Section 2

Part 1

The finality of Prophethood is a fundamental of Islam. Allama Ibn-e-Nujaim wrote (in Al-Ashbah wal Nazair, Kitab-ul-Sier, Babul Riddah; page 179) that a person who does not acknowledge the belief in the finality of Prophethood is not a Muslim since it is a fundamental of faith which must be known and acknowledged.

The opinions of: Al-Ghazali (450-505 A.H.) Qadi Ayaz (d. 544 A,H.) Allama Shehrastani (4. 548 A.H.): Ibn-e-Kathir (d. 774 A.H.), Mulla Ali Qari (d. 1016 A.H.), Sheikh Ismail Haqqi (d. 1137 A.H.), Shaukani (d. 1255 A.H.) and the view in Fatawa Alamgiri that one who does not believe in the finality of Prophethood or claims to be a Prophet or follows such a person, is an unbeliever not within the pale of Islam, have already been noticed. The verdict of Imam Abu Haneefa is also reproduced below :-

A man in the time of Imam Abu Haneefa (80--150 A.H.) claimed to be a Prophet and said, "Allow me to present proofs of my Prophethood". The Imam ruled: "Anyone who demands a proof of Prophethood from him will also turn an unbeliever, for the Messenger of Allah said "There is no Prophet after me". (Manaqib-ul-Imam al-Azam Abi Hanifa, Ibn-e-Ahmad al-Makki, Vol. 1, page 16l, Hyderabad).

There is no doubt that a person who falsifies a clear and general verse of the Holy Quran by resort to its Taaweel and particularisation is as good as-one who denies the verse itself. The belief in the absolute finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (P.B.H) is an article of faith of the Muslims and a fundamental of the religion. These verdicts of the renowned scholars give the correct Sharia position about inter alia the claimant to prophethood as well as his followers.

In our view the verse about Khatam-un-Nabiyyin clinches the issue that all claimants of prophethood after the Holy-Prophet will be false Prophets.

It may also be described here that some people have objected to the finality of the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) and have stated that the meaning of Khatam is not the last but it is like calling a person Khatam-ush-shu'ara or Khatam-ul-Mufassirin. These terms do not mean that after such a person, no other Poet, or Jurist, or Commentator would be born, but it means that this particular branch of knowledge was exhausted with that person. But this is a fallacious argument. The use of such a title as an exaggeration does not mean Khatam is usable for "perfect and excellent", and not for "last and final". There is no such rule that the use of a word sometimes in a figurative sense shall deprive that word of its real meaning. If somebody were to say "" before an Arab, he shall never understand it to mean that the most perfect man of the tribe had come, but shall understand it to mean that the last man of the tribe came.

One should also note that the titles of Khatam-ush-shu'ara, Khatam-ul-Fuqaha, etc. given to some people, were given by human beings, and no human being can ever know that after the person whom he is calling Khatam for some quality, no other person of the same quality would be born. That is the reason why in human language, these titles are no more than exaggerated recognition of excellence. But when Allah says that such and such a quality has terminated on and finalised in a particular person, there is no reason why we should understand it in any metaphorical sense, particularly when there is no ambiguity in the language. Therefore, Allah's calling someone Khatam-un-Nabiyin and the man's exaggeratedly calling someone Khatam-ul-shu'ara or Khatam-ul-fuqaha, etc. cannot be regarded at the same level.

An argument against the absolute finality is based on the tradition that his Mosque is the last mosque. It is argued that it is not the last mosque, because countless of other Mosques have been built after it in the world. The words 'last mosque' were used in the sense of excellence and perfection. The argument is fallacious. The last masjid means the Prophets' last masjid or the masjid having some special qualities as compared to other mosques.

The tradition related by Imam Muslim in this connection on the authority of Hadrat Abu Hurairah, Hadrat Abdullah bin Umar and Hadrat Maimunah (wife of the Prophet (P.B.H.) are explicit that there are three such Mosques in the world, Which are superior to all other Mosques in the sense that offering the prayer in them carries a thousand times greater spiritual reward than offering it in other Mosques. They are Masjid-ul-Haram in Makkah, Masjid-al-Aqsa in Jerusalem (Bait-ul-Maqdas) and Masjid-i-Nabawi in Madinah. For this reason it is permissible to undertake a journey for the purpose of offering the prayer in these three Mosques. This is something which is not advisable for any other Mosque. The merits and spiritual reward for all other Mosques whether far or near is equal. What the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) meant was this: Since no other Prophet would come after him, no fourth Mosque would be built in the world-offering the prayer in which might carry greater reward than offering the same in other Mosques and making of journey to which especially for the purpose of offering the prayer in it might be lawful.

