Talk:Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mirza Ghulam Ahmad article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 30 days

India High‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Islam: Muslim scholars Mid‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Muslim scholars task force.

Merge proposal

It would seem most appropriate to merge Criticism of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad into Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.Gjs238 (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Obviously. It would fit perfectly in the article of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. AimanAbir18plus (talk) 08:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The critics section needs to be removed from the article entirely. None of the people mentioned are renowned enough that need to carry a mention in the article, with perhaps an exception of Sanaullah Amritsari. The critics section is essentially "here are a bunch of people who have disputed or criticised him for claiming prophethood", which is a point that has already been mentioned throughout the article. It makes no sense to add a critics section. It's WP:POV. HolyArtThou (talk) 00:22, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Each person mentioned in critics section are renowned scholars as each of them have the articles on wikipedia, I disagree that these scholars aren’t renowned enough, and i dont see criticism on finality of prophethood mentioned by any scholars in the article.Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 00:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC) Done - Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:43, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :-) Gjs238 (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it only redirected, text isn’t merged. Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 12:48, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Owais Khursheed: How do you not see the critism on the Finality of Prophethood and on other topics that you feel there's a specific need for a criticism section?

1. attracting thereby substantial following within his lifetime as well as considerable hostility particularly from the Muslim Ulama.

2. Ahmad's claim to be a subordinate (ummati) prophet within Islam has remained a central point of controversy between his followers and mainstream Muslims, who believe Muhammad to be the last prophet.

3. Some religious scholars turned against him, and he was often branded as a heretic, but many religious scholars praised him like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad among many others who praised him for his defense of Islam. After his death, opponents accused him of working for the British government due to the termination of armed Jihad, since his claims of being the Mahdi were made around the same time as the Mahdi of Sudan (Muhammad Ahmad).

4. Following his claim to be the Promised Messiah and Mahdi, one of his adversaries prepared a Fatwa (decree) of disbelief against Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, declaring him a kafir (disbeliever), a deceiver, and a liar. The decree permitted killing him and his followers. It was taken all around India and was signed by some two hundred religious scholars.

5. He compiled these opinions in his work Husamul Haramain (The Sword of the Two Holy Mosques), in which he calls Ahmad was an apostate. The consensus of about thirty-four religious scholars was that Ahmad's beliefs were blasphemous and tantamount to apostasy and that he must be punished by imprisonment and, if necessary, by execution.

6. though the majority orthodox position of most Muslims with regard to this issue has not changed.

7. Most non-Ahmadi Muslims consider Muhammad to be the last of the prophets and believe that Ahmad's use of these terms is a violation of the concept of the Finality of Prophethood. His followers fall into two factions in this regard

8. it has received a largely negative (often hostile) response from mainstream Muslims who view Ahmad as a false messiah and his teachings as heretical, particularly the teaching that he was a prophet HolyArtThou (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]