AAIIL and finality of prophethood (by Bashir)
Our friend Bashir has submitted the following.
This short article shows that the AAIIL are the only sect of muslims that believe that the Holy Prophet Muhammad is the final prophet.
First let me start with the ahmadis(q). The ahmadis(q) believe that prophethood is open for the entire muslim ummah. They believe that God has not closed the door to the “ummati nubuwwat”. This is the type of prophethood that the AMI claim is achievable, in other words, if GOD desires, he can send us a follower-prophet. HMBMA wrote in HN (1915) to the effect that even 1000 prophets could come in the future. Of course this was an extreme statement, but word for word, that’s what he said. HMGA never said that.
The ahmadis(q) believe that the law-bearing type of prophethood is sealed off (khatam) as well as the independent type. They also believe that in the future, prophethood is available to whomever GOD chooses. They claim that nobody can tie the hand of God. The ahmadis cite Chapter 4 Verse 70. HMGA did not define this verse after 1901. HMGA only defined it before 1901, the irony is evident.
The sunnis/shiites believe that the HP is the last prophet. After the HP no “new” prophet is to appear. But, Jesus (an old prophet) will return, this does not effect their finality concept. The truth is this, HMGA discovered this contradiction in islamic thought. His ideas pre-1901 (or at least until 1901) beautifully reject this contradiction. In other words muslims believe that Jesus was the exception to the rule. Jesus was an old prophet that was to re-appear, the finality of the HP didnt effect the return of Jesus. When Jesus was to return he would still be the same prophet that he was, of course he would be follower of the Koran. HMGA wrote extensively on this topic, he wrote that this idea was bogus. It was an idea that totally contradicted the finality of the HP.
Lasty the AAIIL believe that the HP is in fact the last prophet. They reject the idea that when Jesus was to re-appear that he would be a prophet (of any type). They reject the “ummati nabi-perfect nabi” concept. In other words the AAIIL totally believe in that the HP is the final prophet. No other muslim sect believes this. The AAIIL believe that HMGA was an “ummati nabi-imperfect nabi” just like Hazrat Umar was an “ummati nabi-imperfect nabi”. The only difference is that HMGA was openly called nabi, while Hazrat Umar was not. The AAIIL believe in the continuance of revelation, but not the perfect-prophethood type. The saintly type of prophethood is what they believe in.
The one thing that confuses is that the AAIIL believe that muhaddases can appear, but no one in the aaiil has ever claimed divine revelation like HMGA. Not even M. ali had visions that were daily and continuous. From my knowledge m. ali never even claimed to be muhadas. No member of the aaiil has openly claimed this rank.
Bashir.
From Zahid Aziz:
Regarding the last para in the above article, I make the following points.
1. No muhaddas in Islam needs to make a claim or tell anyone about being one, unless he is appointed by Allah to a mission (i.e. is a mamur).
2. Hazrat Mirza sahib had strongly warned his followers not to make it as their aim to have true dreams/revelations, and not to be misled by true drreams into considering themselves to be holy ones. (Just as two examples, see Malfuzat, v. 9, p. 126 and v. 9, p. 425-426)
According to him, there is no need for any of his followers to have true dreams.
3. I know it for a fact that there have been elders of the AAIIL who were recipients of revelation. At least one or two such were personally known to me. Of one of them, even his Sunni acquaintances and relatives were fully convinced that he received revelation. He had ilham by voice, visions, and dreams.
They did not trumpet this about or make public claims. One reason may be the fact that Qadiani Jamaat members indulge in this kind of thing.
It was with sadness that I read in a khutba by Maulana Muhammad Ali that Mirza Mahmud Ahmad had stated: “It is possible even for a prostitute to have true dreams, but it is impossible for Muhammad Ali to have a true dream.”
Despite statements like these, the Maulana kept any mention of his dreams and revelations confined to his close ones, and only very rarely mentioned them in public.
From Rashid:
AAIIL who were recipients of revelation.
I also know at least two persons; one himself accepted PM-HMGA other was son of his prominent companion who received ilham by voice, visions, and dreams. But they never publicized it, as it was for their own selves or their immediate families. At the same time they use to quote PM-HMGA and say don’t be worshipper of dreams.
Mannan Omar sahib narrated an incident. He said, in late 1960s Punjab University, Lahore showed interest in publishing his work of subject-wise arrangement of Musnad Ahmad Ibn-Hambal. As it was expensive project to publish such kind or work, and at the same time he was worried it may not get lost. So, he asked one of the elder of AAIIL to pray and let me know what to do. Few days later this elder replied that I recieved a very different answer. Briefly, this work won’t get published now but in your children’s time and it may take 35-40 years. Exactly that happened. The first volume of this work was published in 2004, by his children.
Bashir writes: The AAIIL believe that HMGA was an “ummati nabi-imperfect nabi” just like Hazrat Umar was an “ummati nabi-imperfect nabi”.
