Category Archives: Qadiani Dajjal

Mirza Dajjal’s Fake Prophecy regarding death at age of 80!!

by Ebrahim Saifuddin

I am going the article into in different parts to increase the understandability of the argument by everyone.


Mirza Ghulam Ahmad boldly claimed that he has received a revelation from Allah(swt) that he will live till the age of 80 or maybe even more. This is recorded in Roohani Khazaein Vol 19 Page 239 as unders:

“God have given me good news that I shall live till 80 years or maybe even more.”

Ghulam Ahmad was born in 1839 [] and he died in 1908. This is a total of 69 years.

Prophecy Unfulfilled – Allah the Exalted exposed this dajjal for all mankind to see.


Now some Qadianis that I have also talked to previously say that he was not born in 1839, rather he was born in 1835. Firstly I would like to point it out to everyone that I gave a link to an encyclopedia that confirms his year of birth to be 1839. The above link was to and below I will give other links to another encyclopedia that will further confirm the year of birth:

– Ghulam Ahmad, Mirza []

– Ahmadiyya[]

Now would the Qadianis say that Muslims / anti Qadianis have written Britannica Encyclopedia as well all the others that I have given references to?Anyways so the Qadiani people kept on insisting like little babies that it is 1835. I told them that I will not argue with them for now whether it was 1839 or 1835 and for arguments sake I will accept for now that it is 1835.So that would mean he died at the age of 73 which is NOT 80!!

It still does not fulfill the prophecy!!!

Once again the dajjal is exposed!


So then this one qadiani told me that Mirza Sahib’s age is not even known!! It was not 1835! His real year of birth isn’t even known!! She said that Mirza Ghulam did not even KNOW his age!! Thus, she concluded that it cannot be said if the prophecy was fulfilled or not because no one knows his real year of birth.

My Reply to her:

1. The Official Qadiani Website [] clearly says that his year of birth was 1835. (Read the 1st line of the 3rd paragraph)

This qadiani misguided soul was so hell bent on proving the dajjal to be right that she just declared their Official Website to be LYING!! Now that’s funny

2. If Mirza did not know his age then how in the world can he say that he will live for 80 years or more?! That is like misguiding people. When a person does not know his age then how can he/she say that he/she will die at 80 or more?!? Only a devious man would do such a thing because if no one knows his age and he himself does not know his age then him making a prophecy regarding his age would mean that no one can counter check it. If it cannot be counter checked then it is the work of satan to confuse people!

3. Allah is not evil or devious! Therefore if this would have been a revelation, then surely Allah the Exalted would have informed him of his actual age! A person who claimed himself to be a prophet does not know his age and YET prophesized regarding his age?!!? NONSENSE!! This is the work of Satan!!


And then she and this other qadiani said that the actual prophecy was different.

She told me that is was “a little less or a little more than 80″

The other fellow told me that is was “5 years less or 5 years more”.

Seriously these Qadianis need to make up their minds and agree between themselves first!!

In Roohani Khazain, the book written by Ghulam Ahmad himself, it clearly states:

“80 years or more”

Note: There is NO “a little less” or “5 years less”

However the Qadianis reject this. They are rejecting a book written by a person who they claim to be a prophet?! That’s odd!

In the end we are left with the following which ghulam ahmad is to have said regarding a prophecy about his age:

1. 80 years or more

2. A little less or a little more than 80

3. 5 years less or 5 years more than 80

I ask What the hell is this?!!?!? You call this a revelation from Allah? I say this is exactly how a “revelation” from Satan would be like!! Is Ghulam Ahmad trying to tell us that Allah is so indecisive that He was not even sure about something that He was revealing?!!? So I asked the qadiani female whether she would say “indecisive prophet or indecisive God?”

And well she put me on her ignore list from then onwards, running away from the truth. Allah the Exalted exposed this liar ghulam ahmad and did not let his prophecy come to pass. This is enough evidence to know that a person is not a prophet but a liar!!It was Mirza Ghulam himself who said:

“To Judge my truthfulness or lies, there is no better test than my prophecies.” (Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 19, P. 288)

“It is not possible that the prophecies of Prophets are delayed.” (Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 19, P. 5)

“To turn out a liar in his own prophecy is biggest disgrace of disgraces.” (Roohany Khazaen, Vol. 15, P. 382)

I have proved above that Ghulam Ahmad was nothing but a liar and his prophecy was NEVER FULFILLED, hence according to his own sayings he was a LIAR – a Dajjal – a Kazzab and nothing more.

Mahdi and ‘Eisa are not the Same – Refuting a Qadiani Dajjali Contention

[By brother Waqar Akbar Cheema]

In a certain program[1] of MTA channel one Ahmadi ‘scholar’ presented few arguments in a bid to uphold his religious belief that Mahdi and ‘Eisa Ibn Maryam are two references to the same personality.

Argument 1

The first argument that the Ahmadi ‘scholar’ presents goes as;

A certain narration says that Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, said:

كيف تهلك أمة أنا في أولها وعيسى في آخرها

‘How can that Ummah be destroyed in whose beginning is me, in whose end is ‘Eisa.”

Ahmadi ‘scholar’ contends that in this narration there is no mention of ‘Imam Mahdi’ hence it proves, in his good belief, that there is no separate person as Imam Mahdi.

While this is true that the report is given as such in Tarikh Damishq of Ibn Asakir but elsewhere the full report not only kills his argument but also exposes the gimmicks of the Ahmadiyya intellectual elite. The complete narration says;

لن تهلك أمة أنا في أولها وعيسى ابن مريم في آخرها ، والمهدي في أوسطها

“That Ummah cannot be destroyed in whose beginning is me, in whose end is ‘Eisa and in whose middle is al-Mahdi.”

(Kanzul Ummal 14/266 Hadīth 38671 cf. Kitabul Mahdi of Abu Na’im, Classified as Hasan by Al-Azizi in Siraj Al-Munir Sharah Jami’ Saghir 3/196)

Al-Manawi in his exegesis to this Hadith writes;

أراد بالوسط ما قبل الآخر لأن نزول عيسى لقتل الدجال يكون في زمن المهدي ويصلي عيسى خلفه

“By أوسط ‘before the end’ is meant for the descent of ‘Eisa (Alayhis Salaam) to kill Dajjal will take place during the time of al-Mahdi and he (‘Eisa) will pray behind him.” (Faidh Al-Qadir 5/383 Hadith 7384)

This simply kills the twisting of Murabbis.

Argument 2

Next he uses the following narration to meet his end.

عن أبي هريرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم قال : يوشك من عاش منكم ان يلقى عيسى بن مريم إماما مهديا وحكما عدلا فيكسر الصليب ويقتل الخنزير ويضع الجزية وتضع الحرب أوزارها

Narrated Abu Huraira (Radhiyallahu Anhu) that Prophet, may Allah bless him, said: “It is near that one who lives from amongst you shall meet ‘Eisa bin Maryam. He will be a rightly guided (imaman mahdiyyan] leader and a just ruler …”

Ahmadis argue that as ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, has been called ‘imaman mahdiyyan’ in this Hadith it means he will be Imam Mahdi spoken about in other Hadith narrations.

Let’s take this absurd argument to task.

What is “Mahdi”?

What? The heading says, ‘What is Mahdi?’ not, ‘Who is Mahdi?’ Yes, indeed that is what needs to be understood in the very first place.

Mahdi is an attribute/characteristic which means ‘rightly guided.’ And it is used for so many people in various Hadith narrations. With a quick look I could find that following people have been called so;

Abdullah bin Jarir (Radhiyallahu Anhu):

In Sahih Bukhari we read that Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, prayed for Sayyidina Jarir bin ‘Abdullah, may Allah be pleased with him;

اللَّهُمَّ ثَبِّتْهُ وَاجْعَلْهُ هَادِيًا مَهْدِيًّا

“O Allah! Make him firm and make him a guiding and a rightly-guided man [mahdiyyan].”(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2809)

Mu’awiya (Radhiyallahu Anhu):

According to Jami’ Tirmidhi, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, prayed exactly the same way for Sayyidina Mu’awiya, may Allah be pleased with him;

اللهم اجعله هاديا مهديا

“O Allah! Make him a guiding and a rightly-guided man [mahdiyyan].” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Hadith 3842. Classified as Hasan by Tirmidhi and Sahih by Albani)

‘Ali (Radhiyallahu Anhu):

In one Hadith the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, addressing the people said about Sayyidina ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him;

تجدوه هاديا مهديا يأخذ بكم الطريق المستقيم

“You will find him a guiding and a right-guided person [mahdiyyan] who will take you on the right path.” (al-Isaba fi Ma’rifatil Sahaba 2/271. Hafiz Ibn Hajr said, its chain is good [jayyad])

All the Pious Caliphs:

A famous Hadith uses the word for all the pious Caliphs. It read;

فعليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء المهديين

“You must then follow my sunnah and that of the rightly-guided [mahdiyyeencaliphs.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4607. Classified as Sahih by Albani)

The word ‘mahdiyyeen’ is plural of ‘mahdi.’

Thus we find that all of these great men and many others were ‘Mahdi’ i.e. rightly-guided ones. And by following the Ahmadiyya line of argument we end up with so many Mahdis instead of reaching the conclusion that ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, alone is ‘mahdi’.

The fact however, is simply that Ahmadiyya try to play with the innocent minds that do not know the Arabic language and have been basically made to think of ‘mahdi ‘as a noun and not an adjective.

A person from the lineage of the Prophet due to appear near the End of Times:

Just like all these people and many others, near the End of Times will appear a person from the lineage of the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, whose being ‘mahdi’ i.e. rightly-guided is testified in original sources of Islam.

The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, said;

المهدي من عترتي من ولد فاطمة

“The Mahdi (lit. rightly-guided) will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah.”(Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4284. Classified as Sahih by Albani and others)

But even he is referred to as ‘Mahdi’ not because it is his name but because he will be a rightly-guided person.

About his name, another Hadith says;

رجلا مني أو من أهل بيتي يواطئ اسمه اسمي واسم أبيه اسم أبي

“A man who belongs to me or to my family whose name is same as my name and whose father’s name is the same as my father’s name.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4282. Classified as Sahih by Ibn Qayyim, Albani and others)

Why generally only a particular person is referred to as ‘Mahdi’?

Now naturally the question arises, if so many people were given the title of ‘Mahdi’ why only one person is referred to as such? The answer is simple. ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, is basically a Prophet, Pious caliphs and other companions themselves are praised much by the Qur’an so they have much greater references to be known with. However, the personality known and revered as ‘Imam Mahdi’ is so referred to as it will be his greatest position and as such makes him stand out among all other humans after the Prophets and their companions. And that is the reason we always, retain the word Mahdi when translating the narrations about him. And looking at the subtleties let me say that this contention of ours springs from the very wording of the Hadith and a comparison of various narrations.

Please note, in the narrations using the word ‘mahdi’ (as singular adjective) for ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, and various companions it is simply ‘mahdi’ i.e. without the article ‘al’ i.e. ‘the’ while the narration about the person to appear near the End of the Times is ‘al-Mahdi’ which makes him stand out among all those for whom this word is used. This is, let me reiterate, because his being rightly-guided is an honor for him greater than any other status of him.

Argument 3

His third argument is about the famous narration that Ahmadis often quote.

لا مهدي إلا عيسى

“There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa.”

He says that one of its narrators Muhammad bin Khalid al-Jundi is a trustworthy narrator and that ‘Yahya bin Mu’in’ [sic.] graded him as trustworthy.

Firstly Hafiz Ibn Hajr, who has been recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadis, after careful scrutiny of the various opinions, graded him as ‘Majhul’ i.e. unknown. See al-Taqrib 2/71.

Imam Hakim also classified him as ‘Majhul’ see Tahzib al-Tahzib 9/126

Let’s not forget Imam Hakim is also recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadiyya.

As to what is attributed to Imam Yahya bin Ma’in (its Ma’in not Mu’in as Ahmadi ‘scholar’ speaks) al-Mizi quotes Abu al-Hassan al-Abri to have said, “If they mention what is said to come from Yahya bin Ma’in, it is not known to the experts among the people of knowledge and reporting.” (Tahzib al-Kamal 25/149)

Infact the narration has multiple issues. Shaykh Albani (in Silsala Da’ifa, Number 77) has mentioned three problems in this.

1. Tadlis of Hassan al-Basri

2. Muhammad bin Khalid al-Jundi being Majhul.

3. Difference in the chain. At another place Muhammad bin Khalid narrates from Aban bin Abi Ayyash instead of Aban bin Salih and he is ‘Matrook’ i.e. rejected. See Tahzib al-Tahzib 9/126

It is for this reason; Imam Ibn Taymiya, al-Saghani, al-Shaukani, Ibn Qayyim, al-Dhahbi, al-Qurtubi, Azimabadi etc. and recently Albani and Shu’aib Arnaut all have graded this narration as dubious.

And it is precisely for this reason Mullah Ali Qari in his commentary to Mishkat al-Masabih writes;

ثُمَّ اعْلَمْ أَنَّ حَدِيثَ: لَا مَهْدِيَّ إِلَّا عِيسَى بْنُ مَرْيَمَ ضَعِيفٌ بِاتِّفَاقِ الْمُحَدِّثِينَ

“Then I learnt the Hadith: There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa, is weak by the consensus of the scholars of Hadith.” (Mirqat al-Mafatih 8/3448)

Infact Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself accepted that this report is not authentic. He wrote;

“And as to Ahadith about the arrival of Mahdi you know they are all Da’if and problematic contradicting one another so much so that in one narration in Ibn Majah and other books says, ‘There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa, so how can one rest is his case on such kind of narrations with so much difference and contradictions, weakness and criticism on their narrators, as is not hidden from the scholars of Hadith?”

(Humamtul Bushra pp.148-149 included in Rohani Khazain vol.7 pp.314-315)

Please remember in Sirat al-Mahdi vol.1 p.91 Mirza Bashir Ahmad on the authority of Maulvi Sher Ali quotes Mirza to have said that all his Arabic writings are only a kind of revelation.

So Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself accepted this narration as weak and unreliable. Whatever he said certainly applies to this narration. However his contention about the other narrations is faulty.

Mullah Ali Qari discussing the ‘No Mahdi except ‘Eisa’ narration, writes;

قَالَ الطِّيبِيُّ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ: الْأَحَادِيثُ عَنْهُ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – فِي التَّنْصِيصِ عَلَى خُرُوجِ الْمَهْدِيِّ مِنْ عِتْرَتِهِ مِنْ وَلَدِ فَاطِمَةَ، ثَابِتَةٌ أَصَحُّ مِنْ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ، فَالْحُكْمُ لَهَا دُونَهُ

“Taybi, may Allah have mercy on him, said; And the narrations from the Prophet, may Allah bless him, about Mahdi emerging from his progeny and from the children of Fatima, are proved and authentic than this narration, and their status is different than it.” (Mirqat al-Mafatih 8/3448)

Also note scholars like Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Qayyim, Albani and Shu’aib Arnaut who have graded the ‘No mahdi except ‘Eisa’ narration as weak authenticated the other narrations about al-Mahdi.

So we find all the claims of Murabbis are not only erroneous but also show how common Ahmadis are fooled into misleading beliefs risking their life in the Hereafter.

May Allah bring all Ahmadis back to the fold of religion of His Last and Final Messenger, on whom be the peace and blessings of Almighty Allah.

Indeed Allah knows the best!


By Mujlisul Ulama

The Ahmadi kuffaar who are the followers of the false prophet, Mirza Gulam Ahmad, are not Muslims. This kuffaar sect masquerades as Muslims. They have their centre in Cape Town in Manly Road, Athlone.

Many Muslims are deceived into believing that the Ahmadis are Muslims. The deception is based on their claim of believing in the Kalimah Laa ilaha il lallaah Muhammadur Rasulullah. Mere recitation of the Kalimah of Islam without 100% belief in all the Aqaaid (Beliefs) of Islam does not render the reciter a Muslim.

He remains a kaafir if he rejects even one belief of Islam or interpolates one extra belief into Islam, or if he changes the meaning of any belief or tenet of Islam from the meaning which has reached us from the Sahaabah. There are many kufr aberrations in the Qaadiani religion of which the Ahmadiyyah is a sect.

The Finality of Nubuwwat, viz., there is no Nabi after Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), is the fundamental basis for the kufr of all Qaadianis. Qaadianis are the followers of Gulam Mirza Ahamd of Qadian which is now in Pakistan. The Ahmadiyyah group is a sect of Qaadianism. Whilst they claim to accept Mirza Gulam as a ‘reformer’, not as a prophet, their claim is satanically deceptive. Gullible and ignorant Muslims are sometimes entangled in this deception. Even if they believe that Mirza Gulam was a reformer, it is kufr to believe that a man who claimed to be a Nabi is a reformer. So, beware of the deception of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim Jamaat which operates from Cape Town.

Repentance of an Ahmadi/ Qadyani/ Mirzaai, Ikrima Najami

Announcement that I left the Ahmadiyya Jamaat

I declare to all of my Ahmadi friends everywhere, and to the whole world, that it is clear to me that the founder of Ahmadiyya was deliberately lying, with bad morals, and his jamaat after him continues to spread lies, deception and false showing off.

It is very shocking that one reaches this conclusion, but the alternative is an eternal concern and worries, and a betrayal of the new generations, a Perjury and it will Increase the size of the disaster and the magnitude of the shock.

In My last phase in Ahmadiyya – which took from my birth until my 45 years of age – I was the In-Charge of Ahmadiyya Jamaats in some of the Arab Countries, and I was the In-Charge of the Arab Baiats Record department and other Administrating responsibilities. And before that I was Deputy of MTA-3 Alarabiya Director and had some other responsibilities.

I was born as an Ahmadi, and my grandfather from my mother side was the first Ahmadi among Odeh family in Kababir, when he joined Ahmadiyya 90 years before. Since I was religiously committed and knew the ideologies of the Jamaat closely, I have endeavored to impliment all the teachings fully heartily and to abide by what the Jamaat says, and I have been a member of the Administrative body of the Jamaat in Kababir for years.

When I moved to London in 2007, I worked at the Centre of Ahmadiya Jamaat. I was close to Mirza’s successor (Khalifa), My house was near his house, my work was near his office, and I was the Moua`zin (caller for prayers) in his mosque and I was leading the prayers when he and the Imam of the Mosque absent.
how difficult and painful to be born in a Jamaat and serve it with all the means you can, live it, love it and breathe it, and cancel your existence and personal choices for it, thinking that it is on the right path; And you find in this age (45) that it is a Jamaat that has been lying since its first day! And that it is a Showing-off Jamaat that does not really serve Islam and humanity, but instead, it serves only its interests and some beneficiaries only!

In any case, all praise to Allah the Almighty who helped me to leave this Jamaat after a deep independent unbiased research, which was very shocking and painful too.

After reaching certainty in this regard, I felt an imperative duty to convey to all people my testimony and experience of this Jamaat, so that May Allah save the respectful and sincere members of the Ahmadiyya who do not know the painful and hidden truth or cannot really cope with it, or being unable to confront it or even think about it.

I have notices that the Jamaat does not respond to what brother Hani Tahir poses. The Khalifa asked me once about my opinion. I said to him: I did not see any real or geniuen replies. He said to me: “Ok, you research and reply to his allegations”.

Then I started my research and went through the following stages: the stage of denial, then the stage of distress and anxiety, then the stage of confronting yourself with the big questions, what would you do if you actually find the falsehood of your Jamaat? How will you live your life? What about the thousands of people you knew and served within the Jamaat and they know you personally? What about your family and children of all ages and your relatives and friends? How would you explain all of that to them? How will their reactions be? Would they be psychologically affected?

Then it was the stage of intensive and continuous Du’aa (Prayers) with a covenant with Allah the Almighty to follow the truth whatever the cost would be. After all, all what I want was to please Allah in every respect. My main Dua’ was: “ O Allah! show us the truth as true, and inspire us to follow it. Show us falsehood as falsehood, and inspire us to abstain from it.”

And only after this covenant (pledge) with Allah, came the stage of “the start of the unbiased research”; Allah is my witness it was very very difficult and painful. You research and get disturbed from everything you find, because the findings are contrary to what you want or what you love! you will be shocked and hurt when you discover that you face the biggest Falsehood & Deception in the modern history. Especially when you find, for example, in your research about the Arabic language of the founder, you find it one of the biggest lies. all his beautiful expressions were stolen from Al-Hariri and Hamdhani who existed 700 years before the founder. For example, during my research in Al-Maqamat, I found in the first quarter of the Muqamat al-Hariri, more than one thousand (1000) stolen phrases that was distributed on a number of his Arabic books!!

After passing through this path of pain, comes the stage of ” Delivering the Trust” . and handing over these facts for the highest authority in Ahmadiyya, that is the successor (Caliph) of the founder.

It was indeed a very difficult and painful meeting, I had mixed feelings with pain in my heart, I gave him a detailed letter and it was the following:

In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.

Fazl Mosque: 23/10/2017

My Dear and respected Mirza Masroor Ahmad

ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﻋﻠﻴﻜﻢ ﻭﺭﺣﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻭﺑﺮﻛﺎﺗﻪ

I call the Almighty Allah to witness that I have never imagined that I would be in this painful position. My heart is full of aches from the trauma I am living in these days. This has been reflected negatively on me; even in terms of my health.

How beautiful were those days that we spent in your presence, but in the same time this has born severe pains. How much we loved to work for the service of Islam through this Jamaat, and how glad we were to sacrifice all what we possessed, thinking that this was in the cause of Allah. How much have we overlooked the mistakes of the Ahmadis and had good faith in them. All this was because of our love for the founder of this Jamaat and his Khalifah. How much have we tried to ignore to face the facts that we have heard recently, but for how long could we continue doing that?

Who can reject the gift of Allah and not use his mind? Who can deceive himself more than that?
I am sorry to say that I have found that the responses of the Ahmadis – to the points that brother Hani Tahir has raised – were very far from being objective and were devoid of substance. They were full of selfish pride and insults as well as ruthlessness. As a result, our Jamaat emerged as an arrogant dictatorial Jamaat that wanted to prevent its people from thinking. In the same time, Hani Tahir continued to preach affection, peace, reason and objectivity in the research, and he did not change his approach in presenting his points and he did not get dragged into the personal arguments that some people tried to drag him into, while all that he was presenting was from texts written by the founder of the Jamaat.

How much it hurt me to see that the Jamaat did not stand as a unity to defend its founder, and left the matter in the hands of some individuals who are biased and unable to provide replies to refute what Hani has presented in an objective and fundamental manner. Since when was this person or the other representing the Jamaat? Why were not the replies issued officially in the name of the Jamaat or even in the name of the Arabic Desk?

