During Goggling I found following piece from not any other place but from Lahori Ahmadiya Group website. Kindly keep in mind both groups (Quadiani and Lahori Ahmadi Group) have declared Non Muslim by National assembly in 1974
From about the year 1911 Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad (second khalifa of the Qadiani Movement) started to put forward the doctrine that it is not sufficient for a person to declare belief in the Kalima Shahada in order to be a Muslim because Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had now appeared as a prophet and belief in him must be acknowledged as well.
According to Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, it is no longer sufficient for the existing Muslims to believe in the Holy Prophet Muhammad and all the prophets before him. Now they must also declare that they believe in the prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as well. Otherwise they cannot remain Muslims but become just like those Jews and Christians who believed in the previous prophets but failed to accept the Holy Prophet Muhammad.
Mirza Mahmud Ahmad wrote a book A’inah-i Sadaqat, published in 1921, which was translated into English and first published in 1924 under the title The Truth about the Split. In this book, while acknowledging his beliefs, he writes:
“(3) the belief that all those so-called Muslims who have not entered into his [i.e. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s] Bai’at formally, wherever they may be, are Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam, even though they may not have heard the name of the Promised Messiah. That these beliefs have my full concurrence, I readily admit.”
— The Truth about the Split, Rabwah, 1965, pp. 55–56. The 2007 edition of this book is available on the Qadiani website from the link http://www.alislam.org/books/. See page 56 for this extract.
See original Urdu text below from the book A’inah-i Sadaqat [Urdu 1].
In this book, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad also gives a summary of his first article expressing these views which had earlier appeared in April 1911. He writes regarding this article:
“The article was elaborately entitled — ‘A Muslim is one who believes in all the messengers of God.’ The title itself is sufficient to show that the article was not meant to prove merely that ‘those who did not accept the Promised Messiah were deniers of the Promised Messiah’. Its object rather was to demonstrate that those who did not believe in the Promised Messiah were not Muslims.”
— pages 135–136 of the 1965 edition. In the 2007 online edition at http://www.alislam.org/books/ see page 144.
“Regarding the main subject of my article, I wrote that as we believed the Promised Messiah to be one of the prophets of God, we could not possibly regard his deniers as Muslims.” (pages 137–138 of 1965 edition; page 146 of online 2007 edition)
“…not only are those deemed to be Kafirs, who openly style the Promised Messiah as Kafir, and those who although they do not style him thus, decline still to accept his claim, but even those who, in their hearts, believe the Promised Messiah to be true, and do not even deny him with their tongues, but hesitate to enter into his Bai’at, have here been adjudged to be Kafirs.” (pages 139–140 of 1965 edition; page 148 of online 2007 edition)
“And lastly, it was argued from a verse of the Holy Quran that such people as had failed to recognise the Promised Messiah as a Rasul even if they called him a righteous person with their tongues, were yet veritable Kafirs.” (p. 140 of 1965 edition; page 148 of online 2007 edition)
See original Urdu text below from the book A’inah-i Sadaqat [Urdu 2].
According to these views, the only Muslims in the whole world at any time are those who have taken the bai‘at of the Qadiani leader of the time. In the last quotation above, the closing words given as “veritable Kafirs” are “pakkay kafir” in the original Urdu book A’inah-i Sadaqat. The word pakkay conveys the significance of ‘real, true, absolute and full-fledged’, meaning that all other Muslims are kafir in the fullest sense without the least doubt.
Views of M. Mahmud Ahmad’s brother Bashir
For the views of Mirza Bashir Ahmad, younger brother of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, see this link.
Qadianis disallow funeral prayers for other Muslims.