In fact, AAIIL believes PM-HMGA as ‘Ummati’ AND ‘Nabi’ (ummati in the real sense, with the title nabi applying to him in the metaphorical sense).
From Tariq:
Thank you Rashid. I was going to make the same point.
Ummati-nabi is a term concocted by the Qadianis for their own benefit. They have made it into a loaded term which they infuse with a meaning that grays the area between a follower (ummati) and a prophet (nabi). Barring incidental (or accidental) usage by any writer from AAIIL, I don’t believe any of our official writings use this term on to convey the status of HMGA.
From Usman:
I was personally narrated a story by an elder about her elder, a leading luminary of the AAIIL, who on one of the last nights of Ramadan told his children that tonight his “ibadat” is giving him a such a spiritual satisfaction that perhaps it is Lailat-ul-Qadr. Later on (my memory is a little hazy here as this was told some time back and the narrator is no longer in this world) I think it was after rising up from prostration that the gentleman in question saw a hill visible from the room window aglow with bright light. Though at first he thought maybe it is a person walking there with a lantern, later he (I don’t know how) learnt that this was a vision, indicating that this indeed was the special night.
From Bashir:
For ZA: You wrote, “1. No muhaddas in Islam needs to make a claim or tell anyone about being one, unless he is appointed by Allah to a mission (i.e. is a mamur).”
Thats my point. I must say that i am surprised that GOD hasnt sent this favor to the aaiil. I was looking for muhaddas’ in the aaiil who had been appointed by GOD. There are none to speak of. Not even M. ali.
The statement by HMBMA that you speak of, that statement deeply touches me… I just don’t understand why he was so extreme in his mannerisms.
For rashid:
I meant to write, the aaiil believe HMGA to be a ummati(perfect) and a prophet(imperfect). Meanwhile the AMI believe him to be an ummati(perfect) and prophet(perfect).
I have written over and over again, a researcher needs HMBMA’s HN, QAF a AW to be translated into english to be able to fully understand the assertions of 1914-1922.
For Tariq: I think the aaiil should call HMGA as an ummati and nabi. HMGA did not mention this phrase in EGKI. Just some ideas that swirl around in my head.
From Tariq:
>>For Tariq: I think the aaiil should call HMGA as an ummati and nabi. HMGA did not mention this phrase in EGKI. Just some ideas that swirl around in my head.<<
Bashir, thank you for sharing your thoughts. I however see no reason for us to go beyond what HMGA was himself raised up by God to do and to proclaim to the world, i.e. his claims of Mujaddid, Promised Messiah and the Mahdi.
All other terms, whether they existed in Islamic sufi thought or were concocted by Qadanis for their benefit or any other variations thereof are at best inconsequential to the primary mission of HMGA, or at worst contribute to the kind of fitna and harm that we have seen since 1914.
From Bashir:
Tariq, I totally agree with everything that you wrote. I have always argued to my relatives as well as other people in terms of what difference does it make if HMGA was a prophet or not??? He was still the messiah, he was still the Mahdi. The difference is Khilafat, thats all.
Ahmadis(q) dont care. I have never met one who has read up on early ahmadiyya history. Their stance is that HMBMA could never be wrong….bottom line.
Remember HMGA did not mention his status as ummati and nabi in EGKI. How is that even possible?? Ahmadiyya has been a very intriguing puzzle.
From Bashir:
The point of this entire thread has been overlooked by everyone.
HMBMA actually moved closer to mainstream Islam with his assertions. Whether they were his or HMGA’s is another topic.
The mainstream muslims believe that Jesus was to be a prophet when he returned, then what would his deniers be?? Of course they would be KAFIRS of the first kind. The deniers of Jesus(the second coming), would fall under the category of disbelievers in the Koran. They would be categorized with all others who deny any prophet of GOD.
M. ali moved AWAY from the mainstream ideas with his assertions that the HP is the fianl prophet. This belief moves away from the mainstream, does it not?
So, why was M. ali accused of attaching himself to mainstream ideas? That is totally incorrect.
From Bashir:
Just to add to the above comment.
The deniers of Jesus would be the same, vis-a-vis. Whether it’s his first coming or his last coming, it doesnt matter. Whether it was 0 B.C. or 1900, it doesnt matter.
The problem with all of this is that muslims never could have imagined that Jesus in his second coming, would have deniers. A famous hadith states that Jesus would eliminate the JIZYAH. Jizyah is a tax that is paid by KAFIRS. Only KAFIRS can pay the Jizyah. If there are no KAFIRS left then who would pay the Jizyah?? This proves that the Mahdi/Messiah was to be conquer in his own lifetime. Since that didnt happen with HMGA, the status of his deniers has become obscured.
There is no hadith that relates to the status of the deniers of the Mahdi/Messiah. Somebody check all the hadith books and please try to prove me wrong.
Also, the mahdi was never spoken of as of a prophet.