I wondered, how can the “Jamaat of the Truth” prevent its members from listening to its opponents or even becoming aware of the doubts that are raised against the Jamaat, in fear that they will be affected by what they will know?
Since when was the truth so weak?

How many times have we criticized the non-Ahmadi scholars who forbade people from following our channel? How many times have we quoted in our favour as an argument the verse:

ﺍﻟَّﺬِﻳﻦَ ﻳَﺴْﺘَﻤِﻌُﻮﻥَ ﺍﻟْﻘَﻮْﻝَ ﻓَﻴَﺘَّﺒِﻌُﻮﻥَ ﺃَﺣْﺴَﻨَﻪُ ‏(ﺍﻟﺰﻣﺮ 19)

Those who listen to the Word and follow the best thereof.
(Al-Zumar 19)

How can we now find the officials of the Jamaat ordering its members not to listen at all to what any opponent says and not to even get acquainted with different opinions?

They even attribute these instructions to you!

As for the content of the responses to what Hani published, I cite the following as a few examples:

• Hani said: “How could the members of the Jamaat be 400 thousand in 1906, and then remain 400 thousand in 1944, despite the fact that the Khalifa said that the number has multiplied hundreds of times more than what it was at the time of the promised Messiah?”.

They replied by only repeating the same phrase, as if by doing this they have refuted it!

And when Hani published hundreds of grammatical errors that occurred in the founder’s Arabic books, they did not respond to any of these articles except in a way that no one would accept, and they did not ask any specialist in the Jamaat to respond, even though Hani himself has asked them to do so.

And when Hani published dozens of articles that show that the founder has copied from “Maqamat Al Hariri”- whose author ‘Al Hariri’ was born in the year A.D. 1054, their responses were inconsistent and contradictory; once they say: the founder did not read any of Hariri’s writings at all, and once they say: the founder was only affected by Hariri, and once they say: the founder deliberately copied from Hariri to draw people’s attention to him! But in all cases they did not answer the question why is there a very big similarity between the founder’s writings and “Maqamat Al Hariri”?
For example, from the first 30 pages of “Maqamat Al Hariri”, there are at least 500 phrases that are found distributed in the founder’s Arabic books! The only explanation for this is that the founder has actually copied from Hariri, and that he could not himself come up with powerful eloquent phrases without copying from Hariri. This of course destroys the idea that Allah taught him 40 thousand articles in Arabic! How could Allah have taught him all that while he continued to depend on Hariri?

And when Hani spoke about the falsification of the founder of the Jamaat when he referred to the Qur’an, the Hadith, the Mufassereen (Interpreters of the Quran), and the Awleyaa, there was no reply, despite the fact that Hani had mentioned more than 20 texts that the founder has ascribed to these sources, without the least trace of these texts existing in any of them. And this is the case also when Hani spoke about the falsification of the founder in referring to some points in his own books and publications, while these points did not exist in the said references.

And when Hani discredited the book “Ijazul Masih” from all aspects and said that he has taken the challenge and won, and he called for the formation of an unprejudiced committee to judge in this matter, no Ahmadi even commented on this. As a result, there was no reversal to Hani’s nullification of the book and this remains the case now.

Yet the greatest tremor was when we were taken by shock by the founder’s morals and his many insults, which we cannot accept for our children to hear and which we cannot be proud of, if these were published to the world.
We did not feel at all easy with his writing of a thousand consecutive “La’nah” – curse – in one of his books, nor with his insistence on the inevitability of his marriage to a married woman and his publishing announcements among people about that. For us this is a crime and a shameful act and is unacceptable to anyone.
There are also some texts written by the founder that can be a reason for our prosecution by law on the basis of “contempt of religions”. As an example I refer to his description of Christianity and its beliefs as “filthy”. This was mentioned when he said about Abdullah Atham: “And he stopped in one go writing any books in favour of the filthy beliefs of Christianity that he used to be engaged with.” And also his saying: “Christianity occupies the first place in the world in speaking falsehood, those who did not hesitate even to cheat in the divine books have forged hundreds of false books”. And his description of the Christian religion by saying: “It provokes disgust.”

As for the prophecies of the founder, it is clear that they were not fulfilled – or they were even fulfilled in reverse – and that the justification of the Jamaat for not being fulfilled was not correct. It is regrettably all forgery, the Jamaat even sometimes fabricated non existing texts. For example, regarding Thanaullah who lived after the founder, the Jamaat claimed that the founder has written in an announcement in October 1907 that the liar would still be alive after the truthful. But we find no trace of such an announcement in his “Ishtiharat” volumes.

After realising all this, it is still my hope and wish that we remain on a good relationship with you and with the Jamaat. But I am very sorry to tell you that I no longer consider the founder of the Jamaat truthful in his claims. As for the members of my family, they can decide for themselves. I do not mind if any of them chose to stay in the Jamaat. I do not even have any problem to continue working for the Jamaat if you accept in it someone who does not believe that its founder is the promised messiah and Mahdi, and whose intention is to help its members and strive to save them. Otherwise, it is all right if you discharge me from my work. What is important is for us to remain on a friendly good relationship InshaAllah.

Sir, I have very good faith in you and I can see that you are the only one in the whole World who has the solution for this issue of Ahmadiyya at its roots. You can work on saving the Ahmadis and their offspring and the future generations from this awkward situation. By doing this you will gain the special pleasure of Allah.

This can be done if you put in place a long-term plan to transform this Jamaat into a charity or something similar that can work as an organisation to enjoin goodness and spread peace in the world.

I am willing to help in this matter and to work with you to gradually bring the Jamaat and its members to safety, no matter how long this might take.

I know that telling people all the truth at once can cause them a shock and that the negative effects of this may be more than the positive ones. But on the other hand, remaining silent altogether will intensify the problem.

If you work on solving this issue at its roots, history will bestow upon you an extraordinary and unprecedented position. You will win the respect and admiration of the people, and you will receive the greatest rewards from Allah the Almighty.

I can help you with this all the way through until the end. In this case no one will ever know about this letter or its contents.

I will continue to work in the office as usual and I will carry out the tasks entrusted to me until I get any directions from you.

ﻭﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻭﺭﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻘﺼﺪ

Yours truly:
Ikrima Najami

I handed him the letter and he asked me: What did you write in it? I said: I cannot speak before you read it and I hope that we meet after reading it, but it is a very disturbing matter that I have never experienced in my entire life!

He said, “What is wrong with you, do you want to leave the Jamaat or what?

I said: please let’s postpone the talking after you read the content of my letter, as I have written to you in detail. He said: Well, give me a day or two and I’ll read it and meet you again.

After 40 minutes, one of his bodyguards came to my office and said, “Huzoor (the Caliph) wants to see you right now.”

I went to him and when I entered his office he said: “what you have said regarding the founder of the Jamaat I do not accept it and is nonsense.”

He seemed tense, his voice was choppy and his hands were trembling and continued saying: “I have read all of your letter and I find myself compelled to discharge you from your duties and discharge you from the Jamaat with an immediate effect!”.

And with this he concludes the matter! rather than discussing or presenting strong proofs to me, from his practical and spiritual experiences and from the miracles of his daily accepted prayers, from which we have not seen anything! Yes, instead of showing me an example of a firm faith in the truthfulness of the founder; he just quickly said to me: “I find myself compelled to discharge you from your duties and discharge you from the Jamaat”.

There are other important details that I will mention later inshaAllah, but I want to mention here very important point; at the end of this meeting, I asked the Caliph: what would you do if you were in my place?

He replied: “most probably, I will do the same like you!”.

From that moment on, a terrible series of defamation, abuse, insults and cruelty began against me, all of this to intimidate any Ahmadi from just thinking about what I thought about, and from researching the same topics I did, and from just breathing the real freedom of thoughts that I began to breathe. Insha’Allah, I will talk about these details later.

At the End, I pray to Allah that may he guide and help the Ahmadies to convey the truth to their families and children and relatives.

There is no harm if they did this in a gradual way and in stages, what is important for them is not to contribute in spreading evil and lies. They should help each other in research, reading and understanding, and demand that everything should be accurate and documented, that the responses for the allegations should be official, and from specialists, especially in relation to the Arabic language which has become known to all now, the low level of the Mirza’s Arabic.

My heart will remain open to all the Ahmadis, hoping they will not obey the boycott, and will not agree to any evil, and will not listen to the false rumours, and will not judge anything before they hear all parties, because those selfish beneficiaries (who care only for their worldly interests) live on this type of enmity and hatred.

Ikrima Najami

10 Fundamental Conflicts Between Islam and Qadiyaniyat

By Hazrat Moulana Idris Kandhlawi (rahimahullah)


In a Hadith, dress has been compared to religion because the way the dress protects/safe guards the human beings, their identity and the dress is means for beauty, in the same way, the religion also protects the life here and hereafter, prepares one’s life and is identifying source. As soon as a baby is born, it is dressed up and as it grows up, the new dresses are required in line with its growth/age. And then a time comes when it enters into its youth and reaches peak in terms of abilities and strength, and at this stage the dress that decors it is most fitting and remains the same for ever and doest not necessitate any change. Similarly the mankind for its cultural development needed and were provided Shariah (code of law)  and Prophet Muhammed ﷺ was sent as apostle at the time when the mankind reached fully developed cultural form (tamaddun). So the Shariat (Islamic code of law) that descended along with Prophet Muhammed ﷺ was with such glory that it remains until doomsday and mankind does not need any new Shariah (code of law). This fact has been informed by Qur’an in the following verse.

“Today, I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My blessing upon you, and chosen Islam as Deen for you.”

This is a clear announcement that with Prophet Muhammed ﷺ, the chain of prophecies has been sealed and the mankind under the guidance of Shariah (Islamic code of law) of Prophet Muhammed ﷺ will do its journey until doomsday. Because the sealing of prophets is the collective consensus of whole Muslim nation (Ummah) and it is also accepted faith that after Prophet Muhammed ﷺ any one who claims prophethood and his followers are zindeeq (who promote infidelity as Islam and misguide others) and without doubt are out of Islam.

Unfortunately under the influence of British in India, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani had claimed false prophethood and his followers   to cheat innocent Muslims say that Qadyanis are also “Muslims” and the way there are so many sects in Muslims, and there are trivial differences between the sects, similarly Qadiyani has just trivial differences. But this is mere cheating and mis-understanding   because between Muslims and Qadyani, there is not just one or two differences or conflicts but all of the fundamental articles of faith are in conflict and differences.

In this connection, there is an important article titled “MIRZAIYAT KA USOOLI IKHTILAF” by renowned scholar of Islam and Muhaqqiq Hadhrat Maulana Mohammed Idris Kandhelvi (Rahimahullah), previous Sheikh-ut-tafseer (Master of Quranic Exegecis) Darul-uloom Deoband, Shaikul Hadith Jamia Ashrafia Lahore. Maulana Idris is one of the highly esteemed and distinguished scholars of Islam. The three works of Maulana, “Ma’riful Qur’an” in line of Tafseer (Quranic Exegesis), “At-Talluq As-sahih (arabi)” Sharah of Mishkat Shareef in line of Hadith and “Seerat-e-Mustafa” (three parts) are the most exemplary works left behind by him for the Muslim nation (Ummah). Narrations and belief were his two special aspects. He had regular writings on Islamic Belief/Creed and in all his writings the orational style is fully reflected. Due to this, Maulana Idris had a very important part in rejection of Qadiyaniyat and in this connection this booklet is a great work.

Hadhrat Maulana Kandhelvi (rahimahullah) was a great scholar and his writings were also scholaric and used to be in schoolic style. Now a days due to down-trend in Urdu language it has become very hard to explain to the new generation. Allah may bestow his blessings and rewards on my respected friend Maulana Mufti Ghayasuddin Saheb, who called upon Hadhrat Maulana Abdul Qavi Saheb to transform this booklet into easily understood language and Maulana Abdul Qavi Saheb has accomplished it with great beauty and responsibility. In fact the ease and style have made this writing doubly rewarding and scholars and Muslims in general both alike can benefit out of it. In this booklet, 10 fundamental conflicts in light of writings from Mirza himself have been discussed. If any person with intention of seeking truth, reads this, will surely and undoubtedly know and understand that Qadiyani beliefs is Kufr (infidelity) and it is not one of the sects of Muslims. But its treachery against Islam and an evil effort to take off the Prophethood from Muhammad ﷺ and crown himself (Mirza) with prophethood.

One of the aims of “Majlis-e-Tahaffuz Khatam-e-Nabawwat” Andhra Pradesh is also to publish most beneficial books on this subject of Rejecting Qadiyaniyat and ensure that these reach all the Muslims and this booklet is one of them as an humble effort.

Allah may reward Hadhrat Maulana Idris with Noor in his grave, also reward graciously Hadhrat Moulana Abdul Qavi and protect the whole Muslim nation (ummah) from this fitnah (religious chaos, tribulation, corruption and mischief and spreading of it), and reward us sinners to become the dust of the path of this blessed movement, so that on the Day of judgement along with our wrong doings we can present our humble efforts and have an excuse to gain   Shafa’at (recommendation) of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ as we have no other ways and means of salvation except hoping for the mercy of Allah and hoping for Shafa’at of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ .

_ Khalid Saifullah Rahmani

[Khadim “Majlis-e-Tahaffuz  Khatam-e-Nabawwut”
Andhra Pradesh]
15 Jamadi ul Ula, 1426 June 24, 2005


Islam is a whole and complete religion and it is Allah’s last Shariah (Islamic code of law). And Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is the last of all the Prophets and Apostles sent by Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala. It is the collective consensus and faith of all the Muslims that after Prophet Mohammed ﷺ neither a Prophet comes nor a Holy Book will be sent, neither there is a need for it. Innumerable verses in Qur’an Karim and Hadith Saheeh have re-affirmed this faith and belief.

From the time of Prophet Mohammed ﷺ itself, some wretched and unblessed people have denied the last   prophethoodness of Mohammed ﷺ and claimed themselves to be the prophets but all of them have been sent to their destiny.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani is also one of those unfortunate and wretched people, who in the beginning to allure Muslims, called upon them to work for benefit of Islam and it was a deceit and then when he succeeded to some extent, he exposed his own purpose by claiming himself the guardian of Islam and then Mahdi and then Maseeh and finally claimed himself to be the prophet and the last of the prophets. Some ignorant Muslims who are not aware of true consensus or faith or belief, have been caught in this web. And this movement now has taken a shape of world wide fitnah. But the learned Ulamas right from the first day have been on watch out and have been taking care of their responsibility to safeguard the Khatm-e-Nabuwwat (end/seal of chain of prophethood) and Insha Allah continue to do so until the last nail is hammered into the coffin of this fitnah.

Hadhrat Moulana Idris Saheb Kandhelvi is a great scholar. He was a commentator of Qur’an   and Shaikhul Hadith. He authored lot of religious knowledge books. He also made aware the Muslims of this “Fitnah Qadiyaniat” and warned to be on watch and he collected and compiled the quotes and faiths of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani from their own books which prove that Qadiyanis are not Muslims but they follow some other religion   than Islam.

Meaning, the religion of Islam which Nabi Mohammed ﷺ brought to mankind, and which was accepted and followed by the Companions of Prophet Mohammed ﷺ, and companions’ followers, the Heads of all schools of thought, and Jurisprudence, experts and commentators of Quran, Muhaddithin, Scholars, Virtuous personalities and all Muslims is a different religion from that of which Qadiyanis are claiming and following. There is difference of skies and earth between the two religions.

This booklet was in old hard style language wise and scholaric. On the insistence of Hazrat Moulana Mufti Ghayasuddin sahib, I have taken up the task of re-writing this book in easy language so that all Muslims in general can easily benefit out of it.

Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala with His grace and generosity bestow acceptance of this book and protect all the Muslim nation (Ummah) from turning away from the right path and from going astray.

Mohammed Abdul Qavi Nazim  Idara Ashraful Uloom,
18 Jamadi Hussani, 1424

بسم الله ال رحمان ال رحيم

Many people are in a misunderstanding about Qadiyanis that “it is also a sect of islam, just they are having some conflict in some trivial and secondary affairs, which is also found in other Islamic sects.” That’s why they slink away from admitting that Qadiyanis are Murtad (infidels) and are non-Muslims.

However it is wrong to think that ‘Qadiyanat’ is one of Islamic sects. Such type of thought is due to lack of knowledge and awareness regarding the basic princples of Islam. It is very unfortunate that many Muslims don’t have the correct knowledge of islamic fundamentals.

It is an admitted fact that “each and every religion have its own principles and beliefs, which are the peculiar and distinctive features of that religion.” It means on the basis of these principles that religion is recognised and distinguished from other religions. Therefore Islam is also having some basic beliefs and laws. If any one sticks himself to these fundamentals and have conflict in other matters then such a conflict is called as a “trivial conflict” and such a person is still in Islam and he is named a Muslim. But if any one have conflict with these principles itself and had crossed their limits, then such a person is no more a Muslim, he will be treated as murtad (infidel) or non-Muslim. This type of basic conflict is found between the Muslims and Qadiyanis, therefore the Qadiyanis is infidels and is out of Islam. In this booklet this basic difference will be explained to some extent, so that the misunderstanding of Muslims may get away and the real matter may be known:

1. Qadiyanies themselves claim to have fundamental conflict with us:

It is not the only claim of Muslims that Qadiyanis are having basic and faith related conflict with Islam and Muslims, they themselves say that their conflict with Muslims is not trivial but it is fundamental. For example see the text of their book “Majmu’ah fatawah ahmediyah” 

“It is completely wrong that there is some trivial conflict between we and non-Ahmedis (muslims). Because denying the one who has been appointed by Allah (i.e., one who is sent by Allah) is infidelity. Our position (Muslims) are atheists of Mirza saheb’s appointment (his prophesy). Now say how can this conflict will be a trivial one.” [Fatawa Ahmediyah  p.274]

According to us the opposition of Qadiyanis with islam and Muslims is fundamental not trivial. And the Qadiyanis themselves also say the same. So by this it is known that Qadiyaniat and Islam both are different religions.

2. Religion also changes with the change of prophet:

Due to the change of prophet religion and tribe also changes. For example if anyone believes only in Esa (alayhissalaam) then he is a Christian and one who believes only in Musa (alayhissalaam) is called a Jew. He is not eligible to be named as a ‘Muslim’ or ‘Muhammadi’. In the same manner if any Christian or a Jew starts to believe in Hazrath Muhammed ﷺ and admits that he is the final Messenger then he is not mentioned as a Jew or Christian rather he is mentioned as a Muslim. Muslims believe that Hazrath Muhammed ﷺ is Allah’s Prophet and his final Messenger. Where as Qadiyanis admits Mirza Gulam Ahmed Qadiyani as their prophet. For example it is written in their book “Tatimmah haqeeqatul wahi”:

I swear by the god who is having my soul in his hands he had sent me and named me ‘nabi’ (prophet) [Haqeeqatul wahi];

The true god is the one who had sent his prophet in Qadiyan   [Daafeul-bala].

So when we came to know that Qadiyani’s prophet is different, then the faith and religion of both are also different. Hence the followers of Mirza Gulam Ahmed Qadiyani can be mentioned as Mirza’i, Gulami or Qadiyani, but they can’t be mentioned as a Muslim.

3. The series of Prophets came to an end:

It is the basic and unanimously consented faith of all the muslims that Hadhrat Muhammed ﷺ is the final Prophet of Allah, and no Prophet will arrive after him till the doomsday. This is the faith of all the companions of Prophet, tabi’een and all the religious scholars of Muslim nation in the light of Qur’anic verse,

Muhammad is not The father of any Of your men, but (he is) The Apostle of God, And the Seal of the Prophets: And God has full knowledge Of all things. [Al-Ahzab: 40]

and various ahadith, And all had admitted unanimously that Hadhrat Muhammed ﷺ is the final Messenger and the series of Prophets came to an end at him. No new Prophet will arrive now. It is a fundamental and basic belief of Islam in which no islamic sect is having any type of conflict. (As far as the issue of Hadhrat ESA (alayhissalaam) he was a Prophet sent before our Prophet ﷺ, and in the same state he was raised to the sky, Whenever he will arrive, his arrival will be to issue the religion of our Prophet ﷺ, he will not arrive with a new prophethood, therefore there will be no effect of his arrival (in the end) on our Prophet ﷺ being the final Prophet.

Against the faith and belief of all Muslims the Qadiyanis believe that the chain of prophethood didn’t came to an end at Muhammed ﷺ. Gulam Ahmed Qadiyani’s claim that:

“How can you gain those favours without prophets and messengers? So as to make you reach the degree of faith and love the arrival of messengers occasionally is essential and through their intervention you will gain those favours.” [lecture  siyaal Koot p.32]

“I am not any new messenger, many messengers came before me [Al-Hukum 10th April 1908]

our claim is that we are messengers and apostles” [Al-Hukum 5th March 1908].

In this way Gulam Ahmed Qadiyani makes his own different belief i.e., the continuity of the series of prophethood after our Prophet Muhammed ﷺ and establishes a false claim of his prophethood. And his followers  admit Gulam Ahmed Qadiyani as their prophet next to Muhammed ﷺ  and change the meaning of the Qur’anic verse which clearly mentions the end of prophethood so they give an inappropriate explanation of our unanimously consented belief in this way:

“Allah the almighty had endowed Hazrath Muhammed with a seal, means god had given him the seal which is not given to any other prophet in order to spread the excellencies. That’s why he was named as ‘khatamun nabiyyin”   [Hashiyah Haqeeqatul Wahi p.97].

Through this and many other such explanations, Mirza and his followers want to say that the meaning of the word ‘Khatam’ is not ‘final’, but it means a stamp with which he puts seal and shows his nation that he is a prophet. Where as the whole Muslim nation besides Mirza’is unanimously agreed that Muhammed ﷺ is the final Prophet as it is explored in many Sahih Ahadith. So the first thing in Islam on which the whole nation unanimously convinced is ‘the person who claims to be a prophet after the era of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ is a liar, he must be killed. So in the life span of Muhammed ﷺ itself when a person called “Aswad an-Ansi” claimed to be a prophet, our Prophet Muhammed ﷺ asked one of his companions to kill him. So he was beheaded. Again Abu-Bakr Siddiq (Radhiyallahu anhu) dispatched a force under the leadership of Khalid bin Waleed (Radhiyallahu anhu) to kill Musaylimah (a big liar). So Musaylimah and his 28,000 followers were sent to hell. Similarly Talaha Asadi claimed to be a prophet, so Abu-Bakr (Radhiyallahu anhu) had given the order to kill him. So he was also killed. In the same way when a person named Haris claimed to be a prophet, Khalifah Marwaan killed him by the collective decision of the companions of Prophet ﷺ and the Tabi’een. In the time of Khaleefa Haroon Rasheed a person was killed according to court’s judgment for claiming to be a prophet. This shows that Hadhrat Muhammed ﷺ is the final Prophet according to Islam and Muslims. After him no new prophet will arrive. Who ever claims to be a prophet next to him will be a murtad (infidel) and who ever obeys him is also an infidel. It must be known that the punishment of infidelity in islam is to slay. Even in the religion of Qadiyanis also the punishment of the one who rejects their prophet or even a khalifah (successor) is to slay. That’s why Nooruddin qadiyani says:

“God made me the successor, neither I can be suspended through your words nor any one have the ability to suspend me, if you keep on forcing, then keep in mind I am having Khalid bin Waleeds (plural) whom will punish you like infidels” [Tasheed-ul-Azhaan vol 9 p.12].