Since the Qadiani belief is that all Muslims outside their community are non-Muslims, just like a Christian or a Hindu is a non-Muslim, the Qadiani leader Mirza Mahmud Ahmad forbade his followers from saying the funeral prayers of other Muslims. This instruction is given by him quite clearly and forcefully in his book Anwar-i Khilafat, published October 1916. At the end of the section where he deals with this question, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad writes as follows:
“Now another question remains, that is, as non-Ahmadis are deniers of the Promised Messiah, this is why funeral prayers for them must not be offered, but if a young child of a non-Ahmadi dies, why should not his funeral prayers be offered? He did not call the Promised Messiah as kafir. I ask those who raise this question, that if this argument is correct, then why are not funeral prayers offered for the children of Hindus and Christians, and how many people say their funeral prayers? The fact is that, according to the Shariah, the religion of the child is the same as the religion of the parents. So a non-Ahmadi’s child is also a non-Ahmadi, and his funeral prayers must not be said. Then I say that as the child cannot be a sinner he does not need the funeral prayers; the child’s funeral is a prayer for his relatives, and they do not belong to us but are non-Ahmadis. This is why even the child’s funeral prayers must not be said. This leaves the question that if a man who believes Hazrat Mirza sahib to be true but has not yet taken the bai‘at, or is still thinking about joining Ahmadiyyat, and he dies in this condition, it is possible that God may not punish him. But the decisions of the Shariah are based on what is outwardly visible. So we must do the same thing in his case, and not offer funeral prayers for him.”
— Anwar-i Khilafat, page 93 of original edition; underlining is ours.
This book is available online at the Qadiani website in the collection Anwar-ul-‘Uloom, v. 3, no. 5 from the link http://www.alislam.org/urdu/au/?j=3. See pages 150–151.See original Urdu text below from the book Anwar-i Khilafat [Urdu 3].
It is quite clear and plain from these instructions that the Qadiani belief is that all other Muslims, including the children , are unbelievers (kafir) and non-Muslims just as people of other religions such as Hindus and Christians.
Original Urdu texts of above quotations
Title page of first edition of A’inah-i Sadaqat:
Images below are from the online edition of A’inah-i Sadaqat at http://www.alislam.org/urdu/au/?j=6 (book no. 5). We have used red-lining to indicate the words being referred to.
(A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 35 original edition; p. 110 online edition)
(A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 84 original ed., p. 149–150 online ed.)
(A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 85 original ed., p. 150 online ed.)
(A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 86 original ed., p. 151 online ed.)
(A’inah-i Sadaqat, p. 86 original ed., p. 151 online ed.)
Title page of first edition of Anwar-i Khilafat:
Anwar-i Khilafat, p. 93 original edition, p. 150–151 online edition. Image above is from the online edition of this book at http://www.alislam.org/urdu/au/?j=3 (book no. 5)
Kashifiat's Blog 
Assalam o Alaicum, At this point we should read Sureh-Kafiroon with meanings. “Kufr” means negation,and “Kafir” is who negates, and Yes we negates the way of Qadianis. and they negate ours.
Now read Sureh-Kafiroon.Hope u’ll get my point of view.
Now I wonder where are those dramay baz Qadyani supporters like Hamadi and “BeyLutf”? These morons always whine like a kid to hide the wickedness of their own cult
“Qadianis Declare Other Muslims as Kafir”
What a freudian slip… this shows that you think the qadianis are Muslims
It means YLH (If u r Muslim & not Ahmadi, about which I have doubts) YOU are also a non Muslim (in Ahmadi perspective) & they will not offer your funeral also
Molana Mohammad Ali Johar, Founder of Khilafate tahreeak bhe mujhay shoba hay kay Qadiyani or Israeali agent thay. Woh bhe Israeal may madfoone haan.
Wallaho-Alam…..
