The Qadiani Ahmadiyya Lahore Tragedy By Truth Unvield

[Kaleem_ch]

AOA all,
Sorry I have been busy with work and stuff and could not login for the past few days. But below is my response to Qadianitruth's 2 questions about the word Khatam.



Qadianitruth's questions
I quote Mirza from his own writing when he translated 33:40.

Ref. Roohani Khatin, vol. 3 azala-e-aouham, page 431 or pdf 463-727

Here is link from your official website:
http://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Ruhan...ain-Vol-03.pdf

" Meaning Muhammed is not the father of any of you but is a prophet of Allah and final (ender) of prophets. This verse logically proves that after our nabi , there will be no nabi."

HERE MIRZA CLEARLY TRANSLATED KHATAM AS FINAL OR ENDER OF PROPHETS.
There are other occeasions where Mirza proved that khatam means last or final. Here is another for record and that will also prove that Mirza lies too. Let me show you how.

Ruhani khazine vol. 3, izala-e-aouham page 511 or pdf 543 of 727
http://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Ruhan...ain-Vol-03.pdf
Translation:
" Quran does not allow any prophet after KHATAM AN NABIYYEEN, NEW or old. Because prophet is given knowledge through angel Jibrael and door for the descending of Jebrael for prophetic revelation is closed. The phenominan of coming of a prophet but no revelation is self denying. "

Here again Mirza tells us that no prophet after khatam un naniyeen . He is using KHATAM UN NABIYYEN as ender of prophethood. But he also said that descend of Gebrail a.s. for prophetic revelation is ended too as the prophethood has ended. Good point ..... but what do you say about this?


Ref. ruhani khazine vol. 22 izala aouham page 106, pdf 123-813 (main page and footnote)
http://www.alislam.org/urdu/rk/Ruhan...ain-Vol-22.pdf

Translation: " In this revelation from god (wahi-e-ilahi), the apparent menaing is that I will make mistake ..... (HERE MIRZA CLAINMING RECEIVING WAHI AND GOES ON TO SAY) ..AAIL came to me."
In the footnote he says" here, Alla Tala gave Gebrail the name of AAIL , beause he comes again and again "

SO MR KALEEM, ABOVE REFERNCES ARE AFROM MIRZA'S BOOKS, LINKS FROM YOUR OFFICIAL WEBSITE AND ARE IN URDU. I will post screen shots if someone needed that too. They show that:
Mirza trannlated Khatam as FINAL or LAST.
When he said that Gebriel will not come for prophetic revelation as this door is closed, WHO WAS AAIL WHO CAME FOR WAHI?
PLEASE TELL US ALL, WHY MIRZA LIED?



My response:

Qadianitruth:

I think you probably do not understand the difference between a Nabi and Rasool. For your info I have found the difference from the web and it is from a Sunni website
The link is http://www.dartabligh.org/books/ebooks/basicbeliefs/page55.asp
(Begin quote)
What is the difference between Rasool and Nabi ?
After knowing the terminological meanings of Rasul and Nabi, it is also important to understand the difference of these two great positions.
The Quran has used both the words, Nabi and Rasul, which shows that there were two kinds of messengers.
1. Some of the messengers were Nabi only.
2. Some messengers were both Nabi and Rasool.
The difference between Rasul and Nabi is that,
1. A Rasul was a messenger of Allah who was given a new Shariat (codes of law) from Him. And a Nabi was also the messenger of Allah, but he was not given any new Shariat and followed the shariat of earlier Rasul. Sheikh Mufid, a great scholar of Islam writes in his book, Awail al-Maqalat, every messenger is a prophet [Nabi], but not every Prophet is a Rasul [Apostle]. All Rasules were Nabi but all Nabis were not Rasuls.
Out of 25 Prophets mentioned in the Holy Quran, or among 124000 Nabis, Five were Rasul, and are called Ulu l-azm prophets, meaning those who possess a quality of determination and firmness.
The five Rasuls and Ulul-azm Prophets are:
1 - Hazrat Nooh (as)
2 - Hazrat Ibrahim (as)
3 - Hazrat Musa (as)
4 - Hazrat Isa (as)
5 - Hazrat Muhammad (sws)

• Prophet Nooh(as) was given a Shariah which was followed by other prophets up to the time of Hazrat Ibrahim(as).
• Prophet Ibrahim(as) was given a Shariah which remained in force up to the time of Hazrat Musa. i.e., Hazrat Yaqub, Hazrat Lut, Hazrat Yousuf (as) etc. followed the Shariat of Ibrahim.
• Prophet Musa(as) was given a new Shariah which was followed by all the prophets of Bani Israel until the time of Hazrat Isa (as).
• Prophet Isa (as) was given a new Shariat which remained in force upto the time of the Holy Prophet.
• Prophet Muhammad (sws) was given the last and the most perfect Shariat which will remain in force up to the last working day of the world.

The Shariat -e- Muhammadi can never be changed as Prophet Muhammed (sws) is the last prophet and no prophet will come after him. Our Prophet, Hazrat Muhammad (sws) has the highest position and rank among all the Prophets.
(End quote)

Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad calimed to be a Nabi and not a Rasool. And this what he is explaning in the links that you have mentioned. He did not bring a new shariah nor did he ever claim to change the Shariah of his Master Hadhrat Mohammed pbuh.

