebody says that I
don't believe in Nabi Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa
sallam.
This person is an outright disbeliever and Mirza's
son was saying that if you reject my
father his father i.e. you are a
disbeliever in the same sense and guess what
now they are hiding all of that.
So my thesis is.
So what's the current stance.
The current jamaat.
Who do they think the true believers are.
Their current fake.
Do they believe that you're a true believer.
I tell you their current.
Their current.
Absolutely not.
100% not.
You know their current fake public narrative is
that they are the true Muslims and us
people are they don't call it false Muslims
we are the Muslims who are sinner because
they rejected.
What is the opposite of true.
I told you falsehood.
Untrue.
Untrue is one polite way of putting it.
It means false.
True.
False.
True.
False.
Right.
False is false.
True is true.
Right.
So we are upon false Islam.
They are upon true Islam.
And how do we know they're claiming this.
Their YouTube channel is called this.
True Islam UK.
True Islam UK.
And they always claim that we are upon
true Islam.
So they are saying in a very cunning
way that we are the only true believers.
The rest of the world is basically filled
with disbelievers.
So there are only.
So would they use that word.
Yes.
Would they use the K word.
The kafir.
Yeah.
The word kafir.
Yeah.
Mirza used it.
Yeah.
And his son used it.
Both of his sons used it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
They use it.
The current community.
No.
No.
They will not call you a kafir outright.
There are two things now actually.
There are two things now.
If some.
Although.
Sorry for interruption.
They have said it recently.
The missionaries said it live.
Yes.
That yes we believe you to be a
kafir.
Kafir.
Not only you the Muslims but also the
Lahoris and the other splinter groups of the
Qadiani Jamaat.
All the other splinter groups are also disbelievers.
Kafirs.
So are you.
They said it.
The missionaries said it.
Not only this by the way.
They said that even the Lahoris despite believing
in Mirza as a promised messiah and a
reviver they are kuffar i.e. disbelievers and
they will burn in *.
Now the question is it means that you
are telling for last 100 years to the
people that believe in Mirza you will be
saved.
But the Lahoris believed in.
OK forget about Lahoris.
Jamba group is one of their own offshoot
of Ahmadiyya.
It's called Jamba.
Abdul Ghaffar Jamba is the name of the
founder of this cult.
Now he says Mirza was a prophet.
He was promised messiah.
He was the Mahdi and reviver.
Now our question is Mirza was saying that
believe in me you will be saved.
Now Abdul Ghaffar Jamba and his group they
believe in all of the rest of the
Islam and they believe in Mirza as a
prophet as a savior and everything.
You still think they are disbelievers.
They will burn in *.
The question is then what is that condition
which one has to fulfill in order to
be Muslim.
It's pretty hard criteria by the sounds of
things.
And this is what I'm saying is that
they never tell their complete narrative.
You basically I have the answer.
The answer is you must take a pledge
of allegiance with Mirza Masroor the current caliph
to be a Muslim in their eyes.
And if you haven't taken that pledge.
No you're not.
Exactly.
If you say that I do not accept
him as the caliph you're outside.
You're out.
Now it means if obviously I knew this
answer.
But the thing is the moment they will
spell it out.
They are in trouble.
You know why.
Because they have added that believe in Mirza
Masroor or the caliph a condition to be
a believer with evidence.
Even Mirza did not say this.
Even Mirza himself did not say this that
in the future if you don't believe in
my caliph you'll be a disbeliever.
So if you have this criteria with evidence.
Well it's just it's made up as they
go along isn't it.
And now the interesting thing is that if
there's about a million of them in the
world.
So there can't be any other believers out
of that.
That's the criteria.
Yeah absolutely.
Yeah.
And only those believers within true Islam will
go to heaven.
That's right.
And the rest of us are completely doomed.
Yes.
Yes.
Wow.
Yes.
There's going to be a lot of space
up there isn't that.
Yes.
It's going to be by their standards.
Yes absolutely.
These place all to themselves.
Yeah yeah absolutely.
And they have no no no legs to
stand on when when they claim this because
they have failed utterly failed to save humanity
by this virtue.
OK.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was an utter failure
for 100 years.
His Jamaat has absolutely failed to save humanity.
Millions of people have gone to hellfire.
Hundreds of thousands.
OK.
They haven't even received his message.
We can say about mainstream Islam that everyone
in the world knows about it.
The message is reached right.
The the case has been established.
But with this cult they have utterly failed
to do the job despite the fact that
they have the money to do so.