QADIANIS ARE SHIFTING THEIR POSTION FROM THEIR ORIGINAL STANCE. WHATCH OUT HOW TACTFUL THEY ARE:
Mujib-ur-Rahman’s statement on MTA about janaza prayers
http://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress/2010/06/14/mujib-ur-rahmans-statement-on-mta-about-janaza-prayers/#comments
POST COPIED FROM LAHORE AHMADIYYA MOVEMENT BLOG
Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 4 and now 5 and others in the leadership and important positions in their jamaat have started to violate and reject beliefs and instructions of their Qadiani Jamaat Khalifa 2 and his younger brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad. Mirza Mahmud Ahmad has written and said in his numerous writings that all those who have not accepted Promised Messiah Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as prophet are Kafir (non-Muslim) and even their young children are non-Muslims and it is not permitted to offer their Janazah (funeral prayer).
And now their Spokesman Mr. Mujib-ur-Rehman has made absolutely 180 degree turn.
On their TV channel MTA there was a live programme on Saturday 12th June called “Raah-i Huda”. Mr Mujib-ur-Rahman was interviewed from Pakistan by telephone at just before 6.00 p.m. UK time.
In regard to the allegation that the Qadiani Jamaat does not hold janaza prayers of non-Ahmadi Muslims, Mr Mujib-ur-Rahman stated most forcefully that saying janaza prayers is a “fard-i kifaya” in Islam, and that this means that if any other Muslims have held the janaza prayers of a non-Ahmadi then there is no requirement for the Qadiani Jamaat to hold them as well. He added that in the case where there were no other Muslims who could hold the janaza prayers of a non-Ahmadi (for example, in a foreign country with few Muslims), then the Qadiani Jamaat does hold janaza prayers for that non-Ahmadi. He was proud that if there are no other Muslims to hold the janaza prayers for a non-Ahmadi, then the Qadiani Jamaat holds it.
He also stated that if non-Ahmadi Muslims started saying janaza prayers for deceased members of the Qadiani Jamaat, then they would start holding them for non-Ahmadis deceased persons.
He also stated that in the time of the Promised Messiah, before he was declared kafir, Ahmadis used to pray behind non-Ahmadi imams and join janaza prayers behind non-Ahmadi imams. But after he was declared kafir, then according to Hadith this declaration of takfir reflected back upon his opponents. Mr Mujib-ur-Rahman stated that this was the only reason why his Jamaat members do not say janaza prayers of a non-Ahmadi behind a non-Ahmadi imam.
For comparison with these statements of Mr Mujib-ur-Rahman, please see attached statements of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad from books which are on the Qadiani Jamaat website http://www.alislam.org.
For additional references, see the following on alislam.org:
Musalman Wohi Hay Jo Saab Mamoron Ko Maany by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad
Page 3 and 4 of pdf format online edition: See book no. 9 on this page
Kalima-Tul-Fasal by Mirza Bashir Ahmad. Just read the first few pages of this book: http://www.alislam.org/urdu/pdf/Kalma-tul-Fasal.pdf
So strongly held and argued was this standpoint of the Qadiani Jamaat (i.e. that they must not hold janaza prayers for other Muslims) that in 1940 Maulana Muhammad Ali wrote a brief booklet on this issue addressed to Qadiani Jamaat members. He asked if any single one of them could testify that:
‘In the time of the Promised Messiah and the time of Hazrat Maulana Nur-ud-Din, that is before 1914, saying funeral prayers for non-Ahmadis was considered to be prohibited as it is now, and no Ahmadi community ever held the funeral prayers of a non-Ahmadi.’
See this link for the booklet.
A few months later in 1941, Mirza Bashir Ahmad wrote a book in reply which was more than 200 pages long, entitled Mas`ala Janaza ki Haqiqat. The standpoint in this book was that when the Promised Messiah wrote that janaza prayers of non-Ahmadis were allowed, he put such conditions on it that such a non-Ahmadi would in effect have to be an Ahmadi!
Mirza Bashir Ahmad wrote about these conciliatory statements of the Promised Messiah that: “The Promised Messiah gave people a bitter pill to swallow which he coated with sugar, but Hazrat Khalifat-ul-Masih 2 has given them the pill directly without sugar coating.”