Even if I take your meanings of Khatam then Hadhrat Isa A.S was a rasool with a shariat. So therefore he cannot possibly come back.

I will respond to your next questions when I get home. J

 

[atensari]

AOA all,
Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad calimed to be a Nabi and not a Rasool. And this what he is explaning in the links that you have mentioned. He did not bring a new shariah nor did he ever claim to change the Shariah of his Master Hadhrat Mohammed pbuh.

Even if I take your meanings of Khatam then Hadhrat Isa A.S was a rasool with a shariat. So therefore he cannot possibly come back.

I will respond to your next questions when I get home. J

Is forbidding "Qital" is not changing the Shariah?
Is Qadiyani Khalifat is same as defined in Shariat Muhammadi established by Muhammad SAW and Khulafa-a-Rashdeen?
Is Qadiyani concept of establishing Shariat itself is same as done by Prophet Muhammad SAW?

 

[QADIANITRUTH]

Kaleem ch.

Just one comment, you were arguing about 'khatam' and when i showed your Mirza translated as " final" you deviated from that issue. I AWAIT YOU FUTHER RESPONSE AND THEN I WILL SHOW YOU THAT MIRZA ACTUALLY SAID ' NO NABI' DEFINING KATAM NABIYYEEN. Moreover, you igored lie of Mirza when he said Gibriel's ( a.s.) desend is not happening anymore yet he later said 'gebriel came to him .......

Anyway, I await your reply..

 

[xiaahmad]

What is the difference between Rasool and Nabi ?
After knowing the terminological meanings of Rasul and Nabi, it is also important to understand the difference of these two great positions.
The Quran has used both the words, Nabi and Rasul, which shows that there were two kinds of messengers.
1. Some of the messengers were Nabi only.
2. Some messengers were both Nabi and Rasool.
The difference between Rasul and Nabi is that,
1. A Rasul was a messenger of Allah who was given a new Shariat (codes of law) from Him. And a Nabi was also the messenger of Allah, but he was not given any new Shariat and followed the shariat of earlier Rasul. Sheikh Mufid, a great scholar of Islam writes in his book, Awa’il al-Maqalat, “every messenger is a prophet [Nabi], but not every Prophet is a Rasul [Apostle]. All Rasules were Nabi but all Nabis were not Rasuls.
Out of 25 Prophets mentioned in the Holy Quran, or among 124000 Nabis, Five were Rasul, and are called Ulu l-azm prophets, meaning those who possess a quality of determination and firmness.
The five Rasuls and Ulul-azm Prophets are:
1 - Hazrat Nooh (as)
2 - Hazrat Ibrahim (as)
3 - Hazrat Musa (as)
4 - Hazrat Isa (as)
5 - Hazrat Muhammad (sws)

Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad calimed to be a Nabi and not a Rasool. And this what he is explaning in the links that you have

Kaleem Ch

Bro your belief about Rasul and Nabi are Against ur own jammat stance
but let me tell u MGA also said that he is RASUL as well :)

He writes:

"Qadian remain safe because RASOOL of God was in Qadian"
Rohani Khazain vol 18 page 226

"God keep qadiani remain safe of plague because this is seat of his RASOOL"
Rohani Khazain vol 18 page 230

"True God is he who has sent his RASOOLin Qadian "
Daafe ul Bala Roohani Khazain Vol 18 page 231

So now what u gona say? so think please and dont get trick by ur leaders.

Plus Prophet Muhammad (PUBH) is Khatam un Nabiyeen so he has Seal the Prophethood (Nabuwat)
no where Prophet(PUBH) said law bearing or non law bearing thing. so please dont assume.

 

[atensari]

Kaleem_ch
You quoted (copied from a web site ) "A Rasul was a messenger of Allah who was given a new Shariat (codes of law) from Him".

Was Hazrat Essa given any Shariat?
​

later you are adding Him in the List of Rasools.

When a Prophet "Nabi" specifically sent towards a Nation he became a Rasool, if majority of nation reject Him that Nation is destroyed. Noah, Aad, Samood, Loot AS were Rasools.

Hazrat Mussa AS was a Rasool toward Firoon and his Nation "Izhab ela Firoon Ina-Hu Ttagha" and Nabi for Bani Israel. That’s why Firoon and his Nation was destroyed not the Bani-Isarel despite their repeated disobeyed Musssa AS.

Essa AS was Rasool towards Bani-Israel (with out new Shariat), the punishment of Bani-Israel which they deserve after rejecting HIM AS is postponed. This is the reason He will come back, so that His disobedient are punished in HIS presence as nation of other Rasools are punished in Their presence

Younas AS was a Rasool as well, His nation was about to destroyed. He left the land with out express permission from Allah, as result nation given concession and destruction decision is taken back.

 

[xiaahmad]

I have proven to Kaleem that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be RASUL as well which according to himself cant come.
plus things is Ahmadies try to focus on bad elements of muslims society like Fox News which does not prove them to be right.

