The claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and his interpretations are controversial and have been extensively discussed by Islamic scholars. Mirza Qadiani made various arbitrary interpretations of prophetic hadiths to validate his claims. This article will review some of his key claims, including “the two yellow robes,” the signs of the Messiah and Mahdi, the “reformer of the 14th century,” and the interpretation of “Damascus.”
The Two Yellow Robes as Representing Two Diseases?
Mirza Qadiani interpreted “the two yellow robes” as two diseases, linking this interpretation to a dream. However, the authentic Hadiths do not mention any dream about the “two yellow robes.” Suppose the Hadith explicitly refers to “the two yellow robes” without any mention of a dream. In that case, it suggests that Mirza Qadiani’s interpretation is fabricated and unauthentic and distorts prophetic traditions.
Signs of the Messiah and Mahdi Mirza Qadiani claimed to be both the Messiah and the Mahdi, but he did not fulfill the signs mentioned in the Hadiths.
Signs of the Messiah (Jesus) (Prophet Esa (A.S))
- Name: Prophet Esa (A.S) mother’s name was Maryam (Mary)
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani’s mother’s name was (Chiragh Bibi). Thus, it does not fulfill these signs. - Place of descent: The Hadiths mention that Prophet Isa (A.S) will descend in Damascus, while Mirza Qadiani was born in Qadian.
Signs of the Mahdi
- Name: Muhammad, and father’s name: Abdullah
Mirza Qadiani’s father’s name was Ghulam Murtaza, which contradicts this sign. - Birth in Madinah and arrival in Makkah
Mirza Qadiani was not born in Madinah, nor did he visit Makkah.
Mirza Qadiani does not meet these signs, and his claims put the Qadiani community in a theological dilemma.
The Reformer of the 14th Century? In his book Brahian Ahmadiyah, Mirza Qadiani claimed that the Messiah would be the reformer of the 14th century and would come at the beginning of the century. (Brahian Ahmadiyah, Supplement, Part 5, p. 188, Khazain, v. 21, p. 359)
But the question remains:
- Do authentic Hadiths support this claim?
- Did Mirza Qadiani cite three authentic Hadiths to validate this claim?
- Did he provide reliable Hadiths in his books to support his claims? If not, how can we evaluate the truth of these assertions?
Did Mirza Qadiani live until 1335 AH? Based on Danial’s prophecy, Mirza Qadiani stated that the Messiah would continue his work until 1335 AH. (Tuhfa Golarviya, p. 117, Khazain, v. 17, p. 292)
However, he passed away in 1326 AH (1908 CE). If we take his statement as a basis, it clearly shows his claims were false.
The Meaning of Damascus Mirza Qadiani (in Aina-e-Kamalat Islam, p. 456) says:
How could Damascus, the city, be meant here? Did the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) go to Damascus with scholars and show them the Messiah’s minaret and place of descent? Or did he draw a map for them?
Damascus has multiple meanings, such as:
- The leader of a people (a reference to the leaders of the Canaanite tribe)
- A camel or a female camel
- A strong man
Additionally, there are other meanings too. So, why do scholars insist on Damascus as a city and disregard other meanings?
Mirza Qadiani gave multiple meanings for “Damascus,” such as:
- The city of Damascus
Hadiths mention the “Minarat al-Bayda” (the white minaret), which is commonly understood as referring to Damascus city. - The leader of a people
Mirza Qadiani also presented this meaning without providing any evidence. - A clever man
This interpretation was also among his explanations.
Is this not a deviation from the clear teachings of Hadith?
The Hadiths mention the descent of the Messiah in Damascus and at the white minaret. Still, Mirza Qadiani’s multiple interpretations of Damascus create confusion. Is this not an avoidance of the clear guidance in the Hadith?
The Dilemma for the Qadiani Community:
For the Qadiani community, accepting or rejecting the Hadiths regarding the coming of the Messiah and Mahdi creates a challenge. If these Hadiths are accepted, Mirza Qadiani cannot be the Messiah or Mahdi; if they are declared false, then his claims lose their foundation. The Qadiani ideology has caused division among the Muslim Ummah. Is it time for Qadianis to reconsider their beliefs and adopt the actual teachings of the Quran and Sunnah? Mirza Qadiani’s claims and interpretations are based on fabrication, distortion, and self-made explanations. His statements have led the Qadiani community into a mental dilemma with no logical solution. The Muslim Ummah needs to distance itself from the misguided ideology of Qadianism and adhere to the original teachings of Islam.
After reviewing Mirza Qadiani’s interpretations and claims, it is clear that his assertion of being the Messiah is incorrect and contradicts the prophetic hadiths. These points invite Qadianis to critically examine Mirza Qadiani’s claims and understand their true nature. Recognizing truth and falsehood is only possible through the guidance of the Quran and Sunnah.