Article copied from Lahore Ahmadiyya Blog
A problem and suggestions sought for resolving it
Problems I face as a member of LAM And suggestions to resolve them
In my talks with our jamaat (LAM) opponents on Internet or in person, I realize repeatedly that they believe that our jamaat has the same beliefs as that of Qadiani Jamaat. Here are couples of examples:
“the same is with Mirzaees whose reasoning falls behind the scope of fundamental tenets of Islam. How ridiculously the fanatics of this cult have remarked about non-Mirzaees being Kafirs! ….. If this be so all Muslims who are not Mirzaees should be Kafirs!”
“I may take your point in that Muslims other than Mirzees were declared Kafirs by his [HMGA] son. But what I am trying to say is that this entire lot is ONE and DISTINCT and has to be viewed as a WHOLE.”
And then in their support they bring quotes from Qadiani Jamaat publications authored by their Khalifa 2 Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad. Such as:
1) “So whatever has been ordained in the Holy Quran about non-belief in a Prophet, the same applies in the case of Mirza Sahib.” (Al-Qaul-al-Fasal, p. 33).
2) “If we don’t believe in him as a Prophet then a dangerous flaw occurs (in iman [faith]) which is enough to render one a ‘kafir’.” (Haqeeqat-un-Nabuwwat, p. 204).
3) “It is obligatory for us not to consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims.” (Anwaar-e-Khilafat, p. 90).
4) “… and one who does not believe in the Promised Messiah, whatever his reasons for this non-belief, he is kafir.” (Zikar-e-Illahi, p. 22).
5) “The third matter to which he (Maulana Muhammad Ali) calls my attention is the issue of ‘kufar and Islam’. He says the path of peace is that we consider non-Ahmadis as Muslims, but I say ‘the path of peace is that we accept the decision of the Holy Quran. The Holy Quran calls the non-believers in a Prophet a kafir, and the same Allah calls Mirza Sahib a Prophet’.” (Haqeeqat-ul-Amar, p. 17).
6) “Is there any such irreligious non-Ahmadi who will marry his daughter to a Christian or a Hindu? You call them kafir but in this matter he is better than you in spite of being a kafir, but you even being Ahmadi marry your daughters to kafirs.” (Maliakatullah, p. 46).
7) “We met a person in Lucknow who is a great scholar. He said ‘many of your adversaries falsely propagate about you that you call us kafir. I cannot believe that a person of your vast capacity would be saying so.’ Sheikh Yaqub Ali was talking to him. I told him, ‘you tell him that we in fact call him a kafir.’ On hearing this he was much astonished.” (Anwar-e-Khilafat, p. 92).
8 ) All such Muslims who have not entered in the Baiat of the Promised Messiah, whether they have not heard the name of the Promised Messiah, are kafir and out of the pail of Islam. That these beliefs have my full concurrence. I readily admit. (Aaina-e-Saddaaqat. p. 35).
His younger brother Mirza Bashir Ahmad, M.A., surpassed him when he wrote:
“Every such person, who believes in Moses but does not believe in Jesus, or believes in Jesus but does not believe in Mohammed, or believes in Mohammed but does not believe in the Promised Messiah, is not only a kafir but a confirmed kafir and out of the pail of Islam.” (Kalamatul-Fasal, p. 110)
——————————————————————————–
My question is, How we can resolve this problem? Perhaps our Qadiani Jamaat friends should think about rejecting these statements, and accept that mistakes were made by authors of these books.
This will help not only LAM members, but will also definitely help Qadiani Jamaat friends immensely. Qadiani Jamaat friends will find this very helpful in their efforts to be recognised as Muslims, which they seek to do by quoting the Holy Quran and Hadith to prove they fulfill criteria to be declared Muslim.
In this regard, I look forward to suggestions from our jamaat and Qadiani jamaat brothers and sisters. Thanks.