Prophet Muhammad (PUBH), Companions and top scholars were very clear about Finality of Prophethood
(remember ESA(AS) is already a Prophet so his return does not goes against finality, plus even if some one believe ESA(AS) to be dead yet that does not prove Mirza Ghulam truthful Sir Syed, GHamdi , Khalid Zaheer these ppl believe that and yet they are/were not ahmadies but Muslim)

Imam Abu Hanfiah(RA) was so strict on Finality of Prophethood that he said we cannot even ask for proof from some one who claim to be Prophet about about his Prophethood claim
May ALLAH guide Ahmadies towards Islam and out of slavery of Mirza Ghulam & Sons

 

[Night_Hawk]

I have proven to Kaleem that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be RASUL as well which according to himself cant come.
plus things is Ahmadies try to focus on bad elements of muslims society like Fox News which does not prove them to be right.

Prophet Muhammad (PUBH), Companions and top scholars were very clear about Finality of Prophethood
(remember ESA(AS) is already a Prophet so his return does not goes against finality, plus even if some one believe ESA(AS) to be dead yet that does not prove Mirza Ghulam truthful Sir Syed, GHamdi , Khalid Zaheer these ppl believe that and yet they are/were not ahmadies but Muslim)

Imam Abu Hanfiah(RA) was so strict on Finality of Prophethood that he said we cannot even ask for proof from some one who claim to be Prophet about about his Prophethood claim
May ALLAH guide Ahmadies towards Islam and out of slavery of Mirza Ghulam & Sons

Khair:jazak: brother, May Allah reward you for your efforts.

 

[crankthskunk]

AKSheikh is someone who may have a personal vendetta against the Qadiani Jamat, but he is no friend of Muslims and Islam. His forum is used constantly for years to attack the religion of Islam, the Person of our beloved Prophet SAW (PBUH), our Holy Book the Quran by some ex-Qadiani and even by some of the moderators of the forum. Once a regular Lahori, Muhstaq Malik wrote under oath that Mr. AK Sheikh himself used foul and abusive language against Prophet Muhammad SAW to him and AK Sheikh wanted him to leave Islam (this is Muhstaq Maliks point of view, for us Muslims Lahori Qadianis are not Muslims either) and become an atheist.
This claim of Muhstaq Malik was never denied by either AK Sheikh or any of his moderators.

I have taken part on Ahmedi.org for last 4 years; I used to stand up to these Qadianis and ex-Qadianis on regular basis whenever time permits me. I was a constant thorn in their side, highlighting and criticizing Islam and Muslim hating policies of the forum, its owners and moderators.

Recently, after I highlighted a users plagiarism and his used of borrowed ideas against Islam and Muslims and his blatant lies against the Holy Quran. In the process criticising the policies of the moderators to allow the attacks on Islam and Holy Quran in the guise of exposing Mirza and Qadianis. I was banned by the moderators on the flimsy grounds that I criticised the moderators and management of the forum.
For the sake of my religion Islam, I will criticise thousand times and take issue with any one who try to lie or distort the teachings of Islam and the Holy Quran.

I have written an article on the finality of Prophet Hood, this article is different from any article or book written. I challenge any Qadiani to respond to my article and explain me the meanings of the alleged revelations received by Mirza, produced at the end of my article.

http://antiquadiani.yuku.com/topic/383

I have another challenge for the Lahoris who had spread this lie for over 100 years that Mirza never claimed Prophet Hood. I have written two more articles a part from the one quoted above, these three articles exposed the lies of Lahoris. I have challenged them on their own blog, Dr. Zahid Aziz who runs their official website and blog, did engaged initially but when he realised he is being humiliated and his, Lahoris and Mirzas lies are exposed, he ran away from the discussion. In the process he used some really nasty language to insinuate charges against me, which many Qadianis are much found to label, when they run out of arguments and are utterly defeated.

I give this open challenge to any Lahori Qadiani to prove against me that Mirza never claimed Prophet Hood, either in a written debate, or a face to face town hall debate in London or in a Court of Law in the UK.

One piece of advice to Lahoris, using the arguments of Sher Muhammad used in the Courts in South Africa are of no use, I have already exposed his lies in one of my articles. Suffice to say I have read the arguments he produced and the verdict of the Court too. I can not change the verdict now, after years of passing, but I can assure
You, I will destroy his arguments if you give me a chance, and also destroy the credibility of Mirza and anyone who represent him beyond repairs.

To My Muslim brothers please read, enjoy and leave comments if you feel like.

To Qadianis, read sulk and if you find courage to discuss and debate, feel free to engage with me.

Here are remaining two articles to expose lies of Lahoris.

http://antiquadiani.yuku.com/topic/369
http://antiquadiani.yuku.com/topic/376

I advice the readers to read in the following sequence to have a better and logical understanding about the issues raised in these articles.

1- Topic 369 Repeat of an Error
2- Topic 376 Recitation of Kalima
3- Topic 383 finality of Prophethood

 

[sok]

Just saw this topic today. I have read enough Qadiani books to know that its a load of bull----. A prophet never have any teachers while Kana mirza studied in school/college.

 

[atensari]

??????? ??? ????????

 

[Kaleem_ch]

AOA all,
I know all of you are looking for your answers. But why don't we stick to one topic before going to the next one. We started we word " Khatam" so let us finish that first or between all of you pick who wants what topic discussed first. Otherwise way you guys will not understand a thing I explain.
We will definitely go through all of them one by one.
What do you guys say?