A saying of Hadrat Aishah is cited against the principle of absolute finality of Prophethood. It is to the effect: Do say that the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) is the Khatam-ul-Nabiyin (last of the Prophets) but do not say that no Prophet will come after him. In the first place to cite a saying of Hadrat Aishah as against the authentic statements of the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) that "there will be no Prophet after me", is highly derogatory. Besides, the tradition ascribed to Hadrat Aishah is itself not authentic. No traditionist worthy of any mention has related it in any reliable collection. It is only traced to Durrul-Mansur, a commentary of the Quran and Takmilah Majma-ul-Bihar, a dictionary of Hadith but without any reference to its chain of transmitters. It is unreliable and no scholar of renown ever relied on it.

Another Hadith which requires consideration is reported in Ibn-e-Majah on the authority of Ibn-e-Abbas that the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) said in connection with his son Ibrahim that if he had lived he would have been truthful Prophet.

()

This Hadith was held to be false and incorrect by Imam Nawawi as stated in Al-Mauzaut-ul-Khabir page 58. One of the persons in the Chain of transmitters is Abu Shaaba who is not reliable, Imam Tirmizi said that he was not reliable in Hadith. Imam Nasai described him as weak in Hadith. Imam Ahmad said about him that no weight can be given to what he said. Imam Abu Hatim called him un-reliable in hadith (Tahzibul Tahzib, vol. I, pages 144-145).

After the description of the Muslim concept of finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (P.B.H.), it would be appropriate to refer to the history and evolution of the claim of Mirza Sahib to prophethood.

Mirza Sahib was born in 1839 or 1840 in village Quadian, District Gurdaspur in that part of the Punjab which is now included in India. This is according to the writings of Mirza Sahib but a controversy later raged in regard to his year of birth among the members of his family. According to the first thesis of Mirza Bashir Ahmad, his son, author of Seerat-i-Mehdi, and his biographer, the year of birth could be 1836 or 1837. Seerat-i-Mehdi, Volume 2, page 150. On reconsideration he fixed the date of birth as 13th February, 1835. (Seerat-i-Mehdi, Volume 3, page 76). According to one calculation the year of birth could be 1831 (Ibid. page 74). (Meraj Din fixed the date as 7th February, 1832 (Ibid. page 302). Others take the year of birth to 1833 or 1834 (Ibid. page 194).

The reason for these discrepant views of Mirza Bashir Ahmad and others who believed Mirza Sahib to be a Prophet who was imparted divine knowledge by God (and consequently should not have made a mistake about his year of birth) is not far to be seen. Mirza Sahib was about sixty nine Years old at the time of his death (born 1839 and died 1908). Nemat Ullah Wali, a saint or the sixth century Hijrah who is said to have predicted the future events among the Muslims in a continuous poem is said to have written in that poem some predictions about the coming of someone at the end of the thirteenth century and the beginning of the fourteenth century who would revive Sharia. Mirza Sahib applied that poem to himself. In one couplet it was predicted that that person would remain alive for forty years from the date of his advent i.e. taking over of the mantle of appointment as the chosen of the Lord. Mirza Sahib while commenting upon the meaning of the couplet wrote that he was appointed as such at the age of forty and he will live till the age of eighty years or nearabout. (Nishan-e-Aasmani, page 15). He then claimed to have a divine revelation.

""

(Allah give you long life eighty-four or five years more or four or five years less). Thus according to this revelation he had to die any time between the age of seventy-five years or eighty-five years. The attempt to prove him more aged and to bring his life span closer to seventy-five years is directed towards proving the accuracy of the prediction and the revelation.