4.  Being Obedient to Muhammed ﷺ is enough for salvation:

All the Muslims had collectively admitted that to have faith in Hazarath Muhammed ﷺ and to follow him is sufficient for the success in the hereafter. But it is not enough in qadiyanies’ view. Moreover (it needs to have faith in mirzas prophethood) until a person didn’t have faith in his prophethood he is an eternal kafir (infidel) and deserves the hell. It is forbidden to marry him. It is not proper to join his funeral. Just go through:

“Whoever is having adversary with us is a Jew, Christian, idolator and hellish” [Tableeqh-e-Risalath 9 p.27]

“every one who received my invitation and didn’t accept me is not a Muslim”. [Haqeequtal-Wahi p.163].

“Infact our enemies became dogs of deserts and their women are worst than dogs.” [Durr-e-  Mateen p.294]

“all those muslims who had not included themselves in the oath of allegance of maseeh mouood (the maseeh who was promised to sent in past) whether they had heard his name or not they are infidels and non-muslims” [Aaena-e-Sadaqat p.35].

It means crores of Muslims all over the world who don’t believe in the Qadiyani’s prophet are infidels, idolators and hellish in   Qadiyanis view and only those people (Qadiyanis) are muslims. (we seek Allah’s protection).

5. Whose Qur’anic interpretation is actually reliable?

It is the firm belief of Muslims that only the Qur’anic interpretation of Muhammed ﷺ is actually reliable. In the Qur’an itself Muhammed ﷺ was mentioned as the interpreter of the Holy Qur’an. If his explanation is not found then the interpretation of his companions and Tabi’een (their followers) will be reliable. But Mirza and his followers say that only Mirza’s interpretation is reliable even though his explanation is against to Sahih ahadith and the whole ummah (Muslim nation).

See what he says:

“There is a big difference between we (me) and Muhammed because I always receive the aid and support of God” [Nuzool-ul-  maseeh p.99].

“The foundation of my claim is quran and divine revelation which descended on me. Yes we present those ahadith as a support which are according to Quran and are not against to my divine revelation and we throw the other ahadith as waste scraps” [Tofah-e-goldviah, p.10]

Its clear that this conflict of Qadiyanis with Muslims is also fundamental and faith related (non trivial) which separates the Qadiyanis from Muslims and makes their religion a religion besides Islam.

6. Isn’t the Qur’an God’s final revelation…?

Muslims believe that Qur’an is the last book of Allah and believe that now Allah will never bring down any other revelation or book till the last day. But according to qadiyanies the claims of mirza are equivalent to Qur’an and to believe in them is as important as to believe in Qur’an. Reading the artificial and self prepared revelation of Mirza is also a form of worship as the recitation of Qur’an. The revelation of Mirza is also a miracle like Qur’an. Let us     once go through their belief:

“The Diving Revelation Of God Descended on me to such an extent that if it is totally written   it will not be less than 20 parts.”   [Haqeeqatul-wahi p.91].

“The pleasure and faith obtained by quran, cannot be obtained through any other books. Similarly the pleasure and delight obtained by reading the revelations of maseeh mouood cannot be obtained by reading   any other book. Hazrath Maseeh mouood is appointed to teach his revelations only to his clan. It is obligatory for ahmadian tribe to believe and act according to his revelations” [An-Nubuwatu fil-  Islam]

7. Is Jihad Forbidden in Islam…?

According to Islamic belief jihad is a form of worship and its command along with all its details will remain as long as Islam remains. Jihad’s mention, incitement and its laws are present in countless places of Quran and hadith. But Mirza’s claim is:

“the command of jihad is demolished with my appearance. It is absolutely forbidden especially to wage a war against british. So after my appearance there is no jihad with swords, a white flag of peace and freedom has been raised from our side. “Who wages a war is an enemy of God, one who believes in it is an atheist of prophet, now leave the thought of jihad oh! Friends, It is forbidden now to wage a war and fight for religion” [Arbaeen No:4  p.15].

“In time of maseeh mouood (Mirza Gulaam Ahmed) the command of jihad was absolutely demolished. Fighiting with infidels is forbidden for me.” [Khutba-e-ilhamiyah p.35].

“Helping the british government and erasing the thought of jihad’s wicked issue is a good thing” [Ijaaz-e-Ahmedi p.34].

8. Who is distinguished of all prophets Muhammed or Mirza…?

It is the firm belief of Islam and Muslims that the Prophets are the most prominent of all the humans, especially our Prophet ﷺ  is the most distinguished of all Prophets. Any person (however virtueous he may be) is not equal to a Prophet. On contrary to this the belief of Mirza and Qadiyanis is “Mirza is not only prominent than all the prophets but he is also prominent than Mohammed”

“There is a lot of difference between Mohammed and us because I always receive the aid and support of God.” [Nuzool-ul-maseeh p.96].

“Leave the rememberance of mary’s son, Gulam Ahmed is better than him” [Daafe-ul-bala p.2]

“Mohammed has arrived again in us with advanced glory than what it was oh akmal. Those who wants to see Mohammed must go to qadiyan and see Gulam Ahmed”. [Paigaam-e-Sulah 24 March 1916].

Means Gulam Ahmed is claiming that he is (we seek Allah’s protection) the rebirth of Mohammed ﷺ and in his second birth he appeared with more advanced capabilities than before.

9. Do Qadiyanies have same beliefs as we have about  Esa (alayhissalaam)..?

Hazrath Esa (alayhissalaam) is Allah’s Prophet with high determination and Qur’an had announced his chastity and his honor and mentioned his mother as siddiqah (the most faithful) and the chaste. All the Muslims have the same belief about him. But it is beyond our capability to explain what type of beliefs Mirza Gulam Ahmed is having about him and the way he percepts in his glory, because just its imagination also makes out hair erect. But to understand the beliefs of Qadiyanis see a few examples:

“If maseeh the son of Mary would have been in our age, then he will be unable to do those things which I can and he can’t show those miracles which are appearing from me.”  [Haqeeqat-ul-wahi p.148] 

“3 paternal and maternal grand mothers of maseeh were prostitutes. He was born with their blood”. [Zameemah Anjaam-e- aatham p.6]

“Also keep it in your mind that he (maseeh) is also having a little habit of lying.” [zameemah anjaam-e-aatham p.5].

10. Who was addressed in the following verses Mirza or Muhammed ﷺ..?

Moreover Mirza determines that the innumerable verses which were revealed in the eminence of Mohammed ﷺ are related to him where as the whole muslim nation unanimously agreed that these are related to Mohammed ﷺ.

Besides this Qadiyanis also believe that:

“The land of qadiyan is like mecca mukarammah and madeena munawarrah.” [Baraheen-e-ahmadiyah p. 557].

“The mosque of qadiyan is equal to Masjid-e-aqsa [Al-fazal 1915 p.6]

“Visiting qadiyan is equivalent to haj” [al-fazavol24, 64]

“Those who see Mirza are equivalent to the companions of prophet.” [Al-fazal vol 24,p. 64]

“The graveyard of qadiyan is better than all thegrave yards on the Earth.” [malfazath-e- ahmadiyah p.416].

But where as the Muslim beliefs are exactly opposite to it.

Any how these are some examples through whichwe want to prove infront of muslims that “Though the religion of Mirza and his followers is different from Islam, they claim to follow a religion parrel (equivalent) to Islam.” So they can’t be Muslims. Their claim of being Muslims is nothing but an attempt to deceive muslims.

Qadiyanis must have to come in open and say that their book, their prophet and their religion are different. They must give-up to present their false prophet, their false book and their false religion as Islam and actual Islam. And also Muslims should have to understand their (qadiyanis) false propaganda and their unsound and useless interpretations. They should reject them and stick to their real and true religion.   Because neither they (qadiyanis) are Muslims nor they have any type of concern with Islam and its fundamental beliefs. May Allah the Almighty safeguard the faith and beliefs of muslims and keep away from all types of deception and fraud.

ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﭘﺮﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺣﻘﯿﻘﺖ

‏[ﺣﺎﻓﻆ ﻋﺒﻴﺪﺍﻟﻠﻪ]

ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺖ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯿﮧ ﺟﺲ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻗﺮﺍٓﻥ ﻭﺣﺪﯾﺚ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﮮ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﺎﻥ ﻭﺻﻮﻓﯿﺎﺀ ﮐﺮﺍﻡ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺤﺮﯾﻒ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﯼ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﯽ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮧ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﮐﯽ ﮐﻮﺷﺶ ﮐﺮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ، ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﮨﯽ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮐﯽ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ’’ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ‘‘ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﺎﻗﺒﻞ ﻭﻣﺎﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﺣﺬﻑ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺗﮭﮯ ﺣﺎﻻﻧﮑﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﺍﭘﻨﯽ ﺍﺳﯽ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻭﻣﺮﺗﺪ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﺍﻓﺴﻮﺱ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻧﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﺍﯾﮏ ﮔﺮﻭﮦ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﮧ ﯾﺎ ﻧﺎﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﮧ ﺍﺱ ﺑﺎﺕ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺼﺮ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻗﺎﺩﯾﺎﻧﯿﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﺍﻧﮩﯽ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﮐﻮ ﺩﻟﯿﻞ ﺑﻨﺎﮐﺮ ﻣﺮﺯﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﯾﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﻮ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮨﮯ، ﮨﻤﺎﺭﮮ ﺧﯿﺎﻝ ﻣﯿﮟ ﯾﮧ ﺣﻀﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺑﻐﺾ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﯾﺴﺎ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﯿﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻣﺠﺪﺩ ﺍﻟﻒ ﺛﺎﻧﯽؒ، ﺷﺎﮦ ﻭﻟﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺩﮨﻠﻮﯼؒ ، ﻣﻼ ﻋﻠﯽ ﻗﺎﺭﯼؒ ، ﺷﯿﺦ ﻣﺤﯽ ﺍﻟﺪﯾﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﯽؒ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺷﯿﺦ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻮﮨﺎﺏ ﺷﻌﺮﺍﻧﯽؒ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮨﻢ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺣﻖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﭘﺮ ﯾﮧ ﻏﺼﮧ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺿﮕﯽ ﮐﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮧ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯽ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺳﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ؟ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺑﮩﺖ ﺳﮯ ﻟﻮﮒ ﻗﺼﻮﺭ ﻓﮩﻢ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﺭﮮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻏﻠﻂ ﻓﮩﻤﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﺒﺘﻼ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺟﮫ ﮐﺮ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﯽ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﮐﮯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺳﮯ ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﭨﮑﮍﻭﮞ ﮐﻮ ﺟﻮﮌ ﮐﺮ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﻣﻨﮯ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﮐﺮﺩﯾﺎ ﺟﺲ ﺳﮯ ﺳﺎﺩﮦ ﻟﻮﺡ ﻋﻮﺍﻡ ﺗﺮﺩﺩ ﻣﯿﮟ ﭘﮍﮔﺌﮯ ، ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮨﻤﯿﮟ ﻋﺪﻝ ﻭﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﮐﺎﻡ ﻟﯿﻨﮯ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻮﻓﯿﻖ ﺩﮮ۔

ﮨﻢ ﺳﺐ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮐﯽ ﻭﮦ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺟﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻧﺪﺭ ﺻﺎﻑ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻧﮩﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺍٓﺧﺮﯼ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﮧ ﺍٓﺧﺮﯼ ﮨﮯ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﺍٓﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ، ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﮨﻮ ﺍﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ، ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮨﻢ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺍﺱ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ‏( ﯾﺎ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﮐﮯ ﭨﮑﮍﻭﮞ ‏) ﭘﺮ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ ﮔﮯ ﺟﻨﮩﯿﮟ ﻟﮯ ﮐﺮ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺖ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯿﮧ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮨﻤﺎﺭﮮ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻧﺎ ﺳﻤﺠﮫ ﻣﺴﻠﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﺭﮮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻏﻠﻂ ﻓﮩﻤﯽ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﺒﺘﻼ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ۔

ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ
ﺟﻮﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎﻭﯾﻞ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ
ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎؒ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ:۔

’’ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﺩﯾﻦ ﻭﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎﻭﯾﻞ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 144 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ، ﮐﻮﺭﻧﮕﯽ ، ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ‏)

ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺭﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﮐﯽ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ’’ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ‘‘ ﮐﯽ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﭘﺮ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﺰﯾﺰ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻧﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﻣﻨﮯ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﺿﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺷﮑﺎﻻﺕ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﮐﯽ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﯿﮟ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﮯ ﺗﮭﮯ ﺟﻦ ﮐﺎﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﻧﮯ ﺩﯾﺎ ، ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ﺍﺳﯽ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﮯ ﮐﯽ ﺧﻂ ﻭﮐﺘﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﮧ ﮨﮯ ، ﺍﺱ ﻃﺮﺡ ﮨﻢ ﮐﮩﮧ ﺳﮑﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ’’ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ‘‘ ﮔﻮﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ’’ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ‘‘ ﮐﯽ ﺷﺮﺡ ﮨﮯ ﺟﺲ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ؒﻧﮯ ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻟﮑﮭﯽ ﮔﺌﯽ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺸﺮﯾﺢ ﺍﻭﺭﻭﺿﺎﺣﺖ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯼ ۔
ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺟﮕﮧ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ:۔

’’ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺳﺐ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺰﺩﯾﮏ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﺑﺎﺕ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺳﺐ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺰﺩﯾﮏ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﮨﯿﮟ‘‘… ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 9 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ، ﮐﻮﺭﻧﮕﯽ ، ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ)

ﻟﯿﺠﯿﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﺻﺎﻑ ﻟﮑﮫ ﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﮐﮯ ﺍٓﺧﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﺒﻌﻮﺙ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ ﺗﻮ ﺍﯾﺴﯽ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮨﮯ ﺟﻮ ﺳﺐ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺰﺩﯾﮏ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﮨﮯ ، ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﮐﻼﻡ ﮨﯽ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ۔

ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﻣﻨﮑﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺌﮯ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﮐﯽ ﮔﻨﺠﺎﺋﺶ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﭼﮭﻮﮌﯼ
ﺍﯾﮏ ﺟﮕﮧ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ:۔

’’ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺠﮫ ﮐﻮ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﯾﻮﮞ ﮐﮩﯿﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻨﮑﺮﻭﮞ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺌﮯ ﮔﻨﺠﺎﺋﺶ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻧﮧ ﭼﮭﻮﮌﯼ ، ﺍﻓﻀﻠﯿﺖ ﮐﺎ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮨﮯ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﭘﺎﻭٔﮞ ﺟﻤﺎ ﺩﯾﮯ ،ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺒﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﯽ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﭘﺮ ﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ، ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ‘‘… ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 71 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ، ﮐﻮﺭﻧﮕﯽ ، ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ‏)

ﯾﮩﺎﮞ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺑﺎﺭ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺻﺎﻑ ﻟﻔﻈﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﻮ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ، ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍٓﭖ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﻮ ﺍﻓﻀﻞ ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻞ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻢ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﮯ ۔

ﭘﮭﺮ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﺰﯾﺰ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﮐﻮ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺩﯾﺘﮯ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ :۔

’’ﺍٓﭖ ﮨﯽ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺋﯿﮟ ﺗﺎٔﺧﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻋﺼﺮ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﻮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻧﮯ ﮐﺐ ﺑﺎﻃﻞ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﮩﺎﮞ ﺑﺎﻃﻞ ﮐﯿﺎ؟ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻧﮯ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﮐﮯ ﻭﮨﯽ ﻣﻌﻨﯽ ﺭﮐﮭﮯ ﺟﻮ ﺍﮨﻞ ﻟﻐﺖ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﻘﻮﻝ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﺍﮨﻞ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﺸﮩﻮﺭ ﮨﯿﮟ‘‘ ۔ ‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 52‏)

ﺍٓﮔﮯ ﭼﻠﻨﮯ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﮐﺮﻧﺎ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﯼ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﮧ ’’ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ‘‘ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺳﻮﺍﻝ ﮐﮯ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﮔﯿﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﺟﺲ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻨﮩﻤﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺟﺲ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﺎﺕ ﺯﻣﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﮐﺎ ﺫﮐﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﺴﮯ ﺍﻣﺎﻡ ﺑﯿﮩﻘﯽ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ ﻧﮯ ﺻﺤﯿﺢ ﮐﮩﺎ ﮨﮯ ‏(ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻻﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻟﺼﻔﺎﺕ ﻟﻠﺒﯿﮩﻘﯽ ﺟﻠﺪ 2 ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 268 ، ﺑﺎﺏ ﺑﺪﺀ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻖ، ﺭﻭﺍﯾﺖ ﻧﻤﺒﺮ 832 ،ﻃﺒﻊ ﻣﮑﺘﺒۃ ﺍﻟﺴﻮﺍﺩﯼ) ﮐﻮ ﺩﺭﺝ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻖ ﺩﺭﯾﺎﻓﺖ ﮐﯽ ﮔﺌﯽ ﺗﮭﯽ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﯾﺎ ﺑﯿﮏ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻨﮩﻤﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺍﺛﺮ ﭘﺮ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺭﮐﮭﻨﺎ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﮨﮯ؟ ﺍﺱ ﺳﻮﺍﻝ ﮐﺎ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺗﯿﻦ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﺗﮭﺎ:

ﻧﻤﺒﺮ :1 ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻌﺎﺭﺽ ﮨﮯ ﻟﮩﺬﺍ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻨﮩﻤﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺍﺛﺮ ﮐﻮ ﻏﻠﻂ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ۔

ﻧﻤﺒﺮ :2 ﯾﮧ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺻﺤﯿﺢ ﮨﮯ ، ﭘﮭﺮ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻖ ﯾﻮﮞ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍٓﭖ e ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺻﺮﻑ ﮨﻤﺎﺭﯼ ﺍﺱ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺳﮯ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﮐﯽ ﮔﺌﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺱ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮨﯿﮟ ۔

ﻧﻤﺒﺮ :3 ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻨﮩﻤﺎ ﮐﮯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﺗﺴﻠﯿﻢ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﺍﯾﺴﯽ ﺗﻄﺒﯿﻖ ﺩﯼ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺱ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﺗﮏ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﮧ ﺭﮨﮯ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺑﺎﻗﯽ ﺯﻣﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺳﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﺎﺋﻨﺎﺕ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺤﯿﻂ ﮨﻮ۔

ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﮧ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﯽ ﯾﺎ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﯼ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺧﺘﯿﺎﺭ ﮐﯽ ، ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﻧﮯ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱؓ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﺻﺤﯿﺢ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﮮ ﮐﺮ ﺗﯿﺴﺮﺍ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﺧﺘﯿﺎﺭ ﮐﯿﺎ ، ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﯽ ﺳﺎﺭﯼ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﮐﺎ ﺧﻼﺻﮧ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮨﻤﺎﺭﯼ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ، ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺳﯽ ﺯﻣﯿﻦ ﺗﮏ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﭘﻮﺭﯼ ﮐﺎﺋﻨﺎﺕ ﮐﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﭼﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺱ ﺭﺿﯽ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻨﮩﻤﺎ ﮐﯽ ﺭﻭﺍﯾﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﺰﯾﺪ ﭼﮫ ﺯﻣﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﮯ ﻧﺒﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﺎ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺫﮐﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺮﺽ ﮨﺰﺍﺭ ﺯﻣﯿﻨﯿﮟ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮨﻮﺗﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﮧ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺟﺎﺭﯼ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﭼﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﺭﮮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﯾﮧ ﺗﺼﺮﯾﺢ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺍٓﺋﯽ ﮐﮧ ﻭﮦ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﯾﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﮨﯿﮟ ﭘﺲ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺌﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍٓﭖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﮯ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﮯ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺮﺽ ‏(ﺟﯽ ﮨﺎﮞ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﺮﺽ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﮐﮧ‏) ﺩﻭﺳﺮﯼ ﺯﻣﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻢ ﻋﺼﺮ ﯾﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺮﺽ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮨﻮﮞ ﺗﻮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍٓﭖ ﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺒﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﮨﻮﺗﮯ ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺫﺍﺗﯽ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ۔ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯽ ﻣﺮﺑﯿﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﻮ ﺟﻮ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﮨﮯ ﺳﯿﺎﻕ ﻭﺳﺒﺎﻕ ﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﭦ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺱ ﻃﺮﺡ ﭘﯿﺶ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﮧ ﮔﻮﯾﺎ ﯾﮧ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺗﻨﮯ ﮨﯽ ﺣﺼﮯ ﮐﻮ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺑﺘﺎ ﮐﺮ ﺩﮬﻮﮐﮧ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﺭﮮ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺟﻮﻟﮑﮭﺎ ﺍﺳﮯ ﯾﮏ ﺳﺮ ﺫﮐﺮ ﻧﮧ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮔﯿﺎ ۔