 

[moazzamniaz]

AOA all,
I know all of you are looking for your answers. But why don't we stick to one topic before going to the next one. We started we word " Khatam" so let us finish that first or between all of you pick who wants what topic discussed first. Otherwise way you guys will not understand a thing I explain.
We will definitely go through all of them one by one.
What do you guys say?

Bro, i really sympathize with u, as u r doing an impossible task. U r defending an un-defendable person. Mirza Saahib`s own writings r full of contradictions and somersaults. I have only read last 2 pages and it is evident that

1- Ahmadis say that Mirza Saahib was a 'Nabi', but bro Xiaahmad(May God bless him) has proven that Mirza Saahib himself said that he was a 'Rasool'.Now, is there any reason after that to discuss what 'Khatam' means? I f u r trying to prove that he was a 'Nabi' not a 'Rasool', then Mirza Saahib himself has refuted ur point.

2- Ahmadis say that if Mirza Saahib was a false prophet, then he would have been killed. But, again bro Xiaahmad has proven with examples that numerous false prophets died a natural death.

3- U should have courage and decency to admit the out come after each and every point! Kindly answer the points raised by bro Xiaahmad. Thanx

 

[crankthskunk]

Kaleem_Ch

In 4 years, not one Qadiani won a single argument against me, why is this if you are truthful? XiaAhmed knows me very well, indeed.

1- On the word “Khattam” I have given you short cut to my article, if you can explain the meanings of the alleged ilham received by Mirza and explain me the meanings of the term “Khatam RabaulAlameen” then we can progress further. This article is published for few months now, not one single Qadiani could provide explanations and meanings of this alleged revelations, according to the meanings used by Mirza, your Jammat and the Qadianis.

2- Mirza’s lies that his truthfulness is accomplished because he has surpassed the 23 years period of revelations granted to our Beloved Prophet Muhammad SAW (May peace and blessing of Allah SWT, All His SWT’s Angels and all humanity be upon him SAW) are busted in my article listed below, read this article and then come and put your points across. http://antiquadiani.yuku.com/topic/370/t/Mirza-a-false-Prophet.html

3- Mirza was a filthy liar, nothing else nothing more. His prophecies are also busted in my articles deaths of his brother and father. Undeniable proofs are given in these articles of the lies of Mirza and subsequent fraud committed by your Jamat and people like Zafrullah Khan, the person who was responsible for doing more harm to the cause of Pakistan then many, at the time of her inceptions. I don’t know when Pakistanis will learn their lessons, and do not give these Qadianis any prominent place in their government. Muslims should know these Qadianis are enemies of Islam and Muslims and they will cause damage to Islam and Muslims at any given opportunity. On Ahmedi.org and other forums, they openly declare that Pakistan would be destroyed because the Pakistani Muslims have declared Mirza a kazzab. The beauty of my articles, they are very sound and can withstand any legal challenge. I have purposefully attacked the credibility of Mirza and their Jamat. The evidence produced is devastating for their cult. Qadianis can not play their words twisting games; they can never ever win any arguments.

 

[QADIANITRUTH]

AOA all,
I know all of you are looking for your answers. But why don't we stick to one topic before going to the next one. We started we word " Khatam" so let us finish that first or between all of you pick who wants what topic discussed first. Otherwise way you guys will not understand a thing I explain.
We will definitely go through all of them one by one.
What do you guys say?

Kaleem ch.

I addressed your false explanation of word ' khatam' and showed from your own mirza qadiani's translation of word. Not only that, Mirza translated the quranic verse 33:10 in the context of prophethood that he agreed, has ended.

But, as any other qadiani, deviated from topic and started your attempt to confuse us. Brother Xia, like always, came with solid arguments for which you have no reply.

I am still awaiting your reply on your 'nabis' claim that Gebriael came to him, though Mirz said that descending of Gabrial ha ended.

- please tell us why Mirza translated khatam as FINAL OR LAST/
- why did he lie about descend of Gebriel?
- why a LIAR be trusted?

 

[Kaleem_ch]

All,
Neither am I deviating from the topic nor you have proved anything that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad A.S took the Khatam's meanings as the last. Perhaps you should read the contexts and try to understand what is he talking about.
I have explained to you in many ways what the word Khatam means. I understand that you interpret it an different way. But we should look at this word from all angles and decide what is the most appropriate.
I also understand that " Atensari" , "Xia Ahmad", "Night Hawk" etc are all looking for answers to their questions and I will keep stressing on the fact that lets take one issue at a time. Word " Khatam" is as I take it is the root as well as the death of Hadhrat Isa A.S. Once these are understood all the other things will start clearing up as well.