They have newspapers they have TV stations they
have everything right.
Yeah.
But they are not.
They're not.
They have actually failed in the job to
take the message to humanity.
And by by the looks of it it
seems to me that they are already on
the decline and they will be.
Our prediction is within the next five years
the cult will be really that short.
Yes.
OK.
Yes.
And then this is not because we we
are being over ambitious.
We believe the way the rate things are
going now and the way that they're avoiding
our questions and they're running away from us.
And this is this is the time this
is the time to speak isn't it.
Yes.
Yes.
This is not this is not time to
shut down.
This is why you have your seminaries.
This is why you train your missionaries you
pay them lavish you pay them you pay
them handsome salaries.
They get a house from the Jamaat.
They get free medical.
They get this the fees for the children
and they get a status in the Jamaat
of being someone very you know respected.
So why are you feeding these people if
they're not able to defend your faith.
Right.
And they're getting paid for it.
They are on money.
The Jamaat pays them.
Myself and brother Imtiaz we're not getting any
money for this work.
We're not getting for the last one year.
We are only saying this so that people
understand and know that we were doing this
out of our love and compassion and a
feeling of sympathy for the common Ahmadis.
We're not doing this to hate them or
to promote hatred against them.
No.
We are doing this so that the common
Muslims out there understand that the Ahmadis are
a victim.
They are victims.
Because what I said in the book you
know I said you know I in the
conclusions the recommendations I you know I said
dialogue dialogue is so important.
Absolutely.
And I also said translation you know these
arguments it was almost futile.
I just couldn't get my head around it.
You know between Lahore ease and the Qadiani's
you know arguing over various words.
Is he a prophet.
Isn't he a prophet.
Yes he is a prophet.
No he's not a prophet.
And it always it all boiled down to
translations of a few words.
And I thought well in this day and
age you must get highly skilled translators that
will be able to.
Yeah.
To go through the kind of dialogue.
The kind of dialogue Declan they want is
where you ask questions and let them go
on on a monologue for 20 30 minutes
to answer that question.
And then you cannot counter.
You cannot confront them.
You cannot counter the answer.
You cannot challenge them with Mizrahi's contradiction.
The moment you start challenging them with contradictions
and absurdities and outright lies they tell you
you're a liar.
You are against the Jamaat.
You are promoting hatred against us.
You are an extremist.
They will go as far as to say
you are an extremist.
They have called people extremists for calling them
Qadiani.
When you call them Qadiani and not Ahmadi.
Okay.
They feel it is an insult against them
even though they own profit.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani on the title of Barahin
sorry Ruhani Khazain the compendium the collection every
volume when you pick it up when you
pull it out like a pull up pull
out this book and it has the name
of the author let's say here it says
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani.
So is that if that's an insult why
are you writing his name like this on
your books.
Right.
But they have actually reported people to the
authorities.
They have sent police to people's people's homes.
They have tried to shut down charitable organizations.
They have tried to shut down people by
intimidated intimidating them by using the authorities.
Okay.
For what.
Calling them a cult or calling them a
Qadiani.
Right.
And cult.
I can understand they take it as an
insult.
I can understand why they take the word
cult as an insult.
I can understand that.
But Qadiani is.
Yeah.
This is a is a geographical reference to
you guys.
Okay.
Lahori's are Lahori's because they're from Lahore.
Right.
Qadiani's are Qadiani's because they are from Qadian.
Yeah.
And you know Adnan Bhai in our Muslim
culture people use for example with proud they
say that I am Makki.
Yeah.
Prophet Muhammad's birthplace Mecca.
They would say I'm a Madani.
The place of his migration when he went
to Medina.
Or I'm Lahori.
I am.
So there's no problem in that.
If Qadian is a blessed place and somebody
is is giving this as a reference to
you.
You should be happy that people are calling
you Qadiani.
Yeah.
Right.
But they take it as an insult.
We have so many scholars in the history
of Islam who are known by the only
name as a reference to their location.
Imam Behaqi from Behaq.
Imam Al-Nawawi from Nawawa.
Okay.
Imam for example the list goes on Asqalani.
Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani from Ascalon in Palestine.
Right.
Kurtobi from Cordoba from Spain.
Qadiani from Qadian.
What's the problem?
But they take it as an insult.
Yeah.
So so I think we should come towards
the conclusion.
Yes.
Two very very quick questions.
Two very very quick questions and then I'll
wrap it up.
Obviously going back to the the academic here
who's recently read his works Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's.
You read the books.