ﻓﺎﺋﺪﮦ : ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﮧ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺍٓﺧﺮﯼ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﭖ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﮐﺴﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﻣﻠﻨﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﺎ ﭘﯿﺪﺍ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ ﻣﻤﮑﻦ ﮨﮯ ، ﯾﮧ ﺷﺎﻥ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﮨﻮﺋﯽ ﺟﺐ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﯾﮑﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺩﯾﮕﺮﮮ ﺩﻧﯿﺎ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺸﺮﯾﻒ ﻻﭼﮑﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺳﺐ ﺳﮯ ﺍٓﺧﺮﻣﯿﮟ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﻮ ﻣﺒﻌﻮﺙ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﯾﺎ ﮔﯿﺎ ، ﺟﺒﮑﮧ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﮐﺎ ﯾﮧ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺧﺘﻢ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﭖ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﮯ ﮐﯽ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﺳﮯ ﺍٓﺧﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺷﺎﻥ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﮐﮯ ﺍٓﺧﺮﯼ ﻧﺒﯽ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺍٓﭖ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺗﮭﯽ ﺟﺐ ﺍﺑﮭﯽ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﺍٓﺩﻡ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﺧﻠﻌﺖ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺳﮯ ﺳﺮﻓﺮﺍﺯ ﻧﮧ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﺗﮭﮯ، ﺍﺱ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﺗﮯ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺒﯿﺎﺀ ﮐﺮﺍﻡ ﯾﮑﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺩﯾﮕﺮﮮ ﺗﺸﺮﯾﻒ ﻻﺗﮯ ﺭﮨﮯ ، ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﮨﻮﺍ ﮐﮧ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﭘﻨﯽ ﺫﺍﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺒﯿﻮﮞ ﮐﻮ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ، ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮮ ﮐﮯ ﻟﺌﮯ ﺻﺮﻑ ﯾﮩﯽ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﯽ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻻﺯﻡ ﮨﮯ ﺟﯿﺴﺎﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺼﺮﯾﺢ ﮐﯽ ﮨﮯ ‏(ﺟﻦ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﮐﭽﮫ ﺣﻮﺍﻟﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺍٓﮔﮯ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﮨﻮﮞ ﮔﮯ ) ۔

ﺗﻮ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﭼﺎﮨﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﮐﻮ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﮐﺎ ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﯽ ﻟﯿﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﻮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﯽ ، ﯾﺎ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﯼ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮧ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﻮ ﻋﺎﻡ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺭﮐﮭﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻭﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ‏(ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺗﯿﺴﺮﯼ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ‏) ﮐﻮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﮐﺎ ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﯽ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﯼ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮐﻮ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺑﺘﻼﯾﺎ ﮨﮯ ، ﺑﮩﺮﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺳﮯ ﺟﻮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﺧﺘﯿﺎﺭ ﮐﯽ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﻋﻼﻭﮦ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻓﻀﯿﻠﺖ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ
ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﻟﮑﮭﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ :۔

’’ﺳﻮ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻋﻤﻮﻡ ﮨﮯ ﺗﺐ ﺗﻮ ﺛﺒﻮﺕ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻇﺎﮨﺮ ﮨﮯ ﻭﺭﻧﮧ ﺗﺴﻠﯿﻢ ﻟﺰﻭﻡ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺑﺪﻻﻟﺖ ﺍﻟﺘﺰﺍﻣﯽ ﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺗﺼﺮﯾﺤﺎﺕ ﻧﺒﻮﯼ ﻣﺜﻞ ‏[ﺍﻧﺖ ﻣﻨﯽ ﺑﻤﻨﺰﻟۃ ﮨﺎﺭﻭﻥ ﻟﻤﻮﺳﯽٰ ﺍﻻ ﺍٔﻧﮧ ﻻ ﻧﺒﯽ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ ﺍﻭﮐﻤﺎ ﻗﺎﻝ] ﺟﻮ ﺑﻈﺎﮨﺮ ﺑﻄﺮﺯ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻟﻔﻆ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺎﺧﻮﺫ ﮨﮯ ﺍﺱ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮐﺎﻓﯽ ﮨﮯ ﮐﯿﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﯾﮧ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ﺩﺭﺟﮧ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﮐﻮ ﭘﮩﻨﭻ ﮔﯿﺎ ﮨﮯ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺍﺳﯽ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻣﻨﻌﻘﺪ ﮨﻮﮔﯿﺎ ﮔﻮ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺑﺴﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻨﻘﻮﻝ ﻧﮧ ﮨﻮﮞ ﺳﻮ ﯾﮧ ﻋﺪﻡِ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﺑﺎﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﯼ ﯾﮩﺎﮞ ﺍﯾﺴﺎ ﮨﯽ ﮨﻮﮔﺎ ﺟﯿﺴﺎ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﻋﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﮐﻌﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﺋﺾ ﻭﻭﺗﺮ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ ، ﺑﺎﻭﺟﻮﺩﯾﮑﮧ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﺣﺪﯾﺚ ﻣﺸﻌﺮ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﮐﻌﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﯿﺴﺎ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﯾﺴﺎ ﮨﯽ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﻮﮔﺎ ﺍﺏ ﺩﯾﮑﮭﯿﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍﺱ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻋﻄﻒ ﺑﯿﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻠﺘﯿﻦ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﺭﺍﮎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻨﺎﺀ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺑﻐﺎﯾﺖ ﺩﺭﺟﮧ ﭼﺴﭙﺎﮞ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍٓﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺑﻮﺟﮧ ﺍﺣﺴﻦ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮨﺎﺗﮫ ﺳﮯ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﺎﺗﯽ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 12 ﻭ 13 ، ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﺷﺎﻋﺖ ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ)

ﺍﺱ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻧﮧ ﺻﺮﻑ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﯽ ﺩﻟﯿﻞ ﮨﯽ ﺳﮯ ﺗﺴﻠﯿﻢ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﻭﮦ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻟﻔﻆ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﮯ ﺟﻮ ﻗﺮﺍٓﻥ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺣﺪﯾﺚ ﺷﺮﯾﻒ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻣﺖ ﺳﮯ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﺲ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻓﺮﺍﺋﺾ ﻭﻏﯿﺮﮦ ﮐﯽ ﺭﮐﻌﺎﺕ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮨﮯ :۔

’’ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍﺱ ﺳﮯ ﺑﮍﮪ ﮐﺮ ﻟﯿﺠﯿﮯ ‏(ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﮐﮯ‏) ﺻﻔﺤﮧ ﻧﮩﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺳﻄﺮ ﺩﮨﻢ ﺳﮯ ﻟﯿﮑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﮧ ﺩﮨﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺳﻄﺮ ﮨﻔﺘﻢ ﺗﮏ ﻭﮦ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ ﻟﮑﮭﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺟﺲ ﺳﮯ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿت ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺗﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﺑﺪﻻﻟﺖ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﯽ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮﺟﺎﺋﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﯽ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ ﮐﻮ ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺑﺘﺎﯾﺎ ﮨﮯ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 70 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ)

ﭘﮭﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ :۔

’’ﺍﮔﺮ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﮐﻮ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺭﮐﮭﯿﮯ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﺍﺱ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮ ﺟﺎﺋﯿﮟ ﮔﮯ ﺟﺲ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ’’ﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﻤﺮ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﯿﺴﺮ ﻭﺍﻻﻧﺼﺎﺏ ﺭﺟﺲ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺍﻟﺸﯿﻄﺎﻥ‘‘ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻟﻔﻆ ﺭﺟﺲ ﺳﮯ ﻧﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﯼ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻇﺎﮨﺮﯼ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮﺗﯽ ﮨﯿﮞﺎﻭﺭ ﺍﺱ ﺍﯾﮏ ﻣﻔﮩﻮﻡ ﮐﺎ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﮧ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ ﻇﺎﮨﺮ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 53)

ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍٓﮔﮯ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ :۔

’’ﺑﺎﻟﺠﻤﻠﮧ ﺟﯿﺴﮯ ﺍﺧﺒﺎﺭ ﻗﯿﺎﻡ ِ ﺯﯾﺪ ﻭﻋﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﻭﻣﻌﺎﺭﺽ ﻗﯿﺎﻡ ﺯﯾﺪ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﻣﻊ ﺷﯽﺀ ﺯﺍﺋﺪ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺼﺪﯾﻖ ﮨﮯ ، ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﮨﯽ ﺍﺱ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﯿﺮﯼ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮ ﻣﻊ ﺷﯽﺀ ﺯﺍﺋﺪ ﻣﺼﺪﻕِ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﮧ ﮨﻮﮔﯽ ﻧﮧ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺍﻭﺭﻣﻌﺎﺭﺽ ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 53‏)

ﭘﮭﺮ ﻟﮑﮭﺎ :۔

’’ﺍﻭﺭ ﺳﻨﯿﮯ ﺍٓﭖ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻣﻌﻨﯽ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮨﮯ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺎﺧﻮﺫ ﮨﻮ ﯾﺎ ﮐﮩﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺳﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻧﮑﺎﺭ ﮨﯽ ﮐﺴﮯ ﮨﮯ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻟﻔﻆ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﮨﻮﻧﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﮨﻤﺎﺭﺍ ﮐﯿﺎ ﻧﻘﺼﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ﺟﻮ ﯾﮧ ﺍٓﭖ ﭘﺮﺩﮦ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍٓﻭﺍﺯﮦ ﺧﺮﻕِ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﮐﺴﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ‏( ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺗﺤﺬﯾﺮ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ۔ ﻧﺎﻗﻞ ‏) ﮐﻮ ﻏﻮﺭ ﺳﮯ ﺩﯾﮑﮭﺎ ﮨﻮﺗﺎ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻟﻔﻆ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺗﯿﻨﻮﮞ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﮞ ﭘﺮ ‏( ﯾﻌﻨﯽ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ، ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ۔ ﻧﺎﻗﻞ ‏) ﺑﺪﻻﻟﺖ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﯽ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﯽ ﮐﻮ ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ‘‘… ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 115‏)

ﻣﻌﻠﻮ ﻡ ﮨﻮﺍ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﺗﻮ ﺧﺎﺗﻤﯿﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﻭﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﻮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ۔ ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻧﺎ ﭼﺎﮦ ﺭﮨﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﻋﺎﻡ ﻃﻮﺭ ﭘﺮ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﯿﯿﻦ ﺳﮯ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍٓﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮨﯽ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﯽ ﺟﺎﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ،ﺟﺒﮑﮧ ﻣﯿﺮﮮ ﻧﺰﺩﯾﮏ ﺍﺱ ﺍٓﯾﺖ ﺳﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺗﯿﺴﺮﯼ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮﺗﯽ ﮨﯿﮟ ۔ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﻓﺮﻕ ﺟﺲ ﺳﮯ ﮐﭽﮫ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺳﻤﺠﮫ ﻟﯿﺎ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﮧ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﯾﻦ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮ ﮐﮯ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮ ﮐﯽ ﮨﮯ ، ﺟﺒﮑﮧ ﺣﻘﯿﻘﺖ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﯾﻦ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﯿﻦ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻔﺴﯿﺮ ﮐﻮ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﯽ ﻭﻣﮑﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﺎ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﯽ ﻧﮑﺘﮧ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﻣﺎ ﯾﺎ ﮨﮯ ۔

ﻗﺎﺭﺋﯿﻦ ﻣﺤﺘﺮﻡ ! ﮨﻢ ﻧﮯ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻋﺮﺽ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ﮐﮧ ﻋﺪﻝ ﻭﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﮐﺎ ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎ ﯾﮧ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﻟﮕﺎﻧﮯ ﺳﮯ ﭘﮩﻠﮯ ﺍﺱ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺑﯿﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﮐﻮ ﭘﮍﮬﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ، ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺱ ﻧﮯ ﺍﭘﻨﯽ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺸﺮﯾﺢ ﻭﺗﻮﺿﯿﺢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮐﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺳﮯ ﻗﺒﻮﻝ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ، ﯾﮧ ﮨﺮﮔﺰ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﮐﯽ ﺑﺎﺕ ﮐﻮ ﺳﯿﺎﻕ ﻭﺳﺒﺎﻕ ﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﭦ ﮐﺮ ، ﯾﺎ ﺷﺮﻁ ﮐﻮ ﺟﺰﺍ ﺳﮯ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﺰﺍ ﮐﻮ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﭦ ﮐﺮ، ﺍﯾﮏ ﻓﻘﺮﮦ ﺍﯾﮏ ﺻﻔﺤﮯ ﺳﮯ ﻟﮯ ﮐﺮ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺩﻭﺳﺮﺍ ﻓﻘﺮﮦ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺻﻔﺤﮯ ﺳﮯ ﻟﮯ ﮐﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﯾﮏ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺗﺮﺗﯿﺐ ﺩﮮ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺱ ﭘﺮ ﻓﺘﻮﯼ ﻟﮕﺎ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ۔ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﺗﻮ ﯾﮧ ﺗﮭﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺟﺐ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﻧﮯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ:

’’ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﺩﯾﻦ ﻭﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎٔﻣﻞ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 144 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ، ﮐﻮﺭﻧﮕﯽ ، ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ)

ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﮐﯽ ﮔﻨﺠﺎﺋﺶ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍٓﺗﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﺽ ﮐﯽ ۔

ﻓﯿﺼﻠﮧ ﮐﻦ ﺑﺎﺕ

ﺟﮩﺎﮞ ﺗﮏ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺖ ﻣﺮﺯﺍﺋﯿﮧ ﮐﺎ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻥ ﺳﮯ ﯾﮧ ﮐﮩﻮﮞ ﮔﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﻘﺎﺋﺪ ﮐﮯ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺣﻀﺮﺕ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼ ﺭﺣﻤۃ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﻋﻠﯿﮧ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺤﺮﯾﺮ ﮐﻮﺋﯽ ﻭﺯﻥ ﺭﮐﮭﺘﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺟﺲ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﮐﮯ ﻓﻘﺮﮮ ﺳﮯ ﻭﮦ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮮ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺳﯽ ﮐﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺟﯿﺴﺎﮐﮧ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﮨﻮﺍ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎؒ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮐﻮ ﻗﺮﺍٓﻥ ﮐﺮﯾﻢ ، ﺣﺪﯾﺚ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻉ ﺍﻣﺖ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ، ﺍﺱ ﻟﺌﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﯽ ﺗﺤﺮﯾﺮ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﮐﺮﺗﮯ ﮨﻮﺋﮯ ﻭﮦ ﺑﮯ ﺷﮏ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺭﮐﮭﯿﮟ ﻟﯿﮑﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﮦ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ‏(ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﮦ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﻧﺎﻡ ﮐﯽ ﮐﺴﯽ ﭼﯿﺰ ﺳﮯ ﻭﺍﻗﻒ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ‏) ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺭﮐﮭﻨﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﮯ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﯾﮟ ۔ ﺍﮔﺮ ﯾﮧ ﺩﻭﻧﻮﮞ ﺑﺎﺗﯿﮟ ﺟﻤﻊ ﮨﻮﺳﮑﺘﯽ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﮐﺮﻧﯽ ﭼﺎﮨﺌﯿﮟ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻤﻊ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮨﻮﺳﮑﺘﯿﮟ ﺗﻮ ﺍﺱ ﺳﮯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮨﻮﮔﺎ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻧﮩﻮﮞ ﻧﮯ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﯼؒ ﮐﯽ ﺟﺲ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﮐﺮﻧﮯ ﮐﯽ ﮐﻮﺷﺶ ﮐﯽ ﮨﮯ ﻭﮦ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﮯ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﯾﮧ ’’ﻧﺎ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﯽ‘‘ ﺷﺎﯾﺪ ﺍﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﭘﯿﺸﻮﺍ ﻣﺮﺯﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﯾﺎﻧﯽ ﺳﮯ ﻭﺭﺛﮯ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻣﻠﯽ ﮨﮯ ﮐﯿﻮﻧﮑﮧ ﻣﺮﺯﺍ ﻏﻼﻡ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻗﺎﺩﯾﺎﻧﯽ ﺗﻮ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺍﻭﭘﺮ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﮯ ‏(ﺑﺰﻋﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ) ﻭﺣﯽ ﻭﺍﻟﮩﺎﻡ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺑﮭﯽ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺳﻤﺠﮫ ﭘﺎﺗﺎ ﺗﮭﺎ ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﺒﮭﯽ ﺗﻮ ﮐﺴﯽ ﮨﻨﺪﻭ ﺳﮯ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﭘﻮﭼﮭﺎ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ، ﮐﺒﮭﯽ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﮐﺴﯽ ﻣﺮﯾﺪ ﺳﮯ ﺑﺬﺭﯾﻌﮧ ﺧﻂ ﺍﺱ ﮐﺎ ﻣﻔﮩﻮﻡ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ﺍﻭﺭ ﮐﺒﮭﯽ ﺑﺎﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﺭﮦ ﺑﺎﺭﮦ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺗﮏ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺍﻭﭘﺮ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﻟﯽ ﻭﺣﯽ ﮐﻮ ﻧﮧ ﺳﻤﺠﮫ ﮐﺮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎﻭﯾﻞ ﮐﺮﺗﺎ ﺭﮨﺎ ‏( ﺗﻔﺼﯿﻞ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍٓﺋﮯ ﮔﯽ ‏) ۔

ﺍﻭﺭ ﺟﮩﺎﮞ ﺗﮏ ﻣﯿﺮﮮ ﺍﻥ ﮐﺮﻡ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﺅﮞ ﮐﺎ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﮨﮯ ﺟﻮ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﺁﭖ ﮐﻮ ” ﻣﺠﺎﮨﺪﯾﻦ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ” ﺑﮭﯽ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﻭﺭ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺁﻧﮑﮫ ﺑﻨﺪ ﮐﺮﮐﮯ ﻣﮑﮭﯽ ﭘﺮ ﻣﮑﮭﯽ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﮯ ﮨﻮﮮ ﯾﮧ ﻧﻌﺮﮮ ﻟﮕﺎﺗﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﮐﮧ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺗﻮﻯ ﺭﺣﻤﻪ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺗﮭﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﮦ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﺀ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺭﮐﮭﺘﮯ ﺗﮭﮯ ﺍﻥ ﮐﯽ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﻣﯿﮟ ﻋﺮﺽ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺳﮯ ﮈﺭﯾﮟ، ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﭘﻨﮯ ﻣﺴﻠﮑﯽ ﺗﻌﺼﺐ ﮐﯽ ﻭﺟﮧ ﺳﮯ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﮐﺎ ﺧﻮﻥ ﻧﮧ ﮐﺮﯾﮟ، ﺍﻭﺭ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﮐﮯ ﯾﮧ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﭘﮍﮬﯿﮟ:

’’ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﺩﯾﻦ ﻭﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎٔﻣﻞ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ ‘‘ ۔
‏(ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﮦ ﻋﺠﯿﺒﮧ ، ﺻﻔﺤﮧ 144 ، ﻣﮑﺘﺒﮧ ﻗﺎﺳﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻮﻡ ، ﮐﻮﺭﻧﮕﯽ ، ﮐﺮﺍﭼﯽ‏) …

ﺟﺐ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻮﻻﻧﺎ ﻧﮯ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﻋﻘﯿﺪﮦ ﺑﯿﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﻣﺎ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﺁﭖ ﮐﻮ ﮐﯿﺎ ﺣﻖ ﭘﮩﻨﭽﺘﺎ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﮐﻔﺮ ﮐﮯ ﻓﺘﻮﻭﮞ ﮐﯽ ﺗﻮﭘﯿﮟ ﭼﻼﺗﮯ ﺟﺎﺋﯿﮟ؟ ﺩﻧﯿﺎ ﮐﺎ ﻭﮦ ﮐﻮﻧﺴﺎ ﻣﻔﺘﯽ ﮨﮯ ﺟﻮ ﺍﯾﺴﮯ ﺁﺩﻣﯽ ﭘﺮ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﻓﺘﻮﯼٰ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺟﻮ ﺻﺎﻑ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺍﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮐﺮﮮ ﮐﮧ ’’ﺍﭘﻨﺎ ﺩﯾﻦ ﻭﺍﯾﻤﺎﻥ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﮧ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﻭﺭﻧﺒﯽ ﮐﮯ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﮐﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻝ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺗﺎٔﻣﻞ ﮐﺮﮮ ﺍﺳﮯ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﺳﻤﺠﮭﺘﺎ ﮨﻮﮞ‘‘؟؟

ﻧﯿﺰ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺩﯾﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﮐﮯ ﮨﺰﺍﺭﻭﮞ ﻻﮐﮭﻮﮞ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺘﯿﺎﻥ ﮐﺮﺍﻡ ﮨﻮﮮ ، ﺁﺝ ﺑﮭﯽ ﺍﻥ ﮐﮯ ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﻓﺘﺎﺀ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﮨﯿﮟ، ﮐﯿﺎ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﯾﮏ ﻣﻔﺘﯽ ﯾﺎ ﮐﺴﯽ ﺍﯾﮏ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻧﮯ ﯾﮧ ﻓﺘﻮﯼٰ ﺩﯾﺎ ﮐﮧ ” ﺍﻧﺤﻀﺮﺕ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﮐﮯ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﺟﺎﺭﯼ ﮨﮯ؟ ” ؟ ﮐﯿﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺩﯾﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﻮ ﮐﺎﻓﺮ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﮐﮩﺘﮯ؟ ﮐﯿﺎ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﯽ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ ﺗﺤﻔﻆ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﯽ ﺗﻨﻈﯿﻢ ﺍﺳﯽ ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺩﯾﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﺳﮯ ﻣﻨﺴﻠﮏ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ؟ ﮐﯿﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺀ ﺩﯾﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﮐﺎ ﺭﺩ ﻗﺎﺩﯾﺎﻧﯿﺖ ﭘﺮ ﻟﭩﺮﯾﭽﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ؟ ﺗﻮ ﭘﮭﺮ ﮐﺘﻨﯽ ﻧﮧ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻓﯽ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮧ ﺑﯿﮏ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻗﻠﻢ ﻟﮑﮫ ﺩﯾﺎ ﺟﺎﺋﮯ ﮐﮧ “ﻣﮑﺘﺐ ﺩﯾﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﻭﺍﻟﮯ ﺗﻮ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺕ ﮐﮯ ﻣﻨﮑﺮ ﮨﯿﮟ”؟؟؟؟ ﺍﻋﺪﻟﻮﺍ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻗﺮﺏ ﻟﻠﺘﻘﻮﻯ.

‏(ﺣﺎﻓﻆ ﻋﺒﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ‏)

The Hadith of 73 Sects & the Qadiani Distortion

The Qadiani cult often quotes the Hadith:

Abdullah bin Amarra (radhiyallahu anhu) relates that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

‘Surely things will happen to my people as happened earlier to Israelites, they will resemble each other like one shoe in a pair resembles the other to the extent that if anyone among the Israelites has openly committed adultery to his mother there will be some who will do this in my Ummah as well, verily the Israelites were divided into 72 sects but my people will be divided into 73 sects, all of them will be in the fire except one.’ The companions asked. ‘Who are they O Messenger of Allah,’ Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said. `They are those who will be like me and my companions.’ [Tirmidhi – Kitabul Iman]

There is no doubt the saying of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is true, the Ummah has split into many factions, yet of all these groups we still share fundamental beliefs and one of them being that Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is the final Prophet.