@ Qadianitruth

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad A.S is not a person where on hand he would take the word Khatam as last and then declare himself a subordinate prophet.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Finality of Prophethood [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The principal charge leveled against the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, is that (God save us), he repudiated the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, being the Khataman Nabiyyeen.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This is an utterly false charge. The Promised Messiah, peace be on him, has repeatedly affirmed in his writings that he believes that every word and vowel point of the Holy Quran is from God and that this is part of his faith. He was the first person in Islam who proclaimed that not one word of the Holy Quran is abrogated. He challenged those who believe that a certain number of verses of the Holy Quran have been abrogated, to come forth in opposition to his declaration and that he would establish that not a single word of the Holy Quran has been abrogated. To say concerning such a person that (God save us) he repudiated a whole verse of the Holy Quran (33:41) is a monstrosity.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He has stated:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I call Allah, the Glorious, to witness that I am not a disbeliever. My doctrine is that there is no one worthy of worship save Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah . I believe concerning him that he was the Messenger of Allah and the Khataman Nabiyyeen. I affirm the truth of this statement with as many oaths as are the Holy names of Allah and as are the letters of the Holy Quran and as is the number of the excellencies of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. No belief of mine is contrary to the commands of Allah and His Messenger. He who imagines anything contrary to this labors under a mis-conception. (Karamatus Sadiqeen, p.25)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Again he has stated:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The person who was above all, and was a perfect man, and a perfect prophet, and who came with the fullness of blessings, through whom, on account of his spiritual advent and the spiritual resurrection that he brought about, the first judgment manifested itself and a whole universe that was dead was revived, that blessed prophet Khatamul Anbiya, Leader of the elect, Katamul Mursileen, Pride of the Prophets was Muhammad Mustafa, peace and the blessings of Allah by upon him. (Itmamul Hujjah, p.28)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He claimed:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Allah is Glorious, Allah is Glorious; what a high station was that of the Khatamul Anbiya, the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Glory be to Allah, what high degree of light was his. (Braheen Ahmadiyya, p.246)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]My belief that I hold in this life and with which, by the grace of Allah, I shall pass on from this world is that our lord and master, Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was Khataman Nabiyyeen and the best of Messengers. (Izala Auham, part I, p.137)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He declared:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I believe in the Khatam-i-Nabuwat of the Khatamul Anbjya, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and consider one who denies the Khatam-i-Nabuwat as faithless and outside the pale of Islam. (Taqreer Wajabul llan, 1891)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He has stated:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]My belief is that our Holy Prophet is better and more exalted than all the Messengers and is Khataman Nabiyyeen. (Ayenah Kamalat Islam, p.327)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He has declared:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I believe that our Holy Prophet, Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is more exalted than all the Messengers and is the Khatamul Anbiya. (Hamamatul Bushra, p.8)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He has affirmed:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I believe truly and perfectly in the verse which says: 'But he was the Messenger of Allah and Khataman Nabiyyeen'. (Ek Ghati Ka Izala)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]All this makes it clear beyond doubt that the Promised Messiah, peace be upon him, had perfect faith in the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, being the Khataman Nabiyyeen, and that he considered anyone who repudiated this as being outside the pale of Islam. It is, therefore, the height of injustice to allege that he denied the Khatam-i-Nabuwat of Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is true, however, that the Ahmadiyya Community differs with some of the Muslim divines in the true meaning and interpretation of the relevant verse (33:41). The Ahmadis have firm faith in the verse itself and a difference of view regarding its meaning and interpretation does not import disbelief. In the history of Islam great Imams and divines have differed with each other in the matter of interpretation on several questions. Despite those differences they were all considered Muslims and are worthy of honor by all Muslims. Such Imams and high authorities have interpreted this particular verse (33:41) exactly as the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has interpreted it. Will they all, God forbid, be held to be non-Muslims? It would be obviously unjust that if X interprets a verse in one way he should be held to be a Muslim but if Y interprets it in the same way, he should be held to be a disbeliever. We set out, by way of illustration, the interpretations of this verse (33:41) by some of the outstanding divines.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Mulla Ali Qari (mercy of Allah be upon him), who died in 1014 A.H. and was a great research scholar and a master of Hanafi jurisprudence and was a great Imam, has stated in his book Mauzuat Kabir, with reference to the saying of the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him:[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Had Ibrahim (the Holy Prophet's infant son) survived, he would have been a true prophet, that if Ibrahim had survived and had become a prophet he would still have been a follower of the Holy Prophet; and he has interpreted the verse (33:41) as meaning that there would be no prophet after the Holy Prophet who would abrogate his law and who would not be one of his followers.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the same way, Hazrat Shah Waliullah, Muhaddas of Delhi (mercy of Allah be upon him), who has been acclaimed as the Reformer of the 12th century of Islam, has stated in his book Tafheemat IIahiyyah:[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The prophets came to an end with the Holy Prophet, meaning that there can be no divinely inspired reformer after him who would be commissioned by Allah, the Glorious, with a new law.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thus there can be a difference in the interpretation of the verse, but so far as faith in the verse is concerned it is not open to any doubt that the Promised Messiah, peace be upon him, had full faith in it.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The verse is as follows:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets. Allah has full knowledge of all things. (33:41)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Our opponents say that the expression Khataman Nabiyyeen, which has been employed in this verse, relating to the Holy Prophet, means that by his advent prophethood has been closed and that he was the last prophet in every sense. This interpretation is not correct. The word Khatam means seal and thus the expression Khataman Nabiyyeen means the Seal of the Prophets. The verse states that Muhammad is not the father of any man but is the Messenger of Allah and is the Seal of the Prophets. The question, therefore, is what is the true meaning of the expression 'Seal of the Prophets' in this context? Our opponents contend that the phrase Khataman Nabiyyeen does mean the Seal of the Prophets but that its interpretation is that the Holy Prophet was the last prophet, for the purpose of a seal is to close a document.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is well known, however, that the purpose of a seal is not to close a statement but to certify it as correct. That is why often a seal is affixed to a document at its top and in other cases it is affixed at its bottom or at its end. Its purpose is to certify the genuiness and correctness of the contents of the document. It is well known that after the truce of Hudaybiyyah, when the Holy Prophet decided to address letters to the rulers and chiefs of surrounding territories inviting them to the acceptance of Islam, he was told that rulers and chiefs do not attach any significance to a communication addressed to them unless it bears the seal of the writer. Thereupon the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, had a seal prepared which was thereafter used for the attestation and certification of documents (Bokhari and Muslim).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The purpose of a seal being attestation and certification, the interpretation of the verse in question would be that though the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, had no male issue, yet being the Messenger of Allah he is the spiritual progenitor of his followers. He is, therefore, not without issue but has a large progeny. It is added that he is not merely a Divine Messenger but is also the Seal of the Prophets, that is to say, he is not only the progenitor of the generality of the believers but is the spiritual progenitor of the prophets and messengers also and thus he occupies the exalted position which imports that no prophet or messenger can now appear unless he bears with him the confirmatory seal of the Holy Prophet. This means that the Holy Prophet is not only the spiritual progenitor of the generality of believers but is also the spiritual progenitor of prophets and messengers.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]If this verse is construed as meaning that the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was absolutely the last prophet, the verse becomes meaningless. In that case its meaning would be: 'Muhammad had no son but he is the last prophet.' In Arabic idiom the word 'but' which has been used here is employed for the purpose of introducing an explanation in modification of what has gone before, or for the purpose of clearing a doubt which the previous statement might raise. The use of the word 'but' in this verse entails that it should be followed by a statement which modifies or clarifies that which has gone before. In view of this the interpretation put forward by our opponents makes the verse meaningless, for it would then amount to a statement that though the Holy Prophet has no issue, no prophet will come after him. This would constitute no praise of the Holy Prophet.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The interpretation of the verse adopted by the Ahmadiyya Community is in exact accord with that attributed to it by great Imams and the elect in the past. For instance, Hazrat Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her) is reported as having said:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Say he was Khataman Nabiyyeen, but do not say that there will be no prophet after him. (Durre Manshur, Vol. V of Jalaludin Suyuti)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Mohyuddin ibn Arabi has stated in his book, Futuhat Makkiyyah:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Prophethood will continue among men till the Judgment Day, though a new law is barred. Law is a part of prophethood.[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Imam Muhammad Tahir has stated in his book, Majmaul Bihar:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The saying of Hazrat Ayesha that Muslims should call the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be on him, Khataman Nabiyyeen, but should not say that there would be no prophet after him, had reference to the advent of the Promised Messiah. The direction given by Hazrat Ayesha is not in contradiction with the hadees: 'There will be no prophet after me'; for the meaning of the Holy Prophet was that there would be no prophet after him who would abrogate his law.[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi (may Allah have mercy on him) Reformer of the second millennium, who is held in great honor, has stated:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The achievement by the followers of the Holy Prophet by way of obedience and inheritance of the excellencies of prophethood after the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is not inconsistent with his being the Khatamar Rusul (Maktubat Ahmadiyya, Vol. I)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Shah Waliullah, Muhaddas of Delhi, may Allah have mercy on him, who was a great divine and was the Reformer of the 12th century of Islam, has stated in his book Tafheemat Ilahiyyah that the meaning of prophethood having come to an end with the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is that there will be no one who will be appointed by God Almighty with a new law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]These are only a few out of hundreds of statements made by eminent Muslim divines and righteous people who have interpreted the expression Khataman Nabiyyeen in the same way as the Promised Messiah, peace be upon him, has interpreted it. If despite differences in interpretation they were Muslims and were accepted as believers in the Holy Quran, why should the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, be penalized for having the same belief? Such an attitude would be the height of injustice.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There is a serious contradiction involved in the stand taken by the divines who are opposed to the Ahmadiyya Movement. On the one hand they pronounce the Promised Messiah, peace be on him, a disbeliever because in their estimation his claim of prophethood is contradictory of the verse which pronounces the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, as being Khataman Nabjyyeen; and on the other hand they believe that Jesus, son of Mary, who is a Prophet, would come a second time. If the Seal of Prophethood is disrupted by the claim of the Promised Messiah that he is a prophet by reflection, then how is it that it would not be disrupted by the second advent of Jesus who was a Prophet in his own right? The bulk of the Muslims believe that Jesus would descend from heaven in his earthly body and would be a prophet.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For instance, Maulana Maudoodi Sahib has stated:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The second advent of Jesus is a question on which the Muslims are all agreed. This belief is based upon the Holy Quran, hadees, and consensus ... This is a certainty and admits of no doubt that the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, has announced the second advent of Jesus. This is established by irrefutable testimony. If such testimony can be rejected, no historical event of the world can be accepted. (Answer to ten questions on behalf of Jamaat Islami, p.24)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In a hadees of Muslim, the Messiah who was to come has been described as the Prophet of Allah. The stand of the Ahl-i-Hadees sect in this matter is that there is a consensus among the Muslims and it is supported by the ahadees that the Promised Messiah would be a prophet. (Ahl-i-Hadees, 29 November 1966).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Imam Sayuti, Ibn Arabi, and Ibn Hajar have all clearly affirmed that in his second advent, the Messiah would be a prophet. Basing himself on a statement by Imam Sayuti, Nawab Siddique Hasan Khan Sahib wrote:[/FONT]