What would you say his his contribution to
Islamic civilization is if you were to just
narrow that down to one or two points.
What would you say his contribution.
Actually you know if we look at it
from the perspective of him being a writer
and author.
So for example somebody would write let's suppose
in the field of Quranic exegesis.
He did not produce any commentary on the
Quran.
He only entered actually reinterpreted selective verses to
prove his case.
That's not the word.
That's self-interest.
Secondly second genre of Islamic literature is called
to explain prophetic hadiths.
The Sunnah.
Right.
He did not produce any such explanation of
the Sunnah.
Yes he did.
He did misinterpreted only those handful of hadiths
which he wanted to use for his purpose.
Let's move on.
The third area is called Islamic jurisprudence Islamic
law the practical things.
He did not produce any work.
The fourth area is for example the financial
aspect.
Adnan will agree with me that today for
the practicing Muslims especially living in the West.
One of the biggest challenges is to have
an option to buy the house and there's
no interest involved.
That's the biggest challenge Muslims are facing.
The practicing one cannot go to a traditional
bank for example you know and some of
them they don't want to use even the
Islamic option as well.
They put a question mark on them.
Now what was the solution given by Mirza
on this one.
So what I'm trying to say is literally
without being biased in any way shape or
form.
Be it solving a global problem of the
Muslim Ummah.
Be it being a writer on Islamic subjects.
Be in for example adding something to Islamic
as a civilization.
There's nothing.
So much so that whatever the work he
produced the work he produced has no literary
beauty.
It's a pain taking size even to read
that.
So even some for some somebody might say
oh he's anti-Ahmadi saying all that.
OK.
Just imagine if Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was not
born hypothetically speaking what have you lost as
a Muslim civilization.
It's a good question.
Nothing.
What do you think Adnan on that point.
On the point that.
What Mirza added to the Islamic civilization.
Had it not been the birth of Mirza
what would you have lost.
I think what he brought.
What did he bring to Islam.
Only harm.
Only confusion.
Did he bring any good.
I don't think so.
I don't think he brought any good to.
Did you see any good.
No.
You know let me tell you Declan that
the one thing they are just chanting day
in day out.
They said that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani defended Islam
in the British India.
That's the one thing they want to just
be proud about.
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani's son Mirza Bashir Ahmed Ammi.
He has written a biography of his dad
Mirza Ghulam.
It's called Seeratul Mahdi.
Biography of the Mahdi.
In this one he says that Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani has done five debates in his entire
career.
Two with Muslims.
Which I can discuss but it's a different
topic.
One with a Christian.
Yeah.
And one with one or two with a
Hindu.
But with a Christian just one.
Abdullah Otham.
And that was written.
And that's documented by Mirza himself.
Yeah.
Now the point is even this one claim
that Mirza was defending Islam.
Number one he lost the debate.
What is the proof?
The people who invited Mirza Ghulam Qadiani to
debate on their behalf.
They left Islam and became Christians.
So then what was the result of the
debate then?
It's one point.
Second point is Declan.
That they said that Mirza was defending Islam
because at that time Hindus and Christians they
were saying all sort of bad things about
our religion.
Guess what?
We have on record.
On record the famous Lekhram.
Lekhram is a famous figure.
Okay.
One of the opponent of Mirza from the
Hindu community.
Lekhram said on record.
He said that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani is the
reason for me to lift my pen against
Islam.
He said had he not ridiculed and mocked
our religion I would not have said anything
about Islam.
So it's not that Mirza was defending Islam.
Mirza was provoking the people to write against
Islam.
Actually a lot of scholars of Islam at
the time claimed that Mirza was an agent
provocateur.
He was trying to provoke tension in India
possibly serving the colonial project because the colonial
rule in India was very brutal.
We have been paid for that.
We don't know possibly.
We have documents.
We have writings in his own.
He is confessing to have received favors from
the British government in India in particular.
Okay.
He is asking for those favors categorically.
He is reaching out to the colonial administrators
asking them for favors.
This is documented.
He is even invoking the services of his
father and himself for the British colonial rule
so that he can get those favors.
He even mentions specifically that his father during
the Indian mutiny in 1857 sent 50 cavaliers
to support the colonial rule against his own
countrymen.
So his father was a traitor and Mirza
Ghulam al-Qadiani was also a traitor for
praising his father as some sort of hero.
Hero for the colonial rule not for the
Indian people because the Indian mutiny in 1857
was a combined endeavor of Muslims and Hindus
together.