The anxiety to establish the fulfillment of prophecy is revealed by a letter of Molvi Abdul Rahim Dard M.A. a preacher of Qadianism who wrote a letter to Mirza Bashir Ahmad, compiler of Seerat-i-Mehdi commending his research in respect of age of Mirza Sahib. He exhorted him to resolve this matter finally so that the year of birth be fixed between 1836 and 1837. After referring to the revelations of eighty or near about reproduced in Arbain 3, page 36, Tohfa-i-Golarwia, page 29, Izala-i-Auham pages 634 to 638 he wrote:

"The-meanings Of these revelations were stated by Mirza Sahib as follows:

If either according to Hijra or the Gregorian Calendar the age is proved within this, the revelation would be fulfilled. There can be no objection if the birth is proved between 1836 and 1822". (Seerat-i-Mehdi; Vol. 3 pages187, 188, No. 763).

The same reason is disclosed at page 76 of Seerat-i-Mehdi, Vol. 3.

After fixing the date of birth as 13th February, 1835 Mirza Bashir Ahmad calculated the age of Mirza Sahib according to the Hijra Calendar as more than seventy five years.

Mirza Sahib was born in a family of landlords which though prosperous and affluent in the past was practically reduced to straitened circumstances at the time of his birth. In 1857 his father Ghulam Murtaza had shown his loyalty to the East India Company and had supplied fifty horses and fifty recruits to the British Army to help them in crushing the fighters of the war of Independence who were called traitors by that Government. In exchange he was held in some esteem by the Government. The tendency to eulogise the British Government was, therefore, ingrained in Mirza Sahib from his boy-hood and continued till death. He mentions and repeats his father's loyalty to the British Government and his being honoured with a seat in the Governor's Darbar, with excessive pride, in his various books and pamphlets. He also mentions his own unflinching loyalty to that Government in his writings.

Mirza Sahib had some religious education from some teachers. Because of the financial position of the family he had to join service as a clerk in the courts at Sialkot on a meagre salary of Rs. 15/- per month. This venture lasted from 1864 to 1868 when he resigned from service and became busy in the family litigation for the restoration of the family property and in the study of the religious literature. His father died when he was about thirty-five years old (Kitab-ul-Bariyyah, pages 146 to 149). At the end of the seventies of the last century he began writing some articles against Christianity, Arya Samaj and the Brahmo Samaj. He also had disputations and debates with the scholars and followers of those religions. He was thus introduced to the Ulema and the Muslim intelligentsia and gained some popularity amongst them.

In 1879 he advertised through a pamphlet his intention to write a book containing three hundred arguments in support of the superiority of Islam over Christianity and Hinduism. He exhorted the Muslims to send their subscriptions and contributions or price of the book in advance since he had no money to publish the same. He wrote in Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, page 337 that when he wrote his first book Baraheen-i-Ahmadiyya he had no money to get it printed. He then prayed to Allah, and alleged to have Ilham (inspiration) on which he wrote letters and received money from different sources.

The book was first priced at Rs. 25/- for others and Rs. 10/- for Muslims (See Baraheen-i-Ahmadiyya, Vol. 3, 1970 Ed. on the back of the title page). After the publication of the first two volumes it was priced at Rs. 100/- for others and Rs. 10/- or Rs. 15/-for Muslims (See Ibid. page 67).

Quite a number of persons paid the price in advance but only four volumes of the book could be published in four years up to 1884. The fifth was published in 1905. During the period of more than two decades between the publication of the fourth and the fifth volumes Mirza Sahib wrote about eighty books but he could not complete the fifth volume despite protests from the contributors of the price of complete book and hostile criticism by many (Ibid., Vol.5, page l).

The first volume of the book consisted of 82 pages only (which in the edition of l970 is condensed in 25 pages only). It was published in 1880 and consisted of preliminaries about the need of the book, list of contributors, some poems and a pamphlet promising award of a prize of Rs. 10,000/- to one who refuted even one-fifth of the arguments through the divinely inspired books of their religion. The second volume consisting of fifty-five pages (new edition 40 pages) of preface only was also published in 1880). The third volume of 143 pages (new edition of 100 pages) was published in 1882. The fourth volume was printed in l884 and consisted of 282 pages (new edition 191 pages) (See Seerat-ul-Mehdi, Vol. 2, page 151 for dates of publication).