The Qadiani cult claim themselves to be the ‘73rd Sect’ prophesised by Rasulullah صلى الله عليه وسلم. After reading the above hadith we notice that there is no mention of the 73rd sect being on the right path. For arguments sake and to simplify this issue, let’s say that the Qadianis are the 73rd sect.

Some important points to note before we go any further:

· Qadianis claim that as long as someone recites the Kalimah, no one has the right to call them Kafir.

· Qadianis claim that Mirza Ghulam Qadiani Dajjal was the messiah who came to unite the world.

· According to the Hadith there will only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed themselves to be the last.

· The Qadianis claim that they are the ONLY group who are all united

Though most Qadianis know of the split in 1914 which resulted in another movement called ‘Lahori Ahmadiyya Jamaat’ What many innocent members of this cult do not know is how their own religion is split into many more factions.

A list of the different Qadiani groups:

· Lahori Movement

· Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen

· Anwar-ul-Islam Movement Of Nigeria

· Jamaat Ul Sahih al-Islam

·  Green Ahmadiyya

· Indonesians who believe Mirza Qadiani Dajjal was just a teacher

· The Ahmadiyya Reform Movement

· Al-Ahmadiyyat

All these groups believe in Mirza Qadiani Dajjal, whether to be a prophet, messiah, imam, reformer or just a teacher. So with the Qadianis claiming to be the 73rd sect, it would then mean that these groups formed after them have increased the number of sects:

· 73rd Qadiani Ahmadiyya,

· 74th Lahori Movement,

· 75th Jamaat Ahmadiyya Al Mouslemeen,

· 76th Anwar-ul-Islam Movement Of Nigeria,

· 77th Jamaat Ul Sahih Al Islam,

· 78th The Infamous Qadiani Movement,

· 79th Green Ahmadiyya

· 80th Teacher group

· 81st Al-Ahmadiyyat

The Hadith of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم stated there would only be 73 sects and the Qadianis have claimed to being the 73rd sect, it would mean that with the creation of these other groups, either the Hadith is wrong (nauzubillah) or that these other groups formed after the Qadiani group are all Kafirs and out of the fold of Islam (as there will be only 73 sects). This would leave the Qadianis in a tricky position as they claim any person who recites the Kalimah cannot be called a Kafir.

As Muslims it is simple for us to clarify the dilemma that the Qadianis have been left with. When Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم declared that no one has the right to call a reciter of the Kalimah a Kafir, it clearly means that no individual knows what is in the heart of the other. During the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed term, many people would come forward and declare that he صلى الله عليه وسلم is a Prophet of Allah, many were sincere and others were hypocrites. His rightly guided companions would hold doubts about certain individuals as to whether they just wanted to spy & create fitnah. The Qadianis do not fall into this category as we know what is in their hearts. The followers of Musailama Kazzaab were declared Kafir even though they recited the Kalimah, prayed 5 times a day, fasted and declared Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to be the Messenger of Allah. Only because they believed in another prophet (Musailama) they were declared Kafirs. It’s the same with Qadianis who believe in Mirza Qadiani Dajjal to be a prophet.

If Mirza Qadiani Dajjal was the messiah then why do the Qadianis continue to split into more and more factions knowing well that the Messiah is supposed to unite the Muslims? If these are just ‘rebellious’ groups, as some Qadianis claim, then are not you the same as you have rebelled against Allah Ta’ala and his final Messenger Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم?

Three options have been left for the Qadianis on the issue of the 73 sects:

· The Hadith is completely wrong as 81 sects have now been formed.

· The rest of those break away factions are Kafirs.

· All the followers of Mirza Qadiani are Kafirs.

Signs Of The Saved Sect

“And hold fast altogether to the Rope of Allah and do not become divided.” [Qur’an 3:103]

“And be not those who commit shirk (associate partners With Allah), those who split up their Deen (religion) and become sects;
each rejoicing in what is with them.” [Qur’an 30:31-32]

Hadith No.1

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “The Jews split into 71 groups; one will enter Paradise and 70 will enter Hell. The Christians split into 72 groups; 71 will enter Hell and one will enter Paradise. By Him in Whose Power is the life of Muhammad, without doubt, my Ummah will be divided into 73 groups. Only one will enter Paradise and 72 will enter Hell.” When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, “The main (al-Jama’ah) body of the Muslims.”  [Ibn Majah Kitab al-Fitan]

Hadith no.2

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “There was disagreement amongst Jews and they split into 72 groups. In exactly the same way, there will be disagreement and divisions in my Ummah. It will split into 73 groups. Apart from one of those groups, all the remaining 72 will be thrown into Hell.” When asked which group will be on the right path, the Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم replied, “The group on the right path, which will enter Paradise, will be the group which follows my Sunna and that of my Sahaba and this will be the largest group of Muslims.” [Tirmidhi, Imam Ahmad, Abu Daud, Mishkat]

Hadith No.3

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “Without doubt my Ummah will never be gathered in misguidance. Whenever you see disagreement, then hold fast to the Sawad-e-A’zam (the great majority)” [Ibn Majah]

Hadith No.4

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “Follow the way of the largest group of Muslims! For, he who deviates from this group will be thrown into Hell!” [Ibn Majah]

Hadith No.5

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “The devil continually pursues humans as a wolf pursues sheep. The wolf only dares to attack those sheep which have separated from the rest of the flock and are standing alone. And so, my followers and my devotees! Save yourselves from being caught in the traps of misguidance and firmly remain with the largest and most well-known group of Muslims!” [Imam Ahmad]

Hadith No.6

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “Allah will never allow my Ummah to unite upon misguidance and incorrect beliefs. Allah’s mercy, blessings and protection are with the largest group of Muslims. And he who deviates from this largest group of Muslims will be thrown into Hell.” [Tirmidhi]

Hadith no.7

The Beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “He who deviates from the largest group of Muslims, even as much as a hand span, has himself cut off his connection with Islam.”  [Abu Daud, Imam Ahmed]

Hadith No.8

The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم warned his Followers: “I have left you upon clear proofs, its night is like its day, and no one deviates from it except one who is destroyed, and whoever lives (long) from amongst you will see great controversy. So stick to what you know from my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khalifahs – cling to that with your molar teeth.” [Imam Ahmed, Ibn Majah]

Having quoted no less than eight Hadiths, from authentic sources, four points stand out:

1. The Muslims will divide into 73 Groups
2. The largest group will be the right group
3. To stick to the main body
4. Through time there will always be one group who have the Aqeedah of Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم & his Companions.

The Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is the main body of Islam, with the vast majority of followers. Qadiani’s at most are 2 Million, They claim 200 million but still they are a minority.

Please note: Qadianis cannot provide a solid chain of beliefs leading through time direct to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Many of the claim and beliefs of Mirza Qadiani were newly formed. Instead of Qadianis wasting time in finding these 73 sects, we request you study the beliefs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamah, who are the one rightly guided group with a solid chain of beliefs, knowledge and practice leading directly to the last Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.

Explanation Of the Verse Regarding Jesus (‘Isa Alayhissalaam) “Caused to Die” in Qur’an

By Mufti Muhammad Shafi (rahimahullah)

When  Allah  said:  “O  ‘Isa!  I  am  to  take  you  in  full  and  raise  you  towards  Myself,  and  cleanse  you  of  those  who disbelieve,  and  place  those  who  follow  you  above  those who  disbelieve,  upto  the  Day  of  Doom.  Then  to  Me  is your  return,  whereupon  I  shall  judge  between  you  in  what  you  have  been  differing  in.”   [Qur’an 3:55]

In  these  verses  the  miraculous  event  of  the  Ascension  of  Sayyidina  ‘Isa  (Jesus  Christ)  has  been  mentioned. 

Explanation  of  important  words  in  the  verse
Some  sects  (&  Qadiani  Kafirs) which  deny,  contrary  to  the  belief  of  the  entire  Muslim   community,  the  Ascension  of  Sayyidina  ‘Isa  (alayhissalaam)  (Jesus  Christ),  his  being  alive  in  the  heavens  and  his  descension  towards  the  later  times,  have  worked  through  the  words  and  meanings  of  these  verses  to  open  doors  of  distortion  in  the  Qur’anic  text.  Therefore,  it  seems  appropriate  that  these  words  be  explained  in  some  details.

The  word, Mutawaffi’  in Innee Mutawaffika takes tawaffi as  its  verbal  noun  with  its  root  being wafyun.  Lexically,  the  word  means  ‘to  take  in  full’.  This  being  its  real  meaning,  its  derivations  wafa,  ifa’  and  ‘istifa’  are  used  to  convey  that  sense.  In  fact,  the  real  meaning  of  tawaffi  is  ‘to  take  in  full’  which  is  universalIy  confirmed  by  all  lexicons  of  the  Arabic  language.  Since  man  completes  his  appointed  time  at  the  hour  of death  and  the  spirit  or  soul  given  by  Allah  is  taken  back  fully  and  conclusively,  it  is  in  that  context  that  this  word  is  also  used  figuratively  in the  sense  of  death.  A  simple  form  of  death  is  the  daily  sleep  of  human  beings.  For  this  too,  the  Holy  Qur’an  uses  the  same  word  when  it  says: 

‘Allah  takes  away  lives  of  the  living  at  the  time  of  their  death  and  of  those  that  do  not  die,  in  their  sleep’.  [Qur’an 39:42]

Hafiz  Ibn  Taimiyyah  says  in  al-Jawab  al-Sahih  v. 2,  p. 83:

Al-tawaffi,  in  the  Arabic  language,  means:  to  exact  fully  or  take  in  full.  It  takes  three  forms; 

the  first:  to  take  in  sleep; 

the  second:  to  take  in  death;  and 

the  third:  to  take  the  soul  and  the  body  all  together.

In  Kulliyat  Abu  al-Baqa’,  it  is  said: 

Al-tawaffi  is  putting  to  death  and  exacting  of  the  soul  in  common  usage  while,  in  the  classical  usage,  it  is  taking  in  full  and  the  exacting  of  the  due  right.

Therefore,  the  majority  of  scholars  have  translated  the  word  Mutawaffika in  the  verse  under  study  in  the  sense  of  ‘taking  in  full’.  This  means  that  Allah  will  not  leave  Sayyidina  ‘Isa  in  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  rather  He  would  take  him  away  which  would  be  in  the  form  that  he  would  be  risen  unto  Him  in  the  heavens. 

This  is  how  the  words  ‘I  am  to  take  you  in  full’  have  been  interpreted  by  the  majority  of  the  scholars.  However,  some  authentic  commentators  of  the  Holy  Qur’an  have  interpreted  these  words  in  the  sense  of  ‘giving  death’ also,  but  they  do  not  mean  that  the  death  of  Sayyidina  ‘Isa  (alayhissalaam)  will  occur  at  the  hands  of  his  enemies.  The  true  meaning  of  the  verse,  according  to  these  commentators  is  as  follows:

Allah  Almighty  said  two  things  to  comfort  ‘Isa  Maseeh  (alayhissalaam)  (Jesus)  at  a  time  when  the  Jews  were  bent  on  killing  him. 

One:  That  his  death  will  come,  not  at  their  hands  in  the  form  of  killing,  but  that  it  would  be  a  natural  death. 

Two:  In  order  to  rescue  him  from  the  evil  designs  of  those  people,  Allah  Almighty  will,  at  that  time,  raise  Jesus  towards  Him. 

This  explanation  is  exactly  what  has  been  reported  from  Sayyidina  Ibn  ‘Abbas  (radhiyallahu  anhu)  as  quoted  by  al-Suyuti  in  his  al-Durr  al-Manthur  v. 2, p. 36  on  the  authority  of  several  narrators.

The  gist  of  this  tafsir  or  explanation  is  that  tawaffi does  mean  giving  death,  but  there  is  the  element  of  precedence  and  sequence  in  the words  used.  The  fact  of  Raafi’uka (I  shall  raise  you)  will  come  first  and  that  Mutawaffika (I  shall  give  you  death)  later.  Now  at  this  point,  the  wisdom  behind  mentioning  the  phenomenon  of  the  earlier  lies  in  the  hint  that  it  gives  about  the  events  which  are  to  come  later  on.  It  means  that  raising  towards  Allah  will  not  last  forever;  it  would  be  temporary  and  then,  he  would  return  to  the  mortal  world  and  prevail  over  enemies  and  later  on,  death  will  come  to  him  in  a  natural  way. 

Thus,  the  event  of  his  return  from  heaven  and  his  death  after  having  established  his  victory  in  the  world  was  not  only  a  miracle  but  a  consummation  of  the  honour  and  integrity  of  Jesus  (‘Isa  alayhissalaam).  In  addition  to  that,  the  unfounded  Christian  belief  in  the  divinity  of  Jesus  was  also  refuted.  Had  it  not  been  so,  the  event  of  Jesus  being  raised  towards  the  heavens  alive  would  have  further  strengthened  their  false belief  that  he  too  was  Living  and  Eternal  like  Allah.  Therefore,  by  introducing  the  word  Mutawaffika (pointing  out  to  his  death)  first,  all  those  misconceptions  which  might  have  arisen  from  ‘raising  of  Jesus’  have  been  refuted  in  advance. 

The  reality  is  that  disbelievers  and  polytheists  have  always  been  vehemently  opposed  to  prophets  (alayhimussalaam).  And  parallel  to  that  there  has  been  the  customary  practice  of  Allah  –  when  a  people  unto  whom  a  prophet  has  been  sent  stick  to  their  own  opinion,  do  not  listen  to  the prophet  and  do  not  believe  in  him  even  after  having  witnessed  the  miracles,  then,  one  of  the  following  two  counter-actions  were  taken: 

Either  those  people  were  annihilated  through  some  natural  calamity  as  was  done  with  ‘Ad  and  Thamud  and  the  peoples  of  Prophets  Lut and  Saalih  (alayhimussalaam)  or,  alternatively  Allah  would  instruct  His  prophet  to  migrate from  the  habitat  of  disbelievers  and  go  to  some  other  place.  It  was  there  that  they  were  provided  with  such  power  and  glory  that  they  finally  achieved  victory  against  the  people  whom  they  were  sent  to.  For  example  Prophet  Ibrahim  (alayhissalaam),  migrated  from  Iraq  and  sought  refuge  in  Syria.  Similarly,  Prophet  Musa  (Moses) alayhissalaam,  migrated  from  Egypt  and  came  to  Madyan.  Finally,  the  Last  prophet,  Muhammad  (sallallaahu  alayhi  wasallam)  migrated  from  Makkah  and  came  to  Madinah.  It  was  from  there  that  he  finally  attacked  Makkah  and  conquered  it.  This  raising  of  Jesus  to  the  heavens  to  outmaneuver  the  threatening  designs  of  the  Jews  was,  in  fact,  an  act  of  emigration  in  its  own  way  following  which  he  would  return  to  this  world  and  achieve  total  victory  over  the  Jews. 

Now  comes  the  question  as  to  why  this  emigration  of  his,  quite  separate  from  the  rest,  has  the  heavens  as  the  destination?  So,  for  that matter,  Allah  Almighty  has  Himself  said  about  him  that  his  case  is  like  that  of  Adam  (alayhissalaam).  The  way  in  which  Adam’s  (alayhissalaam)   birth  differs  from  the  normal  birth  of  the  rest  of  creation,  (i.e.,  without  a  father  and  a  mother)  so  it  is  that  the  birth  of  Jesus  took  a  miraculous  form  different  from  the  normal  birth  of  human  beings;  and  his  death  too,  taking  a  unique  and  unmatched  form,  will  materialize  after  thousands  of  years  following  his  return  to  the  world  –  unprecedented  indeed.  Why  then,  should  one  be  surprised  if  his  emigration  too  follows  some  such  unique pattern?

These  marvels  of  nature  led  the  ignorant  among  Christians  into  believing  and  declaring  that  he  was  God,  while  deliberation  into  the  various  aspects  of  these  very  marvels,  are  clear  proofs  of  his  servitude  as  a  human  being  to  God,  obedience  to  the  Divine  will  and  the  demonstration  of  human  traits.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  Holy  Qur’an  has  made  a  pointed  reference  to  the  refutation  of  belief  in  the  Godhood  of  Jesus  on  all  such  occasions.  The  raising  towards  the  heavens  would have  made  this  doubt  all  the  more  strong.  Therefore,  by  bringing  the word  mutawaffika  (I am  to  take  you  in  full)  earlier,  this  doubt  was  totally  eliminated.  Thus  we  come  to  realize  that  this  verse,  no  doubt,  aims  at  negating  the  Jewish  plans  since  they  were  all  set  to  crucify  and  kill  Jesus  (alayhissalaam),  and  that  Allah  Almighty  made  their  plans come  to  nothing.  Moreover,  this  precedence  and  sequence  of  words  became  the  mode  of  refuting  the  Christians  as  well,  that  Jesus  was  no  God  who  was  never  to  die  but  that  a  time  will  come  when  he  too  will  meet  his  death.

In  his  Tafsir  Imam  al-Razi  has  said  that  such  precedence  and  sequence  occurs  frequently  in  the  noble  Qur’an  in  order  to  cover  similar  expedient  considerations  under  which  an  event  due  later  has  been mentioned  first  while  an  event  due  earlier  has  been  placed  after  that. [al-Tafsir  al-Kabir,  v. 2, p. 48]

As  for Rafi’uka Ila’yy (And  I  shall  raise  you  towards  Me),  the  meaning  is  clear.  Addressing  Jesus  here,  it  has  been  said:  ‘I  shall  raise  you  to- wards  Me’.  Every  one  knows  that  Jesus  is  not  the  name  of  just  the  spirit  but  that  of  the  spirit  and  the  body  of  Jesus. 

Now  taking  the  raising  of  Jesus  in  the  sense  that  the  act  of  raising  was  spiritual  only,  and  not  Physical,  is  all  wrong.  AS  far  as  the  word,  raf  (raising)  is  concerned,  there  are  occasions  when  it  is  also  used  to  indicate  raising  of ranks  as  it  appears  in  the  following  verses  of  the  noble  Qur’an:

…And  raised  some  of  you  in  ranks  over  others [Qur’an 6:165].

…and  Allah  will  raise  up  in  rank  those  of  you  who  believe  and those  who  have  been  given  knowledge  [Qur’an 58:11].

So,  it  is  obvious  that  the  word,  raf (raising),  in  the  sense  of  the  raising  of  rank  or  status  has  been  used  figuratively  in  view  of  the  context  of  the  aforementioned  verses.  There  is  no  reason  here  to  ignore  the  real  meaning  and  go  by  that  which  is  figurative.  Moreover,  by  using  the  word,  ila’ :  (towards)  along  with  the  word,  raf  (raising),  at  this  particular  place,  the  possibility  of  such  a  figurative  meaning  has  been  totally  eliminated.  What  is  said  in  this  verse  is rafi’uka ilaiyya:  I  shall  raise  you  towards  Me.  Then  there  is  the  verse  from  Surah  al-Nisa’  [4:158],  which  refutes  the  belief  of  Jews;  there  too,  what was  said  is:  the  Jews  certainly  did  not  kill  Jesus,  instead,  Allah  raised  him  towards  Himself.  This  later  expression  is  used  for  nothing  but  the  raising  alive  of  the  spirit  and  the  body. 

Explained  this  far  were  the  words  of  the  verse.

Refuting the Baseless Contentions of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani


[Darul Uloom Trinidad & Tobago]

Among the many deviated sects who departed from the true teachings of Islam is that of the Qadianis. The Qadianis or Ahmadis are the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who was born in Qadian in the year 1839 or 1840 C.E.

During his lifetime he laid claims to several different positions and thus managed to obtain followers in different (self-acclaimed) roles. A study of his movement reveals that first of all he claimed IN THE YEAR 1884, to be a revivalist and a reformer. Seven years later he made an announcement stating that he was the promised messiah and the messiah of the age. He further laid claim to his prophethood in 1901 and in the year 1904 he announced that he was Krishna.

            Based on the different claims made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad his followers fell into different brackets and sections differing from each other.  The two main groups are:

1)         Those who believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a prophet and considered non Ahmadis as unbelievers.

2)         Those who believe that Mirza Ghulam is the promised Messiah and a reformer. They separated from the main group of the Qadianis after the death of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. They are known as the Lahori Ahmadis.

However, whatever they may regard him as, they are unanimously held by the recognized authorities of Islam to be non-muslims. Whether they may belong to the ‘Rabwa group’ or the ‘Lahori group’, they are all called Qadianis and Ahmadis.


He said, “Aa’eel came to me and He has chosen me. At this time Allah has put the name of Jibraeel Aa’eel because he comes to me again and again.” (Haqiqatul Wahi written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 103, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 22 pg. 106)

“I swear by Allah saying that these are the words of Allah which are revealed to me.”   (Haqiqatul Wahi written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 387, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 22 pg. 503)

“And I swear by the lord in whose hand is my life that He has sent me and He has placed my name as a Nabi (Prophet) and He has called me the promised Messiah.” (Haqiqatul Wahi written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 387, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 22 pg. 503)

“What a vain and corrupt belief it is to believe that after the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.) revelation has been stopped forever. I swear by Allah that in these times there is no one far away from such a belief than me. Whichever religion preaches such a belief I say that it is a religion of Satan. I have firm belief that such a religion leads to the fire of Hell.” (Zamima Baraheen Ahmadiyah by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 5 pg. 184, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 21 pg. 354)

“It is very clear and evident that after the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.) the door of Prophethood is still open.” (Haqiqatun Nabuwah Vol. 1 pg. 228 by Mirza Basheerudeen, son of Mirza Ghulam)

“Afterwards revelation kept coming to me as the rain. He (Allah) has clearly addressed me as a prophet. However, in this manner, that on one side I am a follower of Prophet Muhammad and on the other side I am a Prophet.” (Haqiqatul Wahi written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 150, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 22 pg. 153-154)

In the above-mentioned references it is clear that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has claimed to be a prophet and rejected the finality of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). In other writings he has also claimed to be the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) himself.