They came together and they fought against the
British colonial rule because it was so oppressive,
so bigoted, so unjust that they had to
get rid of it.
Right.
And the Qadiani's on the other hand claimed
no, the British had brought peace to India.
They had brought stability to India.
They had brought economic prosperity to India.
But this is all a lie.
Because during the Mughal period in the early
18th century before the British came on the
scene in 1703 let's say when the Mughal
Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir died, the GDP of India
was 23% of the global economic figure.
Okay.
23% of global wealth was in India.
When the British left in 1947 it was
4%.
Okay.
So India was bled dry systematically.
The details are found in Shashi Tharoor's book
Inglourious Empire.
He gives you systematic details documenting how the
colonial rule in India impacted the economy and
the people.
Okay.
How can a prophet of God ask for
favors from such an entity?
How can a prophet of God offer to
spy for them?
He published a form documenting the details of
the people who are fostering ill feelings towards
the colonial rule.
He even called people who wanted to struggle
against the colonial rule Haramis.
He called them bastards.
These are bastards.
And how do they respond?
When we bring this stuff out to them.
Oh your so and so scholar in India
also said this.
We say to them we can throw this
scholar on the wall.
If any scholar in India praised the British
colonial rule, there could be two reasons.
Either he's bribed or he's in fear.
Which are both human characteristics.
Greed and fear.
It's either greed or fear.
Greed can be quickly dismissed.
Here we're talking about the alleged promised Messiah.
And when we have statistics.
It's hardly you know.
No comparison.
And when we have undisputed statistics, all academics
are unanimous on those statistics that this was
the outcome of the colonial rule in British
India.
Right.
When no one is disputing those statistics, what
game are you playing?
Why do you even try to bring this
scholar and that scholar and this person and
that person also praise the British colonial rule?
How does that justify the crimes of the
British colonial rule?
How does that justify a prophet of God
working with such an entity?
And fighting with them.
Fighting with them.
Supporting them.
Giving them support.
Theological.
Writing theological works to support them.
And you know Mirza Ghulam Qadiani said to
the Queen Victoria on record.
He said that my forefathers, they have shed
their blood for your empire.
And if the time comes, I will not
leave any stone unturned either.
Now why are you pledging this level of
loyalty to that colonizers?
Why?
Instead of giving an answer.
Your scholar said the same thing.
One.
Secondly, the thing is that as you said,
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani was a Muslim, second coming
of Jesus.
He should be strengthening the case of Jesus.
Guess what?
Mirza Ghulam Qadiani has written extensively to prove.
He said that the Jewish rejection of Jesus
is justified.
And Jesus was a failure?
Yes.
Jesus was a trickster.
He used mesmerism.
His prophecies failed.
His prophecies failed.
He failed in his mission.
He failed in his mission.
And other insults as we discussed in the
last week.
I just want to just thank you both
very much.
Obviously you are going to continue with these
debates.
Yes.
So there is no end in sight.
You are on a roll here.
But I suppose in fairness to them, what
do you expect of them moving forward?
As I said, this isn't a time to
shut down.
This isn't a time to not respond or
to do response videos when a discussion takes
place.
That's kind of cowardly.
You need people here at the table, don't
you?
You need live debate, spontaneous.
Not planning something for six months in advance.
Yes.
And we would like to continue the debate.
With them.
With them.
Our doors are open.
We have nothing but compassion.
We have nothing but mercy and sympathy for
the entire Jamaat.
I mean even the missionaries.
We don't wish them bad.
We wish them well.
If anything, we have sympathy for them.
Even the Caliph.
We don't want him to go to hellfire.
We don't want him to die upon this
belief and burn eternally in hellfire or end
up in a situation like that.
So we have nothing but good wishes and
good desires for them.
For that reason, in that light, we want
to continue with the dialogue.
They have no reason to avoid us.
They have no reason to ignore us.
We're not abusing them.
We're not spreading hate against them.
We have categorically stated that anyone trying to
use physical force against them or trying to
attack them physically in Pakistan or in other
places, anywhere in the world, we do not
condone that.
We do not condone that.
We do not promote that.
In fact, we believe it's bad.
It's evil to do that.
If anything, we'll convince the Ahmadiyya Jamaat and
the people.
Dialogue and education.
Absolutely.
Education and dialogue.
Absolutely.
This is our way forward.
Final word from our visitor.
Actually, you know, obviously, everything Adnan Rashidbhai said,
as his last words, I endorse all of
that.
That's number one.
Number two is, they are using one thing
as an excuse.