• [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He who asserts that Hazrat Isa, when he comes down will not be a prophet and would be deprived of his prophethood is certainly a disbeliever as Imam Jalaludin Sayuti has clearly affirmed, inasmuch as Hazrat Isa is a Prophet and a prophet is not deprived of his quality of prophethood either in his lifetime or after his death. (Hujajul Karamah, p.431)[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Shaikh Ibn Arabi has said:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There is no difference of opinion on the question that Hazrat Isa is a Prophet and a Messenger and it is agreed that he would appear in the latter days and his prophethood is well established (Futuhat Makkiyyah, Vol.II, p.3)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Shaikh Ibn Hajar wrote:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Isa is an honored Prophet. After he comes down he would still be a Prophet and Messenger. An affirmation by a person of no account that he will be only a member of the Muslim community is not correct, inasmuch as he being one of the Muslims and his giving effect to the Islamic law is not inconsistent with his being a Prophet and a Messenger. (Alfatawa Alhadisiyyak, p.129)[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thus, it is the united stand of the Muslims that at the time of his second advent the Messiah will still be clothed with the robe of prophethood and that this would not be inconsistent with the verse which describes the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, as Khataman Nabiyyeen (33:41).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]How unjust, therefore, it is that despite the belief that Jesus of Nazareth will descend from heaven in his capacity of the Messiah of Israel and that he will be a Prophet and that this would not disrupt the Seal of Prophethood, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, who claimed to be a follower of the Holy Prophet and a Prophet by way of reflection and declared his purpose to be perfect obedience to the Holy Prophet, should be held to have been outside the pale of Islam on account of this claim.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Here are some instances of the use of the expression Khatam in the connotation of high, eminent, excellent etc. but not meaning the last:[/FONT]

1. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Abu Tayyub was pronounced Khatamus Shuara. (Introduction to the Divan of Mutanabbi p. 5)[/FONT]
2. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, was Khatamul Aulia. (Tafseer Safi, Surah Ahzab)[/FONT]
3. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Imam Shafai was Khatamul Aulia. (At Tuhfatus Sunnia, p. 45)[/FONT]
4. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Shaikh Ibn Arabi was Khatamul Aulia. (Title page of Fatuhat Makkiyyah)[/FONT]
5. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Shah Abdul Aziz was Khatamul Muhaddaseen Wal Mufassireen. (Hadyatis Shia, p.7)[/FONT]
6. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Maulvi Anwar Shah Sahib Kashmiri was Khatamul Muhaddaseen. (Raisul Ahrar, p. 99)[/FONT]
7. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Habib Shirazi is considered Khatumushuara in Iran. (Hayate Saadi, p.87)[/FONT]
8. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Imam Suyuti was Khatamul Muhaddaseen. (Hadyatis Shia, p.210)[/FONT]
9. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Hazrat Ali was Khatamul Auwsia. (Minar-ul Huda, p. 106)[/FONT]
10. [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Maulvi Muhammad Qasim was Khatamul Muffasireen. (Asrar-e-Qurani, title page).[/FONT]

taken from Alislam.org

 

[Kaleem_ch]

Kaleem_ch
You quoted (copied from a web site ) "A Rasul was a messenger of Allah who was given a new Shariat (codes of law) from Him".

Was Hazrat Essa given any Shariat?
​

later you are adding Him in the List of Rasools.

When a Prophet "Nabi" specifically sent towards a Nation he became a Rasool, if majority of nation reject Him that Nation is destroyed. Noah, Aad, Samood, Loot AS were Rasools.

Hazrat Mussa AS was a Rasool toward Firoon and his Nation "Izhab ela Firoon Ina-Hu Ttagha" and Nabi for Bani Israel. That’s why Firoon and his Nation was destroyed not the Bani-Isarel despite their repeated disobeyed Musssa AS.

Essa AS was Rasool towards Bani-Israel (with out new Shariat), the punishment of Bani-Israel which they deserve after rejecting HIM AS is postponed. This is the reason He will come back, so that His disobedient are punished in HIS presence as nation of other Rasools are punished in Their presence

Younas AS was a Rasool as well, His nation was about to destroyed. He left the land with out express permission from Allah, as result nation given concession and destruction decision is taken back.

These differences were taken from a sunni website and I have mentioned that I am quoting it from the website. It is the sunni website who is declaring that Hadhrat Isa brought a new shariat.
Ahmadis only beleive Hadhrat Isa as a Nabi and by the way we do not differentiate in a Nabi and Rasool as such.

 

[xiaahmad]

Kaleem
and now ur changing ur stance on Rasool thing u said MGA didnt claimed to be Rasul but I showed u that he did , but u didnt answer by the way according to ur own jammat ESA(AS) is not law bearing prophet.

khatam has been used with other meanings but it has been used as seal in sense of ender as well and thats how MGA used it.

and remember ESA(AS) is already a Prophet so his return does not go against the Finality of Prophethood
let me make it simple for you.

we believe in 124000 prophets
ESA is 123999th and Prophet Muhammad (PUBH) is 124000th now even if ESA(AS) returns he is still 123999th
but if Mirza is prophet then he is 1240001st got it

Mirza Ghulam himself translated the verse of Khatam un nabiyeen as:

"Nabiyoon ka Khatam karney wala" (thats MGA's own translation)

Then Mirza Ghulam called ESA(AS) Khatam al Anbiya of Bani Israel in barheen ahmadiyya vol 5 now can u explain us what that will mean?