      In his books, Haqiqatul Wahi (pg 67) and Ruhani Khaza-in (vol. 22 pg. 503) he mentioned the following, “Twenty six years ago Allah had named me Muhammad and Ahmad.” In another book he wrote, “I have repeatedly stated that I am that Prophet, who is the seal of all Prophets, twenty years ago I have been given the name of Muhammad and Ahmad.” (Ruhani Khaza-in vol.18 pg. 212)

      He further wrote, “I am Adam, I am Noah, I am David, I am Jesus the son of Mary and I am Muhammad (A.S.).” (Haqiqatul Wahi written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 521, Ruhani Khaza-in written by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Vol. 22 pg. 521)

            Then reciting the following verse, “Muhammad is the Rasool (Messenger) of Allah,” he says, “In this revelation I have been named Muhammad and a Rasool (Messenger).”

      “There is no doubt that Allah has again sent Muhammad to Qadian, so that he can fulfill His promise.” (Kalimatul Fasl – Mirza Basheer, son of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad pg. 105)

In his book Kashti Nuh Pg. 56 and in Ruhani Khaza-in Vol. 19 Pg. 61, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian wrote, “Blessed is that person who recognized me. I am the last of all Allah’s paths and the last of His lights. Unfortunate is that person who forsakes me because besides me there is darkness.”   Claiming superiority over the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.) he wrote, “For this Prophet (i.e. Muhammad S.A.) the moon went into eclipse and for me both the sun and moon went into eclipse.” (Ruhani Khaza-in Vol. 19 pg. 183)

It has also been a custom of the followers of Mirza Ghulam to send Darood and Salaam upon him. This is evident from the following writings of Muhammad Yusuf Qadiani in his Al Fazl Qadiani Vol. 7 No. 100 published on 30th June 1920. He wrote,

            “O Imam of the creation, peace and salutations upon you

            You are the moon removing darkness, peace and salutations upon you

      You are the awaited Mahdi and promised Isa

      And the chosen Ahmad, peace and salutations upon you

      It was in Qadian you manifested

      As the sun of Guidance, peace and salutations upon you.”

A study of the life of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad reveals him as a person who continuously changed from one claim to another until he finally claimed divinity with Allah. In the very early stages of his mission he claimed to be only a saint and a reformer. At that time he openly proclaimed his belief in the finality of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). In one of his books “Hamamatul Bushra” Pg. 34 he said, “Our Prophet Muhammad (S.A.) is called the last of the prophets and the prophet has said, ‘there will be no prophet after me”. Now if we believe in any other prophet after him it will mean the reopening of the gate of revelation, which is closed after him. How can any prophet come after our prophet when the chain of revelation has been snapped forever after him and he has been made the last of the Prophets.’

In many other books written by Mirza Ghulam, he emphatically stated that there is no Prophet after the Prophet Muhammad. Some of these references are, ‘Izala-I-Awham pgs. 577, 761, Kitabul Bariyyah pg. 84. In one of his pamphlets dated 20thShabaan 1314 A.H. he considered that person cursed who claimed prophethood after the Prophet Muhammad. About himself he wrote, “Anybody who accuses me of anything more than this is not at all God fearing and honest. In short I am not claiming prophethood, but only sainthood and revivalisthood.”   (Mujade diyat)

Further to this Mirza claimed that he received inspiration and communication from Allah. In Mawahibur Rahman Pg. 66, he said, “God communicates with and addresses his friends among the followers of the prophet. But they are not, in fact, prophets as God has perfected Islam in every way. He further stated, “I have no claim to prophethood, it is your understanding. It is not necessary that those who claim to receive inspiration should turn into prophets. I am a follower of Muhammad and fully obey Allah and His Prophet.” (Jang Muqaddas pg. 67) He then claims that the inspirations address him as a Prophet. He wrote, “It is a fact that the inspiration that this bondsman of God receives ascribe him constantly as prophet and messenger, but is not used in a literal sense. This is just a figurative term of God and that is why such words are used. I confess that no prophet in the real sense of the term shall come after the prophet; it may be new or old. The Holy Quraan disallows such advent of prophets. But God has every right to address some inspired person with such words as prophet or messenger in a metaphorical sense.”  (Siraj-I-Munir pg. 2-8)

Mirza further stated, “The position is that this humble being receives inspirations continuously for the last 20 years and on many occasions I am addressed as a messenger, but anyone who thinks that it actually means prophet or messenger is wrong. I would ask my followers not to use such words about me in their day to day conversations as it will open the flood gate of mischief.” (Sermon of Mirza Ghulam in Al Hakam 18th August 1899)

Having negated the concept of Prophethood at this stage, he devised a new name known as an addressee for himself and having done that he then discloses himself as a prophet. In Ayena Kamalat pg. 383, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said, “I am not a prophet, rather I am an addressee of God and a communicator with Him so that I could receive the religion.” He further said, “I am laying claim not to prophethood, but to an addressee-ship which is put forward at the behest of God. And there is no doubt about it that an addressee has in him the ingredients of prophethood. If an addressee could be called a figurative prophet or an abstract prophet, it does not mean that it entails claim to prophethood.”   (Izala-i-Awham pg. 421) However in pg. 569 of the same book, he wrote, “An addressee is a messenger among the followers and an incomplete prophet also. He is a follower in the sense that he follows fully the way of the Prophet and gains light from the light of his prophethood. That is the way God deals with him as with the prophet. An addressee has a status of an intermediary between the prophet and his followers. He is a perfect follower as well as a prophet. And it is essential for an addressee that he should be like a counterpart of a prophet and he gets the same name as that of a prophet.” Opening the doors of his claim to messengership he wrote, “The promised Messiah who is to come will have this symbol that he will be a prophet of God, that is he will receive revelations from Allah. But here it does not mean a perfect prophethood as the last seal has been attached to the perfect prophethood. But it means an addressee who will receive his light from the light of the prophethood of Muhammad. And this bounty is especially given to this humble person.” (Izala-I-Awham pg. 701) In trying to explain this claim he states, “I do not claim to be Christ, the son of Mary, rather I claim to be a counterpart of him.” (Tabligh Risalat Vol. 2 pg. 21) However it was not long after that he openly made the claim that he was Christ, the Messiah. In one of his famous books, Kashti-I-Nooh pg. 47 he wrote, “The mystery is now cleared, that my claim to messiahship is just what I have been describing in my books.  On page 48 of the same book he said, “This is Christ who is awaited. And in the words of inspiration it is I who is meant by Mary and Christ. It is said about me, “I will be the symbol and it is also said about me, “I am the same Christ, son of Mary whose advent was awaited. The awaited one is me and to doubt it is sheer unwisdom.” Again in Kashti-I-Nooh he says, “First I was named Mary and I remained and was nursed and brought up in the state of Maryhood for two years. Then just like Mary, the soul of Christ was infused in me and in a figurative sense I became pregnant and after several years but not more that ten years, by inspiration, I was transformed from Mary to Christ. This is how I am the son of Mary, but while writing my book ‘Baraheen-I-Ahmadi’ I was not yet initiated into the Mystery.” In Izala-I-Awham pg. 698 he said, “Great saints have predicted on the basis of their enlightenments that the promised Messiah will come by the 14thcentury (Hijra) or the 20th century C.E  and his advent will no longer be delayed. So there is none except this humble person to claim that status.” Making it even clearer he said, “This is my claim that I am the promised Messiah about whom there are prophesies in all the holy books.” (Tohfa-I-Golrwiah pg.195)

Not being satisfied with his false claims of Messiahship, Mirza took the next step towards furthering his claims of Prophethood. He wrote in his book Chashma-I-Masihi pg.41, “If a follower gets the honour of revelation and inspiration and prophethood due to obedience to the Prophet and he is graced with the name of a prophet then that does not violate the seal of the prophet.” In another book Risala Khatme Naboowat pg. 10, Mirza Ghulam wrote, “During the last 1300 years no one has claimed prophethood just in deference to the great position of the prophet, but now that people have become seasoned in their belief of the last of the prophets and now if anyone comes forward as a prophet it does not affect in the least the great position of the holy prophet. Therefore, the word prophet is now allowed to be used for Messiah.” After paving the way for his false claim of prophethood he openly declared that he is a prophet. In his book Haqiqatun Nabuwwat pg. 272, he says, “To me any religion that has no continuity of prophethood is a dead one. We call Judaism, Christianity and Hinduism as dead religions just because they will have no more prophets. If Islam is also of the same nature then what is the distinction between them and Islam? Mere true dreams do not suffice, even cobblers and scavengers may have true dreams. There must be a communication with and an address from God and these must contain prophecies. I am having revelations for the last several years and many symbols from God have testified to their truthfulness. That is why I am a prophet. There should be no secrecy in conveying the truth.”   Based upon these statements Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s successors, his sons and followers all regard him as a perfect and complete prophet. They lay great emphasis in his prophethood and honour him in every respect in the same manner as the prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is honoured.

Qadianis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad received numerous revelations from Allah as he himself had made such claims. In his book Haqiqatul Wahi page 391 Mirza Ghulam said, “I have received so many revelations that if all are written down they would fill about 20 volumes.” Based upon this claim of Mirza Ghulam, his followers are exhorted to read his revelations with great respect. Among his (so-called revelations) he asserts that many of the verses of the Holy Quraan were revealed to him.

For example:-

In Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat (pg. 281) he wrote that Sura Kauthar was revealed to him.

In sura Inshirah the verse “Wa rafa’na laka zikrak” he claimed was revealed to him. (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 282)

The verse “And we have not sent you except as a mercy unto mankind” he claimed was revealed to him. (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 634)

The verse “Say if you love Allah, follow me” He said was revealed to him. (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 634)

A few of the new revelations, which he claimed to have received, are:

“The companions of the Suffah. And what do you know about the companions of the Suffah. You will see their eyes flowing with tears, sending blessings upon you.” (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 625-626)

“You are to me like my Arsh. You are to me like my son.” (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 636)

“We have revealed it close to Qadian. And in truth we have sent it down and in truth we have revealed it.”  (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 637)

“Salutations be upon you. We praise you and send blessings upon you. Blessings from the Arsh until the Earth.” (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 644)

“Had it not been for you, I would have not created the heavens.” (Tazkira Majmu’a ilhamat pg. 649)

Similar to the above, which he claimed were revealed in Arabic, he also asserted that he received revelations in the English language. In his book Arba’een-I-Ahmadia pg. 81 he wrote, “Once I received revelation in English “I love you” and then God said, “I am with you.” He further said, “I shall help you”. Then He said, “I can what I will do”, then there was a forceful inspiration, which shocked me, “We can what we will do.” It was in such an accent as if an Englishman was standing in front of me. Such revelations in English also continued. He also claimed that revelations came to him in code words and figures. (Tabligh-I-Risalat pg. 85)

            In Khutba Ilhamia page 20, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote, “My lord has named me Ahmad, so praise me and do not abuse me.”  In his Tazkira, he further wrote, “There was a big square shaped throne installed among the Hindus and I was sitting on it. A Hindu pointing to someone said, “This is”. Then all the Hindus began tendering rupees etc. as offerings. Then a Hindu among the crowd said, “O Krishnaji, Rudra Gopal.”  In “Mukashefat-I-Mirza” pg.560 he says, “Twice I saw in a vision that many Hindus were prostrating before me saying that this is the incarnation, this is Krishna and they tendered me offerings. Then there was an inspiration, “O Krishna, Rudra Gopal be glorified, thy name is mentioned in the Gita.”  Possibly it is for this reason Mian Mahmood Ahmad, the Caliph of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad said that Hindus were also people of the book and as such marriage with their women folk was allowed.

            Owing to their firm belief in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet or Messiah the Qadianis have attributed great respect and veneration to the land of Qadian. In one of his books Aina’I-Kamalat pg. 354, Mirza wrote, “It is more meritorious to attend the annual conference at Qadian as it results in greater merits than a pilgrimage which is uncalled for.” As such Qadianis believe that a pilgrimage should be made at Qadian, which is known as a shadow pilgrimage. In his address Mian Mehmood, the caliph of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad mentioned in Al Fazal (dated 1st December 1932). “As it is only rich people who can afford to go to Mecca for pilgrimage, so in order to enable the poorer sections of Muslims to perform that pilgrimage a shadow pilgrimage is appointed for them at Qadian.” Mirza Ghulam has also described his Qadian Mosque as sacred as “the Holy Kaaba and has considered Qadian to be the sacred land.”  (Durre thimin) Similarly in Al Fazal (dated 21stAugust 1932) it is mentioned that Mirza’s Mosque in Qadian is considered to be the real Masjudul Aqsa and not the one in Jerusalem. On the night of Miraj (Ascension) the Prophet Muhammad travelled from Masjid Haram to Masjid Aqsa and that Mosque is the same one that is on Qadian, situated in the East.

            While explaining his relationship with God, he said that God once said to him, “You are like my son, O moon, O sun, you are from me and I am from you.” (Haqiqatul Wahi pg. 86)

            In Tazkira Majmua Ilhamaat page 452 he wrote, “Once I received an inspiration that God will descend to Qadian.

            In Ainae Kamalat pg. 564 Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote, “I saw in a dream that I am the lord, I then firmly believed that it was so.” Again in Kitabul Bariya pg. 85 he wrote, “I saw in one vision that I am god and then firmly believed in it.”

            From the above quotations it can be clearly seen that besides claiming to be a prophet Mirza Ghulam raised himself to claim divinity. As such he committed the unforgivable sin of shirk. He further explained his concept of divinity in the following words, “God came into my existence and then my anger, forbearance, leniency actions and tranquility became His. In this state I was saying that we need a new heaven and earth. I then first of all created the heavens and earth in a concise shape without any separation. Then conforming to the wishes of the truth I gave it its format and separation and I saw that I was powerful over the creation. I then created the sky of the earth and said we have certainly adorned the earthly sky with stars.” I then said, “We will create man from a piece of clay. Then my state was such that I was now transformed from a mere vision to inspiration and upon my tongue was the words: – “I intended to place a vicegerent (on earth) so I created Adam. We created man in the best of forms.”

Kitabul Bariya pgs 86-87, Ruhani Khazain vol 3 pgs 104-105

            In another book, Arba’een, he wrote, “In some of the books of the prophets, figuratively I have been described as an angel. Prophet Daniel has mentioned me in his book as Mika-il and according to the Hebrew language Mika-il means the like of God.” (Arba’een Vol. 3 pg. 30, Ruhani Khazain Vol.17 pg. 413)

            Thousands of many other quotations can be cited to show the baseless claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. In a nutshell Mirza himself believed that the religion, which he came with, is a new religion having a new shariah. This is clearly seen from the following quotations. In Al fazal Vol. 22 No 93 (dated 3rdFebruary 1936) it states, “Allah revealed this last truth in the desolate land of Qadian and chose the promised Messiah who was of Persian descent, for this great task and said, “I shall spread thy name to the corners of the world and shall protect thee from forceful onslaughts. And the religion which you have brought shall be made to prevail against other religions by virtue of symbols and arguments and that its supremacy shall remain till the end of the world.”

            In his book Arba’-een pg. 7 Mirza wrote, “What is Shariat? I have given some commandments for do’s and don’ts and have prescribed laws for my followers.” Then in “Hashia Arbaeen” No.4 pg. 7 he said “My shariat is named “Ark of Noah” – that is the salvation for the whole world.”  His son, Mirza Basheer Ahmad then explained the reason for no new kalima in the following words, “There is no need for a new kalima because the promised Messiah, who is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is not separated from Prophet Muhammad. In fact it was the promise of Allah that he will once again send the “Seal of the prophets” to the world. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad who is the promised Messiah is therefore Muhammad the Messenger of Allah identically. This is the reason for not having any new Kalima.” (Kalimatul Fasl pg. 158)

            It is thus very clear from all the above quotations that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is no more than an Imposter, a liar and a person who made many false and baseless claims. His entire mission attacks the very core of Islam as preached by Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) as he outwardly condemned the “Seal of prophethood”. As such the entire foundation of the Qadiani religion will be uprooted by the fact that prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was the seal of prophethood as established by the authentic sources.


The Holy Quraan in Sura Ahzab verse 40 states, “Muhammad is not the father of any of you but a messenger of Allah and the seal of the Prophets. And Allah is fully aware of everything.”

            Commenting upon this verse of the Holy Quraan, all the commentators of the Holy Quraan have stated that the word “Khatamun Nabiyeen” seal of the prophet mentioned in this verse means that there is no Prophet after the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) As such the famous commentator Allama Ibn Katheer wrote in his tafseer, vol. 3 pg. 493 that, “This verse is very explicit that there is no prophet after prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) nor any messenger. Many Mutawatir traditions have mentioned the same from all the companions.”

            Another famous commentator of the Holy Quraan Imam Qurtubi, wrote that all scholars past and present are in full agreement that the words “Khatamun Nabiyeen” (Seal of Prophets) directly imply that there is no prophet after prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)” (Tafseer Qurtubi Vol. 14 pg.196)

            Similarly the great Imam Ghazali wrote, “There is Ijma (consensus) of the entire Ummah that the words “Khatamun Nabiyeen” (Seal of Prophets) mean that there will be no prophet nor messenger after the Prophet Muhammad. On this matter there is no allowance for interpretations or specifications. Whosoever rejects this has rejected Ijma in Islam.” (Al Iqtisaad Fil Itiqaad pg. 123)

            In the most authentic tradition, which fulfills the highest standard and criterion of authenticity, the prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has openly declared that there is no prophet after him.

            The famous Mufassir commentator Allama Alusi has written in Tafseer Ruhul Ma’aani, “The Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) being the seal of the prophets is such a matter that the Quraan has spoken of it, the traditions have confirmed it and it has therefore gained the Ijma (consensus) of the Muslim Ummah. Anyone who claims anything against it shall be deemed a kafir (unbeliever) and if he propagates against it shall be killed.”  (Ruhul Ma’aani Vol. 22 pg. 41)


Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “My likeness and the likeness of the prophets of the past is like that of a man who built a house. He decorated it and beautified it except that one brick was missing. People then passed around the house, looking at it and becoming happy with it said, “Why was not this brick placed in it?” The Prophet then said, ”I am that brick and I am the seal of all the prophets.” Reported by Bukhari and Muslim.

This tradition is mentioned in Musnad e Ahmad, Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and Tirmizi. In the Tradition reported by Muslim the following is mentioned at the end of the Hadith, “The Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “I am that brick, I came and completed the chain of Messengers.”

Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallahu anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “I have been honoured above the prophets with six things:

Comprehensive words

I was helped with fear

The spoils of war were made permissible for me

The earth has been made as a Masjid and a purification for me

I have been sent to all mankind

With me the prophets came to an end.

Reported by Muslim and also by Imam Bukhari in the narration of Jabir (Radhiyallahu anhu)

Sa’ad bin Abi Waqas (Radhiyallahu anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) once said to Ali (Radhiyallahu anhu), “You are to me as Haroun was to Moosa except that there is no Prophet nor Prophethood after me.” (Bukhari and Muslim).

Besides Sa’ad bin Abi Waqas, fourteen other companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) have reported this Hadith and as such it is known to be a Mutawatir Hadith.

From Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallahu anhu), the prophet (Sallalpaqhu alayhi wasallam) mentioned that, “From among the Bani Israel, prophets became successors one to another. Whenever a prophet died, another prophet succeeded him and carried on his mission. However there will be no Prophet after me but there will be Khalifas who will be in great number.”   (Bukhari, Muslim). In a tradition reported by Abu Dawood the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Certainly Allah will raise for this ummah at the beginning of every one hundred years someone who will revive their deen (religion) for them.

Thauban (Radhiyallahu anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “There will be in my Ummah thirty liars each of them claiming to be a Prophet. How be it? I am the seal of the prophets there is no prophet after me.”  (Abu Daud, Tirmizi). This Hadith (tradition) is also a Mutawatir Hadith and has been reported by eleven other companions of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)

Anas bin Malik (Radhiyallahu anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Certainly Apostleship and Prophethood have come to an end. There will be no Messenger nor Prophet after me.” (Tirmizi) This hadith has also been narrated by Imam Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad, Ibn Majah and others by different companions.

From Abu Hurairah that he heard the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) saying, “We are the last but the first on the Day of Judgement except that they have been given their scriptures before us.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

Uqba ibn Aamir (Radhiyallahu anhu) states that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, ”Had there been any Prophet after me it would have been Umar.” (Tirmizi)

Jubair bin Mutim (Radhiyallahu anhu) said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) saying, “I have many names, I am Muhammad and I am Ahmad. I am Mahi (the Remover) through whom Allah will remove Kufr (disbelief) and I am Hashir (the Gatherer) who will gather the people around me. I am Aaqib (the last) after whom there is no Prophet.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

Abu Huraira (Radhiyallahu anhu) stated that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) used to place his index finger and the middle finger close together and then say, “I have been sent and the Hour of Judgement like both these fingers.” This tradition has been narrated by eleven different companions in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, Musnad e Ahmad.

All the above traditions bear clear testimony to the fact that Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), the son of Abdullah and Amina, who was born in Makkah 571 C.E. and to whom Jibraeel (Alayhissalaam) came with revelations is the last and final prophet of Allah after whom there will be no prophet, Apostle and Messenger. As such, all the Muhaddhith (traditionists) commentators of the Holy Quran and Jurists from the time of the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) until the present time have all clearly stated that:

The claim of Prophethood after the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is kufr (disbelief). The claimer is an imposter and liar and must be killed.

Whosoever thinks/says that prophethood is inheritent and has not ended then he is an atheist whose punishment is death.

Whosoever claims to receive revelations is a kaafir even though he did not claim prophethood.

Whosoever believes or accepts the prophethood of anyone after the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is a kaafir (unbeliever)

It is the consensus opinion and decision (Ijma) of the Ummah that the claimer of Prophethood after the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is a kaafir. Whoever opposes this is himself a Kaafir.

Other claims made by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad that he was the Promised Messiah or Jesus are all fallacious and unsound. This is evidently clear from the true teachings of the Holy Quraan and authentic traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)

            The following are certain beliefs about Isa (Alayhissalaam), which are taught by the Quraan and Hadith and upon them Ijma of the Ummah is held:

Isa (Alayhissalaam) was born miraculously without the agency of a father. His mother was Maryam (Alayhissalaam) who is mentioned in the Holy Quraan.

Isa (Alayhissalaam) lived on the face of the earth approximately 571 years before the Prophet Muhammad and did not die. However he was taken up bodily into heaven where he remains alive to this day.

When the Hour of Judgement is nearby, Isa (Alayhissalaam) will descend from the heaven to the earth. After accomplishing his mission on the earth, he will die a natural and physical death.