They say that Adnan Rashid and Imtiaz, they
have disrespected our noble figure, i.e. Mirza
Ghulam Qadiani.
Now, instead of me saying, approve to me,
show me where, without even asking Adnan Rashid,
I would say on camera, we unconditionally apologize
if there was anything we said ever that
hurt your feelings.
Let's have a new start.
Let's have a new start in which all
we have is civilized, properly moderated discussions in
which you bring your case in an academic
way and we present our case and let
both communities see with evidence, you know, and
then let them decide.
We both have theological positions on Mirza Ghulam
Qadiani.
To the Ahmadiyya Jamaat, he is the promised
messiah.
Peace be upon him.
That's how they pay their respects to him.
We have our theological position that he was
Antichrist and he was a liar.
We are willing to put aside our theological
baggage and have a neutral position and call
him by his name.
In a dialogue, we will not use those
terms that hurt your feelings.
We are willing to do that.
Which is our belief, by the way.
We believe that he is those things.
Just as they believe that he was a
prophet of God, right?
We cannot force them to change that belief.
Likewise, they cannot force us to change our
theological position on him.
What we can do to promote the dialogue,
to continue the dialogue, we can only use
his name without using any derogatory terms as
they see it, so that we can have
the dialogue, the debate.
We are not hurting their feelings.
We are calling him by his name, which
is Mirza Ghulam Qadiani.
But they have to be open, spontaneous debates.
Not prepared six months in advance and just
one topic.
Can I ask you, Declan, before we end,
are you willing to arbitrate or mediate or
even moderate such discussions if you are invited
to do so?
Yes, yes, yes.
I've tried that in the past.
So this is an open invitation to the
Qadiani Jamaat.
We have a neutral person here who doesn't
have a horse in the race, as they
say, right?
He can simply sit there and arbitrate.
And he has written a book on your
movement.
He is someone who has credentials, who has
researched your religion, and he has written a
book on voices in modern Islam or voices
of modern Islam.
So he is someone who is aware of
our literature, aware of our civilization and our
religion somewhat.
I'm very interested in all of this.
I wouldn't do it if I wasn't.
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
You've given so much of your time.
We thank you for coming all the way.
And you know, Norbert, the reason, Declan, I
said that, look, if you want an apology,
we'll give it to you.
Why?
Because for us, it's not our egos which
are important.
But I've never seen you rude or disrespectful
in any of those lives.
We have used these theological terms to describe
him.
But we've never sworn they are taken from
his works.
Yes!
Yes, yes.
And then the thing is, you know, Declan,
instead of us prove to me where I
said this, let's close that door.
Let's move on, start a new era in
which we are only engaging as a true
academic...
Academic dialogue.
But even if they don't, let's say they
don't want to continue and let's say the
shutters really come down, you're going to continue
anyway.
We're not stopping.
You're not stopping.
And we have hundreds of thousands of people
listening to us.
We don't have any lack of...
They think, they claimed initially that we are
doing this for...
Money.
For money or for social media clout.
Yes.
This is a lie because we had clout
before we engaged with them.
We had hundreds of thousands of people watching
our videos before we engaged with them.
So, they are not bringing any special clout
to us.
Right?
We're not doing this for clout.
And even, you know, social media clouts and
views and likes and so forth, well, that
doesn't put money in your pocket.
No, it doesn't.
It elevates your ego.
And it's a lot of hard work, isn't
it?
Just for a few views or likes, isn't
it?
You know, Declan, as you said, it's a
lot of hard work.
I would say that the places Adnan Bhai
and myself are living, we can do a
lot easier jobs to earn money than this
research.
Okay?
There are many easy options for us to
earn money.
This is not an easy option.
Okay?
Secondly, you know, Declan, the point is, as
you said that what if they are not
still not interested despite all of these invitations
and being all of this fairness?
I would say then it necessitates two things.
The common Ahmadis should then really think that
why is it that despite all of those
fair invitations, why is their Jamaat not interested
in the dialogue?
Then when they are telling to their own
people, we want dialogue, they are not talking.
It means they are lying.
Number one.
And number two, we are not going to
stop.
And this is the golden opportunity to put
the religion out to the world.
We have hundreds of thousands of people watching.
We have the following.
They are watching.
This is your chance.
The audience, I have shown you evidence.
130,000 people are watching a video on
a channel which has 7,000 subscribers.
So we are giving you crowd on your
channels.
Why would you avoid us?
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
Pleasure to be with you.
Thank you.