I was blessed to attend the 2011 Reviving the Islamic Spirit conference in Toronto this past December. I usually dislike conferences as being shallow, mostly image and lacking substance, but this was an exception. I would recommend everyone attend, and I intend to go next year, in sha Allah.

The following is a cell-phone clip from a talk by Shaykh Habib ‘Ali al-Jifri presenting the famous and beautiful Hadith Musalsal of Love.

For those who cannot watch the video, Shaykh Habib ‘Ali narrates that one day the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم met Mu’adh ibn Jabal رحمه الله and said, “Indeed I love you. So when you finish your prayers, do not forget to say ‘Oh Allah, I seek your help in remembering you, and thanking you and perfecting my worship of you.’”. When Mu’adh told the next person, he began by saying “Indeed, I love you”, thus spreading the love of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, and continued with the rest of the narration.

This tradition continued from one to the next to begin by telling the recipient, “Indeed, I love you”, until it came to Shaykh Habib ‘Ali from his Shaykhs. So Shaykh Habib ‘Ali said to the crowd of around ~20,000, “Indeed, I love you all, So whenever you finish your prayers, do not forget to say ‘Oh Allah, I seek your help in remembering you, and thanking you and perfecting my worship of you.’”

The Love of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم traveled through time and place through an unbroken chain and reached us.  This type of hadith, where you say it to the next person, is called a Hadith Musalsal. I put this video to help dispel the “Jahil mullah molvie terrorist” stereotype that is presented by some within the Ahmadiyya community.

One final point. When someone watches a video like this, his or her natural reaction is to want to do Durood Shareef (Salawat). The most proper way of doing so is to send ask Allah to send prayers upon the Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family. A simple form would be Allahumma salli ‘ala saydina Muhammad wa ‘ala aali saydina Muhammad.

May Allah guide us all.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و سلم تسليما

One of the most amazing aspects of Islamic history are the stages that the Muslim community passed through. It seems that in every generation a new issue arose that needed to be dealt with, and through Allah’s Lutf (subtle care) different personages and figures came to help stabilize the Ummah.

Such stages of Fitnah include:

• The shock and instability after the death of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم;
• The four false prophets who arose in Arabia and subsequent wars with Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه;
• The crusaders versus the numerous Muslims generals;
• The Tatar invasion of Ghengis Khan when ‘Izz al-Din ibn ‘Abd al-Salam unified the Muslims;
• You see this pattern repeated…

But what about the fitnah of Sectarianism?

If you read ahadith about the 73-sects, you might get this impression that you need to ask yourself which of the 73-sects you are upon? Which is true? Which am I? How do I know which is correct? Lets have a debate and find out! But then ask yourself, is sectarianism really the main problem in our times?

Sectarianism is a fitnah that the Muslim world primarily experienced 100-300 years after the departure of the noble Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. During this period is when the Muslims divided into literally hundreds of small theological, political and social groups, each claiming to be the “True Islam”. Compounding the problem, many of those new ideologies held extremely compelling arguments in their favor – don’t think they were flimsy!

It was during that time that the masses were engaged in debate over the technicalities and subtleties of the Deen. Confusion was wide-spread, father and son, student and teacher, governor and subject, even two highly ranked scholars all would vehemently argue. Many were influenced by outside ideologies without even realizing it. Others embraced invented ideas wholeheartedly. Some new groups gained prominence, one even took control of the Khilafah!

But as Allah says in the Qur’an, “Travel through the land; then observe how was the end of the deniers.” If we reflect on this ayah, Allah is not calling on us to see how a splinter-sect thrived during its glory days, but how it ended. The vast majority of those sects and groups are no longer in existence today. Some burned out, most fell into obscurity with only a few thousand scattered followers nowadays. Alhumdu lillah, our generation was largely saved from that Fitnah.

At this moment, the vast majority of the Muslims follow “regular Islam”, version 1.0, and are at little risk of joining the remnants of a break-away group. What does this tell us? This is not the era of sectarianism or schisms. ‘Aqidah problems are rarely the immediate issue with contemporary Muslims. The debates are over, that fitnah has come and gone. And just as we do not need to excessively concern ourselves with past issues, we do not need to re-engage ourselves in questions of dogmatic belief that have already been answered. Islam does not need to be re-invented. Newly created arguments are exactly how break-away sects are formed in the first place! Instead we stand on the shoulders of giants to face the current issues that that plague our modern community.