With all these citations and evidences, it should not be doubtful upon any muslim that the Qadianis are out of the pale of Islam. This ruling is one which has been given by the sound and authentic scholars of the Muslim Ummah from the time of the Qadianis origin until present time and has also been officially given by the Federal Shariat Court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

Hadhrat Nabi Isa Dead or Alive?: A Response to Qadiani Claims

[Majlisul Ulama]


No one on this earth—  be he Muslim or non-Muslim—disputes the fact that Islam in its final form was the Message delivered to mankind by Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) more than 1425 years ago. There is consensus of all people that Islam is not the product of this age or of a few decades ago or of a couple of centuries ago. When it is said that Muhammad Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) delivered to mankind the Islam which Allah Ta’ala had revealed to him, it is understood thereby that he handed to the world a set of beliefs and practices  – the Aqaaid and A’maal  of Islam. He did not leave Islam as an ambiguous concept subject  to the understanding and interpretations of the multitudes of people.

It is only logical and a simple fact to understand that the beliefs and practices of the Sahaabah and the early Muslims of the Khairul Quroon  (the Three noblest Ages of Islam) constitute Islam, and that only their Beliefs and Practices are authentic and valid. Any belief or practice which conflicts with the  Aqaaid and A’maal  of the Sahaabah will not be part of Islam. Thus, if someone today has to claim that there are only three Fardh Salaat instead of the five that we know of and adhere to, then the first question such a proponent will have to answer is: When did this belief or teaching of three Salaat develop in Islam? If he cannot prove that it originated with the Sahaabah, then obviously it will be expunged as kufr and branded a figment of the shaitaan’s evil whispering into the heart of the one who contended the belief or act of kufr

If a belief or practice cannot be reliably and authoritatively traced to the Sahaabah, it shall be thrown out into the garbage can of kufr. The very first obstacle any propounder of kufr has to surmount is to prove that the doctrine he is propagating has always been the belief of the People of Islam from the inception of Islam. No man can impose his personal idea as Islamic doctrine and claim that this is what the Qur’aan says, if his personal doctrine has not been the official belief or practice of the Ummah from the time of the Sahaabah.

Islam is not an interpretation of the Qur’aan which modernists or deviates of this age present. Irrespective of how much the interpretation may appeal to and appease the western mind and the western intellectual masters of the modernists, it will never be part of Islam if it cannot be substantiated on the basis of the Ijma’ of the Ummah. Such consensus has its roots in the Beliefs and Practices of the Sahaabah. Hence, the proponent of a belief which is at variance with the Beliefs of the Ummah or in conflict with the  Ijma’ which has been transmitted down the centuries from the age of the Sahaabah is under obligation to furnish his Shar’i evidence for his theory/idea. Evidence is not personal opinion nor is evidence of the Shariah a man’s interpretation of the Qur’aan. Evidence of the Shariah is what the official position of the belief or practice was during the age of the Sahaabah and the Khairul Quroon,  and whether the belief advocated by the deviate was the belief or practice of the Ummah from the inception of Islam.   

It is on the basis of this criterion of authenticity that the beliefs pertaining to Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) as well as all other beliefs and alleged beliefs are to be examined. Any belief, practice or teaching which does not satisfy this criterion stands rejected and will be branded as kufr which expels the proponent from the fold of Islam. Explicity and emphatically stating this conception of Ijma and this criterion of authenticity  which is the belief and practice of the Ummah from the time of the Sahaabah, the Qur’aan Shareef says:    

“And among the people are those who say: “We believe in Allah and the Last Day, while (in reality) they are not Mu’mineen (Believers). They (try to) deceive Allah and those who have Imaan. However, they deceive none but themselves whilst they lack understanding.”    (Surah Baqarah, aayats 8 and 9)

“And when it is said to them: “Believe in the manner in which the people (i.e.the Mu’mineen) believe, they say: ‘What shall we believe as the ignoramuses believe?’   Heed well! Verily, they are the ignoramuses, but they do not know.” (Surah Baqarah, aayat 13) 

It is quite evident from these verses of the Qur’aan Majeed, that Imaan is not the personal idea or conception of any person. A man’s contention of belief in Allah and the Aakhirah is of no significance and validity if it is in conflict with the Belief of “The People”, i.e. the People of Islam who inherited their Beliefs and Practices from the Sahaabah. The Sahaabah are in the highest category of “The People” whom the Qur’aan commands to follow. Elsewhere in the Qur’aan Majeed, Allah Ta’ala commands the selfsame obedience and following to “The People” of Imaan. Thus He says:

“And, follow the Path of those who turn (and lead) towards Us.”  

These as well as other Qur’aanic aayaat categorically command the Mu’mineen to follow the Path of  “The People”, not the path of personal opinion.  Hence, the Consensus of the  “The People” is the criterion of authenticity for the beliefs and practices of Is lam. Any concept which is at variance with or in conflict with the conception of Imaan of “The People” of Imaan and Islam is kufr which extinguishes Imaan and assigns the proponent into irtidaad (making him a renegade) for which the punishment in a truly Islamic nation is Qatl (execution).


One  mulhid  who has sprouted up from somewhere, seeking some cheap publicity, stating his ideas about Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), wrote to the non-Muslim press that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is dead. He is not alive in Heaven as the Ummah of Islam believes and has believed from the age of the Sahaabah. He presents as his ‘proofs’ the following arguments: 

(1)   The Sunni Muslims derive their support from their ‘priests’ whose basis is the traditions (Ahadith). These Ahadith are derived from Israeli sources.  

(2)   These sources were from Jews and Christians who embraced Islam, and who had introduced their ‘apocryphal’ literature in the Ahadith and the commentaries of the Qur’aan. 

(3)   The Qur’aan declares “Messengers had passed away before Him (Muhammad).” (Q3:144)

(4)   “Further: God will cause you (Jesus) to die (or take  You away) and exalt, honour and raise You in My  Presence.” (Q3:55) 

(5)  “God caused Jesus to die or took Him up”. (Q5:120) 

(6)  “That Jesus is dead is confirmed by the Qur’an and some Ahadith (traditions), jurists and modern scholars.”

If these are called ‘proofs’ (daleel), then we must say that they are an insult to the term as well  as an insult to intelligence. Although these stupidities do not warrant  an intelligent response, nevertheless, such a response becomes necessary in view of the large scale ignorance prevailing among the Muslim masses on the issue of Aqaa-id  (Beliefs). Unwary persons and simple-minded folk are quickly misled by the most absurd specimens of kufr offered by just any  jaahil  who reads a few lines of  Yusuf Ali’s commentary. 

The proponent of the kufr belief has made claims without presenting any substantiation whatsoever. He makes allegations about the Qur’aan and “some Ahadith” confirming the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) without tendering the relevant Qur’aanic verses and “some Ahadith” which he claims support his idea of kufr

The very first attack against the belief of Hadhrat Isaa’s death is that it miserably fails the Criterion of Authenticity explained earlier. The death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) never was a doctrine  of Muslims at any time in the history of Islam. If the deviate claims that it was, then it devolves on him to produce his evidence, not his opinion. At what stage in Islam’s history did the belief in Nabi Isaa’s death develop among Muslims? Did the Sahaabah believe in the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam)? Was this the belief of  “The People”  whose obedience the Qur’aan commands? If it was, the zindeeq should produce his proof. 

He should not endeavour to conceal himself in ambiguity and say that according to “some Ahadith” Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) has died. He should produce these “some Ahadith” and the academic discussion pertaining to such traditions. If this mulhid is reborn and he devotes his entire new life to the search for proof to prove that  “The People”  of Islam had ever held this belief of kufr, then too he will miserably fail to do so other than making baseless claims which cannot be substantiated on the basis of Shar’i evidence.

The Mulhid’s First  and Second arguments

In this stupid ‘proof’ he claims that Islam’s belief of Hadhrat Isaa’s death is based on ‘apocryphal’ traditions which Jews and Christians had introduced into Islam when they had embraced this religion. The absurdity of this ludicrous claim is not hidden from  any person who has made even a superficial study of the Science of Hadith compilation. Even a man who lacks expert Islamic Knowledge, but has read some English books on the subject of Hadith compilation, will laugh at the stupid claim which this mulhid has ventured so audaciously. It is said that fools  rush in where angels fear to tread. This is the similitude of the proponent of Nabi Isaa’s death. Can any sane Muslim who does not have kufr concealed in his heart  –who is not a munaafiq  –ever accept  that the wonderful and authentic Hadith compilations of the illustrious Muhadditheen who devoted their entire lives to the science of Hadith authentication are ‘apocryphal’ as the zindeeq alleges? (Apocryphal refers to traditions which are baseless, untrue, legendary, and fabricated). 

The mulhid has made his claim that the belief the People of Islam regarding Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) being alive in Heaven is based on ‘apocryphal’ traditions which Jews and Christians  had interpolated into the Hadith Compilations which the  People of Islam  regard to be correct and authentic. It devolves on him to now produce these ‘apocryphal’ traditions which he claims constitute the basis of the Belief of  “The People”  whom the Qur’aan commands us to submit to. Any Tom, Dick, Harry and atheist can present their personal ideas of whim and fancy, and tender just any stupid and absurd argument. But they cannot present evidence to back up the kufr they gorge up. We want to know about these ‘apocryphal’ traditions which the Jew and Christian converts had introduced into Islam.
It might benefit the mulhid to hear what Allah Ta’ala Himself says about the Christians who had converted to Islam. The Qur’aan Majeed says in this regard:    

“And, most certainly, you will find the closest (to you, O Muslims!)in love, are those who say: ‘Verily, we are Nasaaraa’. That is so because among them are men of justice and Ulama who are  not proud. And, when they hear what has been revealed to the Rasool, you will see their eyes flowing with tears because they have recognized the Haqq.”    (Qur’aan, Surah Maaidah, aayats 82 and 83) 
The reference here is to the early  Nasaaraa who had embraced Islam. There  were highly qualified Ulama and experts of the Taurah and Injeel among them. It is an insult to the Qur’aan  to claim that these noble, pious and knowledgeable members of  Ahl-e-Kitaab  had introduced ‘apocryphal’ traditions into Islam. It is an even greater insult to claim that ‘apocryphal’ traditions of the Jews and Christians were used by the illustrious authorities of Islam to formulate  Aqeedah  when it is a fact as clear as daylight that Beliefs are based on only Ahaadith which are of the  Qatiyuth Thuboot category. The ignorance of the mulhid is stark and quite evident. He simply does not know what he is trumpeting. 

This deviate who in all probability lacks knowledge in the very elementary teachings of Islam  is too stupid to understand or to even know that the Fuqaha (Jurists of Islam) never employed Dhaeef  (Weak, technically speaking) Ahaadith which are au thentic, as basis for  Fardh and Waajib Ahkaam, leave alone Aqaa-id. His sweeping statement simply displays his crass  jahaalat. His argument is absolutely devoid of substance. 

His claim that “Sunni Muslims”  believe in Isaa (alayhis salaam) being alive on the basis of “support from their priests and jurists” is designed to ridicule. This type of stupid childish stratagems of ridicule is a salient feature of the mulhideen who are bereft of rational and Islamic arguments for their concepts and theories of kufr.  If the beliefs of the Sunni Muslims are supported by their “priests” and jurists, it lends more strength to the authenticity of the beliefs of the masses. It is evidence for the correctness of the beliefs of the masses. It shows that the beliefs of the masses are based on scholarly, rational and factual basis, and are not the product of wild speculation of the vacillating nafs (whim and fancy –self-opinion) of men of ignorance. It is  simply logical and acceptable that the masses accept the beliefs as explained to them by their “priests” and jurists. These “priests” and jurists are members of the class of men whom the Qur’aan designates  “The People”,  and whose obedience the Qur’aan commands. The Qur’aan commands that Muslims should believe as “The People” believe, not as the nafs dictates. 

An intelligent mind will present evidence to substantiate the claim that the “priests” and the jurists have erred and that they had in  turn based their belief on the ‘apocryphal’ traditions of the Jews and Christians. What proof does the zindeeq have for his contention in this regard? If he has even a vestige of evidence, let him produce it. The zindeeq is guilty of a blasphemous slander for his contention that the Jurists of Islam had based the beliefs pertaining to Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) on the apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians.

It is incumbent for him to define exactly what he means by ‘apocryphal traditions’ and  on which such traditions of the Jews and Christians did  “The People”  of the Qur’aan base their belief.  Since he has manipulated the term ‘apocryphal’ to serve his kufr idea, he has to explain his criteria for labeling a Jewish or a Christian tradition as ‘apocryphal’. Or perhaps he is a  muqallid (blind follower) of the Jewish and Christian theologians and priests who have categorized their own respective traditions. Just look at this zindeeq! He becomes a blind  muqallid  of the Jewish and Christian theologians and priests who have studied and classified their traditions, but he refuses to accept the highly authentic Ahaadith classified by the illustrious Muhadditheen such as Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Muslim and others of high rank. He must say who had classified the relevant Jewish and Christian traditions to be apocryphal, and  on what basis does he (the zindeeq) accept such classification. Then he should provide his  dalaa-il  for his biggest calumny, viz., the Fuqaha of Islam had based the beliefs regarding Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) on such ‘apocryphal’ traditions of the Jews and Christians.

Another stupidity of the ‘apocryphal’ argument is that as far as the Jews are concerned, they do not even accept Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis  salaam) to be a Nabi. His ascension into Heaven, his second advent and him being alive or dead do not concern them. They have no apocryphal literature on Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). 

The Christians on the otherhand believe that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) had first died a physical death, then after resurrection he ascended into the heaven. But the Qur’aan rejects  the notion of his death. He was not crucified nor killed in any manner whatsoever. This is the official and authoritative belief of “The People” whom the Qur’aan commands us to follow.  Since the Christians do believe in Nabi Isaa’s ascension , his existence in the heavens and his second advent, their narrations are not apocryphal for them on this particular issue.  Those narrations and traditions which are in conflict with their beliefs are rejected by the Christians and termed ‘apocryphal’, e.g. the Gospel of Barnabas which predicts the advent of our Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Thus, the argument that the People of Islam based their beliefs regarding Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) on the ‘apocryphal’ traditions of the Jews and Christians is utterly stupid and fallacious. 

Furthermore, if Muslims had based their beliefs on any such traditions, the belief of Isaa’s death would have also been incorporated into Islamic  Aqeedah  in terms of the logic of the zindeeq because he claims that Islamic Belief is the consequence of Christian and Jewish ‘apocryphal’ (but non-existent) traditions. The absurdity of the mulhid’s arguments should thus be conspicuous. 

In  Tafseer  Durr-e-Manthur  appears the following narration: “Ishaaq Bin Bishr and Ibn Asaakir narrating from  Jauhar  who narrates from Dhuhhak who narrates from Ibn Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) (the tafseer) of the Allah’s statement: “Verily, I shall cause you to die and raise you up to Me”—i.e. “Shall raise you, then cause you to die in the last of ages (aakhiruz zamaan).”   (Page 36, Vol. 2) 

Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) was not a Jew or a Christian who had embraced Islam. He does not present the  tafseer  of this aayat No.55 of Surah Aal-e-Imraan on the basis of  any narration or tradition of Bani Israaeel. He states the meaning as he had acquired it from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) is known as Raeesul Mufassireen (The Chief of the Mufassireen).

We shall discuss this tafseer further in the ensuing pages, Insha’Allah. Suffice here to say that the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), not only the noble Ulama of the Yahood and Nasaaraa who had embraced Islam, taught the belief that Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) did not die but was physically raised into the Heavens. This belief which the Sahaabah propagated was not based on any apocryphal tradition of the Jews and Christians. The mulhid should present his proof for his fallacious contention of kufr

For ignoramuses it is quite easy to tender sweeping and ridiculous contentions. But to substantiate such claims is entirely a different matter. When proof for their  nafsaani  speculation is demanded, they are adept in  the art of seeking refuge in impregnable fortresses of silence and in childish stratagems of ridicule. It behoves this mulhid to produce his Qur’aanic and historical evidence for his absurd contention that the Beliefs of Islam pertaining to Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) are based on apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians. He supposedly regards himself as a member of the ‘enlightened intellegentsia’. If so, he has to necessarily provide his rational and historical evidence  for his claim. Just when  – at which period in the history of Islam- did the belief of Isaa’s death on the basis of Jewish and Christian  traditions develop in Islam? Let the miserable zindeeq answer. 

The Mulhid’s Third argument

In this argument the mulhid avers: “The Qur’aan declares: ‘Messengers had passed away before Him (Muhammad)”. Q3:144” 

The ignorance of the mulhid is manifest from his citation of this aayat which does not have the remotest relevance to Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). Even the  general purport of the aayat cannot be adduced  to substantiate the kufr belief of the zindeeq.

He is unable to even present a correct translation of the verse he cites as his ‘proof’  for  the imagined death of Nabi Isaa  (alayhis salaam). Since the mulhid has merely lapped up what Yusuf Ali says in his translation, he presents the erroneous translation of Yusuf Ali as well. The translation of the aayat is:  “Verily, numerous Messengers passed before you.”  By saying “passed away”, the meaning of ‘died’ is proffered. Although it is understood that the numerous Ambiya who appeared before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had passed away (died), the word in this aayat does not mean “passed away” or ‘died’. 

Even if  the meaning of “have died” or have passed away is taken, it does not in any way whatsoever support the contention that Hadhrat  Isaa (alayhis salaam) too had died. The aayat does not say that each and every  Messenger before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi  wasallam) without any exception had died. The tenor of the aayat does not preclude exceptions. It is a general statement simply mentioning that just as the Messengers before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had died so too will he also die.  The exception  of Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam)  is based on other dalaa-il.  

The contention  is not that  Nabi Isaa  (alayhis salaam) will never die. The belief of Islam is that  he has not yet died and that after his  Nuzool  (Descent) from the Heavens, he will die a normal physical death. The mulhid believes that he is an intellectual and a member of the ‘intellegentsia’. However, his stupidity boggles the mind. He is totally ignorant of the fact that  Aqeedah (Belief) is not the product of interpretation and opinion, least  of all the absurd opinions of  juhala and mulhideen.  Beliefs are based on Qur’aanic aayaat or Ahaadith-e-Mutawattirah  which are Ahaadith of absolute certitude, which do not brook the slightest vestige of doubt, ambiguity or uncertainty. The number of the raka’ts, for example, are established on the basis of such Proofs. 

Instead of presenting any  daleel  of absolute certitude, the mulhid presents a verse which has no relevance whatsoever with Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). He employs and misinterprets this aayat in blind imitation of the Qadiani mulhideen who went before him, and  on the basis of such fallacious interpretation, he offers the belief of Hadhrat Isaa’s death.  And, in his presentation of this kufr belief he perpetrates the chicanery of endeavouring to convey the impression of originality, namely, that his own ‘ingenuity’ has unraveled the mystery surrounding Hadhrat Isaa  (alayhis salaam)  –the mystery  which the Christians had failed to unravel. He fails to acknowledge his ‘imaam’, Yusuf Ali and others of his ilk who had peddled these baseless, legless and stupid arguments. 

The Qur’aanic averment that Messengers had  “passed away” before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) does not negate the fact and belief that Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam)  had not died and that he was raised bodily into the Heavens whilst alive and awake. These beliefs are structured on  independent  Dalaail  of the Shariah. This specific aayat does not negate the longevity of the lifespan of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). The demise of innumerable Messengers, in fact all except Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam), before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) does not rationally or logically or Islamically preclude any being born before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) outliving him. What is the rational argument to prove that a person who was a Nabi and born before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), could not have lived beyond the lifespan of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)? Only mulhids who deny the infinite Power of Allah Ta’ala, covertly refute the Qur’aanic proclamation: “Verily, Allah has power over all things.”  

What is the Islamic proof for claiming that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) was not alive  when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was born and that he  did not remain alive after the demise of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and that he will not remain alive until  the great signs of Qiyaamah materialize?  Independent proof of the category of absolute certitude (Qatiuyuth Thuboot)  is imperative for claiming a belief which conflicts with the 14 century belief of  The People  –the Sahaabah, Taabieen, Tab-e-Taabieen  –all the Aimmah Mujtahideen, Fuqaha, and the entire Ummah down the long corridor of Islam’s history. 

It devolves on the mulhid to prove with Shar’i facts the stages of origin of the two diametrically opposite beliefs—the belief that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is alive and the kufr belief of his death. While  we can conclusively claim that  the belief of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah  –the belief of  The People of the Qur’aan  –  has its origin in the Qur’aan and Ahaadith, the zindeeq fails hopelessly to produce even one valid argument to substantiate his belief of kufr

It is thus illogic and in conflict with Islam to claim the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam)  on the basis of the aayat which merely states that numerous Messengers had passed away before Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

The Mulhid’s fourth argument

In this argument, the mulhid offers the aayat No.55 of Aal-eImraan. Thus he says: “Further:  God ‘will cause You (Jesus) to die (or take You away) and exalt, honour and raise You in My Presence.”

Firstly, he has ventured a corrupt translation. The correct translation of the aayat is: “(Remember) when Allah said: ‘O Isaa! Verily, I shall cause you to die and I shall raise you towards Me, and I shall exonerate you from the disbelievers………”  

He translates the word  ‘raafiuka’ to mean ‘exalt, honour and raise you in My Presence”.   But  this word in the context of the aayat does not mean ‘exalt and honour’. When the term  ‘rafa’  is used with the word  ‘ilaa’, it does not mean exalting the rank of a person. It clearly refers to physical raising or lifting . Furthermore, this meaning has been determined by the explanations of the Sahaabah. It has thus to be translated in the context of the meaning and belief of  The People  whom we are commanded by the Qur’aan to follow. Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) already had an exalted rank by Allah Ta’ala. He was among the great Ambiya.  The  figuritive meaning ascribed to the term in the context of this aayat is  palpably erroneous. In other verses where the term  rafa’  is used for elevation of rank, the term  ilaa  is not used.  Hence, the Qur’aan says: “He has elevated   some  over  others by ranks.” “Allah exalts the Believers among you….”  

In these verses and many others, the word  rafa’  to mean elevation of ranks is used without ‘ilaa’. It should thus be clear that the term  ilaa  when used in conjunction  with the word,  rafa’ produces the meaning of physical lifting or raising upwards physically. There is also  no need for us to substantiate the belief of  Isaa (alayhis salaam) on the basis of this interpretation of the word  rafa’.  The belief is based on the  Ijma’ of the Ummah— “The People” whom the Qur’aan says we have to obey and follow. 

The physical transportation of Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) into the Heavens is further confirmed with emphasis in the following aayat of Surah Nisaa, which  rejects the notion that Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) was killed:

“They most certainly did  not kill him. But, on the contrary, Allah lifted him (Isaa) to Him (Allah Ta’ala).”  The word  rafa’  (lifted) is brought here in this aayat to negate and refute the claim of the Yahud that they had physically killed Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). Refuting their contention, the Qur’aan Majeed declares with emphasis that they did not kill him. On the contrary, Allah Ta’ala saved Isaa (alayhis salaam) by lifting him up to the Heavens. The meaning  of ‘exalting’ or ‘honouring’ will be improper in the context of the refutation stated in this aayat.