Lord Headley while answering a set of questions posed to him, wrote in “Islam, The Guide to Modern Religious Thought” – Islamic Review, June 1929, pg 201-204, Vol XVII, No. 6, pub. The Mosque, Woking, England:
I am sometimes asked questions about essentials and non-essentials, and not very long ago I received a letter from my friend Mr. Dard [Qadiani missionary Abdul Rahim Dard], the Imam of the Mosque at Southfields, in which he makes inquiries as to my views on certain subjects. He begins by an allusion to my lecture entitled “Is our House in Order?” delivered in London on July 29, 1928 [before British Muslim Society, with Abdullah Yusuf Ali in chair]. He asks me to enlighten him on the following points raised in that lecture, viz.:
(1) …
(2) What do you mean by “schism and those sacerdotal dogmas” from which you want Islam to be purged?
(3) …
As regards No. (2) I refer to the trouble caused by new sects which spring up with quite new ideas about what constitutes a follower of Islam. As an example I point to the Quadianis, followers of that very admirable teacher Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom they hold up with veneration as the “Promised Messiah.” This would not matter so very much, but they become bellicose if other Muslims decline to believe that he was the Messiah. I cannot but look upon these people as hostile to the spread of Islam to the West because their tenets indicate complete severance from the orthodox Muslims who are of the Hanifia persuasion. Lest you should think I am making too much complaint, I may point out that a Quadiani is not allowed to give his daughter to a Muslim who is not a Quadiani. A Quadiani is not allowed to say his prayers in a Mosque if the officiating Imam is not an Ahmadian of the Quadian, and finally a Quadiani may not attend the funeral service of his dearest friend unless that friend is a Quadiani thus carrying the unpleasant curtailments and restrictions even to the grave.
It is also specially laid down that unless a man believes that Mirza Ghulum Ahmad was really the Messiah, that man shall be deprived of the light of Faith, and that it is as bad for him as though he denied his belief in the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself. In other words, he becomes a kafir. I cannot help feeling that this high-handed action on the part of a small sect is to be deprecated as very unwise. People sometimes ask me if the Quadianis are really Muslims, and I invariably reply “Yes, they are undoubtedly Muslims, but I think they have deviated somewhat from the ordinary course.”
The fact of the matter is that every fresh sect weakens the community of interests we like to observe in Islam. When sects spring up on every side, we can no longer hope to show that solidarity which is so essential to convince our opponents. And the worst of it is that certain of these sects are quite uncompromising; they lay down the law, tell us what we ought and what we ought not to do, and expect the whole Muslim world to bow down at the ipse dixit of a small fraction of its members. I have recently had opportunities of finding out how bitterly jealous many of the Muslim sects are of one another and what a general absence of unanimity exists throughout the world of Islam. It is infinitely sad that it should be so, because Westerners, flying to Islam for relief from the fanatical teachings in many branches of Christianity, find themselves confronted by a set of conditions not so very much better than those they are trying to get away from.
So that in answer to Mr. Dard’s second question I have endeavoured to show the danger of schisms and the great disservice done to Islam by sects such as his own.
LINK TO:
A problem and suggestions sought for resolving it
http://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress/2009/12/01/a-problem-and-suggestions-sought-for-resolving-it/
’’ہم کسی کلمہ گوکو اسلام سے خارج نہیں کہتے جب تک کہ وہ ہمیں کافر کہہ کر خود کافر نہ بن جائے ۔……..جو ہمیں کافر نہیں کہتا ہم اسے ہرگز کافر نہیں کہتے لیکن جو ہمیں کافر کہتا ہے اسے کافر نہ سمجھیں تو اس میں حدیث اور متفق علیہ مسئلہ کی مخالفت لازم آتی ہے اور یہ ہم سے نہیں ہو سکتا۔‘‘(ملفوظات۔جلد ۱۰ صفحہ ۳۷۶،۳۷۷