But the Ahmadiyya religion seeks to re-open questions that, not only were answered centuries ago, are not subjects of contemporary debate and have no relevance to our modern times. They went as far as to publish this ludicrous lists of the “72 sects”, many of whom have not even existed in hundreds of years, but somehow allegedly came back into existence, managed to unify, all condemn Ahmadiyya, and then went back into non-existence. Convenient.

You tell me:

• What is telling a woman who was raped by Qadaffi’s forces that, “by the way, the Mahdi came about 100 years ago, looks like everyone missed him”, going to do for her shattered self-esteem and self-respect?
• What is a Somali man who watched all of his children die from starvation in the droughts going to do if you tell him, “Jesus is dead”.
• What is a Chechen mother whose son “disappeared” going to do with your attempts to convince her that half of the Qur’an is a bunch of confusing metaphors whose correct understanding no one understood for 1300 years?

Clearly ‘Aqidah is not the primary issue of our times. But the “problems” Ahmadiyya attempts to solve are not on the minds of Muslims, nor are they even our concerns. No one is looking at a calendar thinking, “Man, so when is ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام going to return?” My friends, you are dwelling on non-issues to a people who have more immediate concerns on their minds.

Just like every other break-away group that preceded it, Ahmadiyya has come, will run its course, and will eventually fade away.I am glad that our pious predecessors protected the religion from corruption during the era of sectarianism, and I pray for the forgiveness of those who were sincere but slipped into misguidance. May Allah guide us all to the Truth and keep us firm upon it.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و سلم

The Messiah is ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام.

Per the Qur’an, no one else is the Messiah other than ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام.

We are Muslims who believe in the Messiah, ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام.

We invite Ahmadis to accept the Messiah.

May Allah guide us all

1-     Their Mahdi was born in the 19^th Century, and died on a Tuesday.

2-     Their Mahdi claimed that he is from Persian origins.

3-     Their Mahdi claimed that he is also a descendant of Fatimah (ra) and Ahlulbait.

4-     Their Mahdi wrote many Arabic books, one of these books was Tafseer of Surat-ul-Fatiha.

5-     Their Mahdi plagiarized parts of some verses and Maqamat in his Arabic writings.

6-     A double eclipse happened in Ramadhan during the lifetime of their Mahdi.

7-     Their Mahdi was brought to a local court for trial.

8-     Their Mahdi used Hisab Al-Jummal (numerical values of the words / Arabic alphanumeric coding) to prove that he is the true Mahdi.

9-     Their Promised One was a Mirza who claimed that the signs mentioned by all Hadeeths and holy books about the Promised Messiah have been fulfilled by him.

10-  Their Promised One, the Mirza, was born in the 13th Hijri century and died in the 14th Hijri century during the last week of May.

11-  Their Promised One, the Mirza, sent a letter to Queen Victoria asking her to accept him and to follow his teachings.

12-  Their Promised One claimed that he did not study Arabic language, however he could write dozens of Arabic and Persian books. His followers consider this as a great sign that proves his truthfulness.

13-  They consider the prophecies of their Promised One as another sign that proves his truthfulness.

14-  Their Promised One said that Jihad is not allowed anymore.

15-  Their Promised One praised Mohammad (SAAW) many time in his writings.

16-  Their Promised One was considered – by his own followers only – to be the greatest writer ever (“Sultan Al-Qalam” or “Faris Al-Maani”)

17-  Their Promised One used Hisab Al-Jummal (numerical values of the words) to prove that Islam had died for 1000 years until the 19th century.

18-  Their Promised One claimed that he himself is the manifestation/appearance of God. However the official position of his followers today is that manifestation of God does not mean that he himself is a God.

19-  Their Promised One challenged all scholars to write a book that is equivalent to his book.

20-  Their Promised One claimed that he is an Avatar, i.e. the “reincarnation of Krishna”.

21-  Their Promised One claimed that he was sent by Allah (SWT) to the people of the world.

22-  Their Mujaddid claimed that upon the death of a human being, his soul will immediately be given a special body that has had special nature.

23-  Their Promised One claimed that sometimes the divine revelations do not follow human idiom and sometime does not even follow the rules of grammar.

24-  Their Promised One claimed that he had been given the qualities of many prophets: e.g. Mohammad (SAAW), Isa (as), Musa (as), etc.