The translation which even the Mulhid presents, is:“cause you to die” . The aayat does not say that Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) had died. Allah Ta’ala does not say: “Isaa is dead or has died.” In this verse, Allah  directly addressing Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), says:  o “O Isaa! Verily, I shall cause you to die, and I shall lift you up to Me”. Isaa (alayhis salaam) at the time  of the Divine Address was being pursued by the Yahood  who wanted to have him killed. Allah Ta’ala in this aayat assures him of  the failure of the plot of the Yahood. Hence, the Qur’aan states immediately  before this aayat:  “They (the Yahood) plotted, and Allah plotted, and Allah is the best of plotters.”  

The aayat assures Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) that the Yahood will not succeed in killing him. He will die at some time in the future. Meanwhile he will be raised up into the Heaven. It is absurd to infer from an event which has not yet transpired that it has already happened. The absurdity is obvious. By what warped and stupid logic does the mulhid argue? He claims that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) has died. But in support he presents an aayat which says that Allah Ta’ala will cause Isaa (alayhis salaam) to die in the future. 

Islam does not negate the future death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). “The People”  do not contend that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) will never die. The belief is only that he has not yet died, but will die after his descent from Heaven. The fallacy of this argument of the mulhid should also be conspicuous.

The Mulhid’s fifth argument

In this argument he says: “God caused Jesus to die or took him up. Q5:120”  

Firstly, aayat No.120 of Surah Maaidah does not remotely refer to Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). The translation of aayat 120 is: “Unto Allah belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and whatever is therein. And, He is All-Powerful over everything.”  

However, the mulhid, Yusuf Ali, in his erroneous numbering of the verses has numbered the relevant aayat No.120 when in fact it is No.117. Pick up any copy of the Qur’aan and it will be seen that the number of the aayat to which the mulhid and Yusuf Ali refer is No.117. The translation of the relevant portion of the aayat to which the mulhid has referred is:

“I was a witness over them while I was among them. Then, when you took me away (i.e.caused me to die), then You were the Guard over them.”  (Aayat 117, Surah Maaidah) 

The entire discussion of  the aayat (the above is only a portion of the aayat) is an event which will transpire in Qiyaamah  – in the future. It is not a discussion which Allah Ta’ala already had with Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). It is a discussion which will yet take place after resurrection in Qiyaamah. Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) says (in this aayat): “You caused me to die”. It should be obvious that he is speaking here after his death, not prior to his death. To claim that this discussion took place on earth prior to Nabi Isaa’s death is absurd. He himself says :When  You (O Allah!) caused me to die”.  Hence the discussion logically will take place after resurrection in Qiyaamah. And this is confirmed by the authentic Ahaadith. 

Since this is a discussion which will yet take place in the Hereafter, it is fallacious to present it in substantiation of the kufr belief. The manner in which the Mulhid quotes the portion of the aayat out of its context, is designed to convey the deceptive idea that Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) has already died., hence the zindeeq says:  “God caused Jesus to die” It is not refuted that Allah Ta’ala will cause Nabi Isaa to die. But his death will be caused after his Nuzool to earth. It is therefore baseless to present this aayat as proof for the contention that Isaa (alayhis salaam) is dead.

The Mulhid’s sixth argument

In this ‘argument’, the Mulhid merely makes a claim without providing any evidence. He simply says: “That Jesus is dead is confirmed by the Qur’an,and some Ahadith (traditions), jurists and modern scholars.”  

In his letter there is not a single Qur’aanic verse to confirm his claim. We have refuted and demolished the arguments which he had based on certain   Qur’aanic verses which do not even remotely suggest that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) had died. 

He speaks of “some Ahadith” which allegedly confirm the kufr belief. Firstly, he should not cite Ahaadith because in terms of his own claim, Ahadith are the products of the apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians. Secondly, he should present these Ahaadith for examination.  There are no Ahaadith which confirm the belief of the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). 

Then he speaks about confirmation by the ‘jurists’. The Mulhid is the last man who should speak about the jurists. According to his claim the Jurists had formulated the belief of Hadhrat Isaa’s death on the basis of the apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians. He should now not seek to extract capital from the Jurists for his kufr belief. It is, furthermore, a blatant falsehood to claim that the Fuqaha or some of them believe in the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). He should provide his proof for this claim of confirmation by the Fuqaha. 

As far as “modern scholars” are concerned, their ranks  preponderate with mulhids and zindeeqs. Anyone whose beliefs conflict with the  Ijmaaee  Belief of  The People  of Islam is not a scholar of Islam. Such a modernist is a deviated ignoramus. He is unacceptable to Islam. The views of some of these  modern day “scholars” are repugnant and of no concern. Their views cannot be cited as proof of the Shariah. It is truly amazing that a man who regards himself as an “investigative” scholar and researcher  –a deviate who is prepared to denounce and reject a Belief which the Ummah has believed in for the past 1438 years— citing “modern scolars:”  as his proof. How rapidly does he become a  muqallid  of just anyone whom he thinks is worthy of eking out support. Thus, while he rejects and criticizes the Fuqaha, he is quick to cite “some” of them when he thinks that there is some support for his doomed cause of kufr. No one is interested in the “modern scholars” of deviation (dhalaal),  false hood  (baatil) and kufr.  The views of such “scholars” do not occupy the category of any class of Shar’i proof, leave alone the highest class of evidence on the basis of which Aqeedah is structured. 

Alhamdulillaah! We have adequately refuted and demolished the fallacious arguments of the Mulhid. We now present the Proofs of  those People whose system of Imaan, according to the Qur’aan, is the only valid conception of Belief (Imaan), and whom we have been commanded to follow.


The strongest  daleel  (proof/evidence) for any belief, practice or teaching of Islam is  Ijma.  This  Daleel  is the command of Allah Ta’ala stated in several aayaat of the Qur’aan Majeed.

“Whoever opposes the Rasool after the Hidaayah (Guidance of the Deen) has become manifest, and he follows a path other than  the Path of the Mu’mineen,  We divert him to that (path of deviation) which he follows. And, We shall cast him into Jahannum. Indeed, it is an evil abode.”    (Qur’aan, Aayat 115, Surah Nisaa’)   

“And follow the Path of him who turns to Me.”  

The basis of the validity of Imaan is to believe as the Ummah believes, i.e. to subscribe to all the beliefs  which the Ummah has acquired from  Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) via the agency of the Sahaabah.  The Qur’aan says in this regard:      

“Among mankind are those who say: ‘We believe in Allah and the Last Day”, while (in reality) they are not Mu’mineen (Believers)”. (Surah Baqarah, aayat 8)      

“And, when it is said to them: ‘Believe just as the people (believe)’, they say: ‘What! Shall we believe like the ignoramuses believe?’ Behold! Verily, they  are the ignoramuses, but they know not.”   (Surah Baqarah, aayat 13) 

The Qur’aan Majeed does not instruct Muslims to follow their personal opinions and understanding of the Qur’aan. It commands us to follow  The People, The Mu’mineen.  Those who diverge from the Path of the Mu’mineen, the Qur’aan declares unequivocally:

“We shall cast them into Jahannum”. It is abundantly clear from the Qur’aanic aayaat that in order to be among the  Mu’mineen, the essential requisite is to  “Believe as the People believe.” Thus, any belief, interpretation, idea or view which  conflicts with the Beliefs of the Sahaabah who were the very first Wrung in the Ladder of  The People  to whom the Qur’aan commands obedience, is kufr.

Ijma’  is the Path of the Mu’mineen from which divergence according to the aforementioned aayat leads to Jahannum.  Ijma’  is in the category of the Qur’aan  Majeed since the Qur’aan commands Muslims to follow the Path of the Mu’mineen. There is no difference of opinion among the Fuqaha and Authorities of Islam  on the issue of  Ijma being a  Hujjat  (Proof and Authority) in the category of the Qur’aan. Denial of any belief or teaching evidenced by  Ijma’  is kufr. This is the unanimous ruling of  all Authorities of Islam.

Ijma  of the Ummah  –of  The People  to whom obedience is commanded in the Qur’aan, has been recognized as  Hujjat  for the Ahkaam of the Shariah from the very inception  of Islam since it is a command of the Qur’aan itself. There is no need to delve further on this subject in this concise booklet. Only a moron will deny that the Ummah’s  beliefs pertaining to Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) are  structured on the basis of  Ijma .Inspite of the Mulhid’s denial of the validity and truth of these beliefs, he does concede that Isaa (alayhis salaam) being alive is the Belief of this Ummah. Hence, he had no alternative but to concede: “The belief that Jesus is still alive in heaven is held by both Christians and Sunni Muslims.” Whoever now denies this Belief denies the validity of  Ijma’  and in consequence he has to be prepared to be cast into Jahannum by Allah Ta’ala Who has warned in the Qur’aan Shareef that those who diverge from the Path of the  Mu’mineen will be the inmates of Hell-Fire.


Ijma’ on the Beliefs centering around Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) are structured on the basis of the Qur’aan and Ahaadith-e-Mutawaatirah  – the highest category of authentic and reliable Ahaadith. Refuting the belief of Hadhrat Isaa having died, the Qur’aan Majeed declares with the greatest emphasis and unambiguity:

“And (the punishment they received) was because of their claim: ‘Verily, we have killed the Maseeh, Isaa, the  son of Maryam who was the Rasool of Allah’. (However), they neither killed him nor crucified him, but they (the Yahood) were thrown into confusion (regarding Hadhrat Isaa)………..And most certainly they did not kill him. On the contrary, Allah lifted him up to Him. And, Allah is Mighty, The Wise.”  (Surah Nisaa, aayat 157).   

The Qur’aan in this aayat categorically rejects the claim of the death of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). The Yahood had claimed that they had killed Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). Vehemently refuting this claim the Qur’aan affirms the ascension of Nabi Isaa into the Heavens. There is absolutely no difference of opinion among the Authorities of Islam on this belief. It is an  Ijmaaee Belief that this aayat confirms the physical ascension into the Heavens of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). This is the belief of the Mu’mineen  – the unanimous belief from the earliest time of Islam. Any Mulhid who in his stupidity is so audacious as to deny the fact that these beliefs are based on  Ijma’  of the Ummah, should produce his proof in refutation of this claim we are making. 

Aayat No.159 of Surah Nisaa’ states: 

“And there will be none of the Ahl-e-Kitaab, but he will believe in him (Isaa) before his Maut (death).”  

In the tafseer of this aayat, Hadhrat Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu) said:

“Nabi (alayhis salaam) said: ‘Most assuredly, the Son of Maryam will descend (to earth) as a just ruler. Then he will most certainly slay Dajjaal, kill pigs and destroy crosses. And, (at that time) Sajdah (Ibaadat) will be exclusively for Allah Rabbul Aalameen.’ Then Abu Hurairah said: If you wish recite (aayat No.159)’ He added: ‘Before the Maut of Isaa. He repeated this thrice.”    (Ma-aariful Qur’aan) 

All members of the Ahl-e-Kitaab will ultimately accept Imaan at the hands of Nabi  Isaa (alayhis salaam) before his death. This too testifies to the belief of him still being alive. Millions and millions of Ahl-e-Kitaab have not yet believed in Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) in the way Islam requires belief. This will happen after his   Nuzool from the Heavens. 

The  Nuzool  of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is further confirmed by aayat 61 of Surah Zukhruf:   “Verily he (Nabi Isaa) is certainly a sign for the Hour. Therefore, never ever doubt in it (i.e. the Hour of Qiyaamah) and obey me.”  
The Mufassireen commenting on this aayat say that Isaa (alayhis salaam) will be a sign of Qiyaamah. This aayat conveys the information of his descent  from Heaven in close proximity to Qiyaamah.. Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas, the eminent Sahaabi who is known as Raeesul Mufassireen, narrated regarding this statement of Allah Ta’ala:  “(It means) the emergence of Isaa (alayhis salaam) before the Day of Qiyaamah.” 

The Nuzool  of Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) presupposes him being alive in the Heaven.The unanimous Belief of the Mu’mineen is that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) was raised bodily into heaven while he was alive; that he is alive in Heaven; that he will return to earth before Qiyaamah. There is complete unanimity of the People of Islam on these beliefs. Only munaafiqeen and mulhideen deny these unanimous beliefs of the Mu’mineen. 

Also declaring that Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) was not killed and that he was raised up bodily into the Heaven, the Qur’aan states:

“O Isaa! I shall cause you to die, and I shall raise you to Me, and I shall exonerate you from the unbelievers…”    (Surah Aale-Imraan, aayat 55) 

There is complete unanimity of the Mufassireen and Authorities of Islam regarding the meaning of this aayat. They all state without any difference that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) was lifted alive and physically into the Heaven. The Authorities of Islam unanimously aver that  Allah “will cause Hadhrat Isaa to die” before Qiyaamah after his descent to earth. It is only mulhideen who have taken up the cause of the Qadiani impostor, Mirza Gulam Ahmad. After thirteen centuries of complete unanimity in the beliefs pertaining to Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), Mirza, the impostor  presented his kufr misinterpretation and opinion of Isaa’s death, etc. The mulhideen in our day are all the muqallideen of the dajjaal, Mirza of Qadian.


The proofs of the Sunnah are overwhelming. Only a total  kaafir –  one who  has been destined for Jahannum from the moment he was conceived  – denies the Sunnah with its vast volume of authentic Ahaadith which the Qur’aan Majeed imposes on Muslims to accept and obey as an integral part of Imaan, without which, Imaan is not valid. In many Qur’aanic aayaat, Allah Ta’ala commands:

“Obey Allah and obey the Rasool….. 

This is an oft-repeated aayat and theme of the Qur’aan. In another aayat, the Qur’aan states:   “Whatever the Rasool brings to you, hold on firmly to it, and whatever he forbids you of, abstain from it.” 

Obedience to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) with the axiomatic consequence of accepting and submitting to the  Saheeh  Ahaadith is denied only by those who have no share in Imaan. Refutation of the Ahaadith is precisely denial of the Qur’aan which commands obedience to the Rasool. The teachings, instructions, commands, prohibitions and beliefs delivered and explained by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are all encapsulated in the  Saheeh  Ahaadith. Denial of these Ahaadith is denial of  Allah Ta’ala and Islam because it is Allah Ta’ala Who in the Qur’aan Majeed commands acceptance and obedience to the Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). That the  Saheeh  Ahaadith are part of  Wahi  revealed by Allah Ta’ala, is confirmed by the aayat:   “He (Muhammad) does not speak of desire (whim, fancy and personal opinion). It (his speech) is nothing but Wahi which is revealed to him (from Allah Ta’ala).”  

If one stupid Mulhid today refutes without being able to furnish the slightest vestige of Shar’i evidence the beliefs pertaining to Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), then on the basis of the stupid ‘logic’ of Mulhid No.1, tomorrow Mulhid  No.2 can contend that the daily five Salaat are not Fardh because this perculiar institution of Salaat is the product of the apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians. The Qur’aan is silent on the number of times, viz.5,  that Salaat has to be performed daily. It is even more silent on the number of raka’ts and the multitude of  masaa-il  related to Salaat.  By the same shaitaani token, Mulhid No.3 can claim that the one fortieth annual Zakaat tax which the Jurists have fixed is based on apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians because the Qur’aan is silent on this issue. In fact, the Qur’aan does not even say that Zakaat means payment of money annually. The literal meaning of Zakaat is NOT payment of annual tax. In this way, the multitude of mulhidsmunaafiqs and zindeeqs who lay  hidden among the ranks of the Mu’mineen can torpedo and extinguish the whole of Islam. In fact, this is precisely the conspiracy of the West which is in progress at this moment. The satanic  plot is being spread like mines  and being planted, to bring about total change in the Immutable Shariah by means of “internal initiatives”. This plot is being  applied in different dimensions of Islam. Every mulhid is a cog in this plot.

ALL the Ahaadith on which are based the Islamic doctrines related to Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) are of the highest category of authenticity on par in force and strength with Qur’aanic aayaat in the Shariah’s law-formulation process. Ahaadith-e-Mutawaatirah produc ing the effect of  Qatiyuth Thuboot  (Authenticity of such a lofty degree which does not admit the slightest vestige of uncertainty) constitute the basis for these  Aqaaid. There is not a single authentic Hadith of a lesser class, leave alone Israeli fabrications and apocryphal traditions, which forms the basis for the beliefs pertaining to Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). Only morons, ignoramuses and doomed men with stercoraceous minds will claim that these highly authentic Ahaadith which have the force of Qur’aanic aayat, are the products of the  apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians. 

Shayaateen of this ilk imply by their ludicrous opinions that from its very  inception Islam was smothered and it did not attain its pinnacle of perfection to which the Qur’aan attests.
In fact, this noxious opinion of these  juhhaal  leads to the inevitable conclusion that the whole of Islam, in fact the Qur’aan itself, is a fabrication based on Jewish and Christian legend and mythology because it is an irrefutable fact which no sane Muslim or non-Muslim will deny that the authenticity of the Qur’aan is based on Ahaadith-e-Mutawaatirah. Without Hadith there is NO Qur’aan. 

The Qur’aan Kareem makes a brief reference to the physical lifting of Hadhrat Isaa (alayhis salaam) just as it makes a brief reference to Zakaat in its verses, and just as it makes brief references to Salaat in the verses commanding Salaat. The elaboration of these concepts and institutions has been assigned to the Ahaadith. Thus, the Qur’aan Majeed commands:  “Verily whoever has obeyed the Rasool has obeyed Allah.”  

In exactly the same concise style  the Qur’aan refers to the descent of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), leaving the explanation to the Ahaadith. These Ahaadith as mentioned earlier are of the  Tawaatur  category, denial of which is kufr of the highest degree. Haafiz Bin Hajar states this fact explicitly in Fathul Baari, Sharh (commentary) of Bukhaari Shareef. The illustrious Mufassir, Haafiz Ibn Katheer confirms these Ahaadith and their category in his famous Tafseer. In  Tal-kheesul Habeer, Haafiz Ibn Hajar states:

“All the authorities of Hadith and Tafseer have concurred  that the ascension of Isaa (alayhis salaam) was a physical ascension.” 

Haafiz Ibn Katheer has compiled in his Tafseer ten big pages full with these Ahaadith which state and describe Hadhrat Isaa’s bodily ascension while he was alive, his presence in the Heaven in his physical state, i.e. with his physical body, and his appearance on earth in close proximity to Qiyaamah. It has been explicitly mentioned that these issues are  Ijmaaee, Qat’i and Ittifaaqi  in which there exists absolutely no difference of opinion. 

The entire life of Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) was a  Mu’jizah (Divine Miracle). His mother, Hadhrat Maryam (alayhas salaam) was a Virgin. He was born  without the agency of a father. He spoke when he was an infant of a day old proclaiming his Nubuwwat and the Ahkaam of Salaat and Zakaat. He left this world alive in the miraculous state of ascension into the Heavens. He lives there to this day, alive in the way all human beings are alive. His descent to earth will be miraculous. His task of slaying Dajjaal will be miraculous. Are all these irrefutable facts of Imaan the products of the apocryphal traditions of the Jews and Christians? Only men whose kufr was stamped on their hearts when they were still in the wombs of their mothers can have the audacity of denying these  Aqaaid  of incontrovertible truth. 

We supplicate to Allah Ta’ala to preserve our Imaan and to eliminate the kufr from the hearts of the mulhideen in our midst. After all, Allah Ta’ala has the power to eliminate kufr from even the sealed and stamped hearts of zindeeqs. “Verily, Allah has power over all things.”

NUZUL (Decension) of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam)

By Hazrat Maulana Muhammed Badre-Alam

Common Muslim belief

Muslims believe that Nabi Isaa (Alayhis Salaam) will suffer a natural death after Nuzul  (decension).  They differ with other people only about his previous death.     

According to common Muslim  belief Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) has been taken up to the heavens bodily alive and that he will return to this world and die a natural death.  There are no sectarian differences among Muslims on these points from the early days of Islam.  Not to speak of many other incidents of his life which strongly disprove the Divinity of Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam), the belief about future death stands out almost as final repudiation of  such  divinity. Consequently, once you believe in his physical birth and death there remains absolutely no risk of conceding even a shadow of divinity though you also believe that  he had ascended safely to the heavens.      

Here we may refer to the interpretation of  “I shall receive you” as “I will cause  you to die”  which has been given by Hazrat Ibne Abbas and so it is no way inconsistent with beliefs entertained by Muslims.  The suggested interpretation can neither be correctly to the great commentator of  Qur’aan nor has it been countenanced by any Muslim authority of repute.  In fact there are several other traditions on the authority of Hazrat Ibne Abbas which unequivocally affirm the common Muslim belief that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) will descend into this world and thereafter die a natural death.        


People of deficient knowledge have fallen victim to serious mis understanding in that the single version of Hazrat Ibne-Abass referred to, occurs in the compilation of Imam Bukhari which fact leads to an inference that the latter also agreed with it. Besides the foregoing comments, it may not be overlooked that in this very compilation elsewhere specific traditions relating to “Nuzul” are included.  How then can it be argued that death of  Nabi Isa (alayhis salaam) mentioned in the version in dispute signifies a foregoing one.  Since in the other traditions the views of Hazrat Ibne Abass are clearly brought out,  why not infer that Imam Bukhari held the same belief, knowing as we do that Bukhari itself records numerous traditions to that effect and the Imam must be supposed to have taken full responsibility for the authenticity of these traditions.     

Another authority who is often quoted in  support of the view of previous death is Ibne Hazm.  The uncorroborated opinion of a single authority of medium rank can hardly have any weight against the unanimous pronouncements of leading Ulama. And Ibne Hazm is already notorious in holding arbitrary views on different subjects.  He too in certain places has clearly opined that Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam) is destined to descend to the earth towards  the end.  In his well- known book,  Al Muhalla, page 391, he has described the doctrine of “Nuzul” as one of the basic beliefs of  the majority of Muslims.  The same opinion has been expressed by him in  Kitaabul-Fasl,  see pages 23, 55, 73, 77 and 87.  One such extract from the book runs as follows:     

“The reliable narrators who  have conveyed to us the doctrines of prophethood of our Holy Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proclaimed that no new Prophet will appear after him except Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam).  The prediction of his “Nuzul” is embodied in authentic traditions.  It is the same apostle of Allah who had been sent unto Bani Israel and whom the Jews claimed to have killed by crucifixion.  Hence it is incumbent upon us to believe in these things. And it is proved from reliable sources that no new Nubuwwat will exist after the passing away of our Holy Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).