It appears from the fifth volume of the book (page l) that Mirza Sahib had originally intended to publish the book in fifty volumes and advance price of the book had been received from many contributors. But he declared that his promise was fulfilled with the publication of the fifth volume since there was difference of a zero only between the figures 5 and 50.

Despite the favourable reaction of the Muslims to the pamphlets advertising the book long before its publication Mirza Sahib left no opportunity of complaining against the rich among them and blaming them for indifference. Only two instances of contributions may be reproduced. A sum of five thousand rupees, which was equal to an amount of several hundred thousands of the present age was contributed by one person alone and another sum of five hundred rupees was sent in two instalments by another gentleman (See the publisher's note, Baraheen-i-Ahmadiyya Vol.1 page 5 to the 1970 edition).

Mirza Sahib claimed that he had more than three hundred thousands revelations out of which fifty thousand related to money matters, i.e. whether and when the money would be received. This claim would indicate that money matters were uppermost in his mind.

The main theme in Baraheen-i-Ahmadiyya in which three hundred arguments were promised, is that of divine inspirations or revelations which according to Mirza Sahib continue in the followers of the holy prophet who qualify for it. The purpose with which the book was promised to be printed may have been served or not but the purpose which may have only been intended but not promised was served abundantly. The predominating theme in volumes three and four are the alleged revelations of Mirza Sahib and the theories which laid the foundation of his future claims of being a promised Messiah, promised Mehdi and a prophet. The foundational claim of Mamoor-un-Minallah, (an appointee from God) was, however, made in the third volume of the book Seerat-ul-Mehdi, Vol. 2, page 151. In the fourth volume he-claimed to have received the sign-of Mujaddidiyat (revivalism) (See pages 502 and 503 of Baraheen; Hayat-i-Tayyeba by Abdul Qadir, page 69; Also see Seerat-i-Mehdi, Vol. 2, page 151). The real purpose of the publication of the book at public expense proved to be the propagation of self, the advertisement of his alleged revelations and the publication of his theories which would ultimately help him in making a claim to prophethood. In order to establish the last point a few extracts are given from Baraheen-i-Ahmadiyya.

(1) Ilham is a measure of information about hidden affairs. God always creates such men in the Muhammadan Community who believe in the Holy Quran, and act upon its injunctions truthfully and sincerely and consider the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) as the true and perfect Prophet of God, more venerable and prominent than other Prophets, the last of the Prophets and his guide leader. (page 215).

(2) It is different from the prophetic revelation which has ended but the above inspiration shall not terminate. This type of inspiration is a great proof of the prophetic revelation (page 215).

(3) The word Ilham cannot be limited to its dictionary meaning. There is consensus among the Ulema that Ilham is equivalent to Wahi (page 221).

(4) There is a dispute of words amongst us and the Ulema that whatever divine information We call Wahi, is called Ilham by the Ulema (page 222).

(5) If Ulema are not given the share of hidden knowledge how can they be the inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophet.

(6) Did not the Holy Prophet (P.B.H.) say that there will be Mohaddas (one who is in communication with God) in his Ummah (page 321).

(7) The deviation from the right path, the extreme mischief of the age the craftiness, knavery of those who deny the extreme inattention of the indolent and the negligent, the severity in heresy of the opponents demands that the inspired knowledge of such persons should be like that of Messengers ()· These are the people who have been named Amsal ( ) in Hadis and Siddiq in Quran (page233).

(8) The time of their manifestation or appearance resembles the time of appearance of the Prophets. The advent of both is dependant on the extreme severity of deviation from the path of righteousness, and indolence (page 233).

(9)

O! Ahmad! Allah bless you ....... You are the first vice-regent of Allah with His order in this age.

And tell that the truth has come and falsehood has vanished. Say thou: If I am liar, on me then be my guilt. He is who has sent his messenger with the guidance and the true religion that he may make it prevail over all religions (page 239).

O! Ahmad! Allah has overflowed his mercy upon your lips. May Allah raise for you your renown.

O! thou enveloped, arise and warn and magnify your Lord (page 242).

I shall raise you up to me and I flow on you my love (page 242).

Reproduce Freely