So Muslims Ummah scholars, Prophet Muhammad (PUBH) and companions have been very very clear on the subject of finality of Prophethood, and remember Mirza Ghulam was Mirza Ghulam ibn Chargbibi not ESA IBN MARYAM

All u just gave is copy paste from ur website
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) said: "
If an prophet were to succeed me, it would have been 'Umar bin Khattab."
(Tirmidhi,Kitab-ul- Manaqib)

The Holy Prophet (PBUH) told Hadrat 'Ali, "
You are related to me as Aaron was related to Moses(peace be upon him). But no Apostle will come after me."
(Bukhari and Muslim, Kitab Fada'il as-Sahaba)

Ibn Arabi also said whom u have quoted:
"It is established that the Messenger of Allah has said “Risala and Nubuwwa have ended, so there is no Rasul after me, nor nabī”. This hadīth is among the most bitter of truths that the Awliya’ had to swallow, because it is a barrier that comes between the human and his attainment of complete and ultimate servanthood ('ubudiyyah)."
(Futuhāt al-Makiyyah, Chapter 38)


Shahwali Ullah said whom u have quoted:
that as for that meaning of prophethood which is [a human sent by Allah to the people, obedience to whom is required, protected from sins and remaining in error] that, this (meaning of) prophethood can still be found in the leaders of the Community after him; then this person is a heretic (zindīq).
(Al-Musawwa Sharh al-Muwatta)

Narration of Hazrat Aisha (RA):
Firstly Prophet Muhammad (PUBH) himself said [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"no prophet after him"[/FONT]
Secondly The narration you quoted infact EXPOSE ur Qadiani Jammat
coz they failed to quote the very next narration in the same book which explain that why she said that say Khatam un nabiyeen but dont say la nabi badi, the next narration tells us that she said that becoz she believed in return of ESA IBN MARYAM(AS) [not mirza ibn chargbibi] the next narration in the very same book explains:

Ibn Abi Shaybah reported that Al-Sha’abī said, “A man at [the company of] Al- Mughīrah ibn Abī Shu'ubah said, ‘May Allah bless Muhammad, the seal of the prophets; there is no prophet after him.’ So Al-Mughīrah said, ‘It is enough for you to say ‘the seal of the prophets’, for we were being told that ‘Esā will be appearing. So, when he appears, he [‘Esā] would be before him and after him’.”
so u see why she said that

also she gave the hadith:
“From Hazrat Aisha (Allah be pleased with her):
The Prophet(SAW) said I am the last Prophet and my mosque is the last mosque among the mosques of the prophets”.
(Kanzul Ummal, Vol.12, p.270, Hadith No.34999)
It is weird to see that qadianis them self dont agree with Mirza Ghulam
so please dont get tricked by ur jammat tricks go to QURAN and Hadith and Saalf (the best genrations) and u will see that Qadianiyat is not Islam they are just exploiting the name of Islam

 

[atensari]

These differences were taken from a sunni website and I have mentioned that I am quoting it from the website. It is the sunni website who is declaring that Hadhrat Isa brought a new shariat.
Ahmadis only beleive Hadhrat Isa as a Nabi and by the way we do not differentiate in a Nabi and Rasool as such.

Difference between Nabi and Rasool is established centuries before Ghulamd Ahmed's contaminated Islamic believes for his sake.
You do not differentiate between Nabi and Rasool, does that means since 1200 Muslims were wrong and Miraze corrected them?

 

[xiaahmad]

[FONT=&quot]Imam Abu Hanifa (80 A.H.-150 A.H.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A man in the time of laid claim to Prophethood and said "Let me show you the proofs of my prophethood."
The great Imam thereupon warned the people: "Anyone who asks of this man the credentials of prophethood, shall become an apostate, for the Prophet of God (PBUH) has explicitly declared: "No prophet will come after me."

[/FONT]Ibn Jarir Tabari (224 A.H.-310 A.H.)
In his renowned commentary of the holy Qur'an gives the following interpretation of the verse, 'walakin Rasul Allahi wa Khatam-ul Nabiyyin': "He has closed and sealed the prophethood and the door (of prophethood) shall not open for anyone till the end of the world." (Vide Commentary of Ibn-i-Jarir, Vol. 22, p.12)

thats how much clear muslims have been so qadianis must learn about Islam frm good sources instead of through fake propaganda by their organization

 

[canadian]

Avoid Qadiane fitna, it's our job to speak the truth. Thanks for posting informative videos. But sad thing is that as a Muslim we are suppose to protect all the minorities in Pakistan and provide them security, we failed in Lahore tragedy, it doesn't matter what religion they belong to. There was loss of innocent lives and act of terrorism, my heart goes out to all families and hopefully culprits will be caught soon.

I agree Qadiniat is falsehood.However,there is no justification in killing them.They may not be Muslims but they are Citizens of Pakistan and The State is duty bound to protect them.During Prophet Mohammad's (SWAS) time Christians,jews and other non Muslims would pay " Jazia" and lived peacefully in Mecca.