25-  Their Promised One claimed that Yawm Al-Qiyamah will come after around 1000 years.

26-  Their Mujaddid believed that the Heaven and the Hell are spiritual places and not physical places.

27-  Their Promised One claimed that he had been receiving secret revelations for 10 years confirming that he is the promised one, however he waited 10 years before revealing this secret.

28-  Their Promised One had invented new names of God.

29-  They consider Quran as a Holy Book, however they also consider the Arabic Wahi of their Promised One as holy, divine and sacred.

30-  Their holy Arabic revelation said that their Promised One does not speak out of his own desire, it is all Wahi vouchsafed to him

31-  Their holy Arabic revelation instructed them not to worship any god but Allah.

32-  Many of their Promised One’s Arabic revelations are just meaningless distortion of some Quranic verses.

33-  Their promised Reformer was also a Mirza like his father, the Promised One

34-  Their promised Reformer died in the month of November at an age of around 77 years.

35-  Their promised Reformer introduced some interpretations that are different from the original teachings of the Promised One.  

36-  One of their Mirzas introduced a new special solar calendar. The months of the new calendar have had new Arabic names.

37-  Their message to the world is that ‘Glory not in love for your country, but in love for all mankind’.

38-  It is obligatory for them to pay to their leadership a specific amount of money that had been decided by their Promised One.

39-  They believe that the antichrist is not a specific evil individual or entity.

40-  Their leader claimed that the most important role for his followers is to show the true good image of Islam and the true Islamic teachings to the western people and the whole world.

41-  Their Mujaddid believed that the promised one should not descend from heaven but he would appear in the body of another person.

42-  They interpret many of the words “Jinn” mentioned in Quran to mean “human beings who are fiery natured”.

43-  Their Mujaddid did not believe that the moon was split up literally into two parts during the lifetime of Mohammad (SAAW).

44-  They teach that everyone must be loyal to the government that rules his country, whatever that government is.

45-  They believe that divine revelations have not been stopped and will always continue to descend.

46-  Their main center in the Middle East is located near to the city of Haifa, Palestine.

47-  The followers of their Promised One in Palestine receive very special treatment from the Israeli government. However, they face a sort of persecution in some Muslim countries.

48-  They are not allowed by the Saudi government to enter Mecca or Madinah.

49-  They believe that Mohammad (SAAW) is “Khatam-un-Nabiyyean”, however they claim that it does not mean “the last prophet”.

50-  Their women are not allowed to marry Muslims who do not believe in their Promised One.

51-  They use the Quranic verses 69:45/46 ((And if he had fabricated against Us some of the sayings * We would certainly have seized him by the right hand)) to prove that their Promised One was truthful as he was not killed.

52-  They claim that some kings/presidents had accepted the teachings of their Promised One.

53-  They consider most of the miracles – which were shown by the prophets in Quran and the holy books – as sort of metaphor.

54-  They believe that the body of Isa (as) was put on the cross.

55-  They believe that Isa (as) had died.

56-  They believe that Miraaj did not happen to the body of Rasulullah (saaw) but to his soul only.

57-  They believe that Surat At-Takweer mentions the signs of their Promised One, and not the signs of Yawm Al-Qiyamah.

58-  They translated some of the books of their Mahdi to some languages; however they still did not translate many of his Arabic books to any other language. Apparently they could not understand many of his odd, irrelevant and meaningless Arabic sentences

59-  They claim that they have millions of followers in more than 200 countries. However, my own estimation about their total number worldwide is less than 2 millions.

60-  Their promised Reformer caused the movement to split into two sects. Each sect says that the other sect is not on the right path.

However I would summarize the main differences between Ahmadis and Bahais as follows:

1-     The Mujaddid according to Ahmadis was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. The Mujaddid according to Bahais was Shaykh Ahmad bin Zayn-ud-Deen al-Ahsaai.

2-     The Mahdi according to Ahmadis was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. The Mahdi according to Bahais was Ali Mohammad Shirazi.

3-     The Promised One according to Ahmadis was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. The Promised One according to Bahais was Mirza Hussain Ali Nuri.

4-     The Promised Reformer according to Ahmadis was Mirza Basheer-ud-Din Mahmood.  The Promised Reformer according to Bahais was Mirza Abbas Effendi “Abdul-Baha”.

5-     The Ahmadi solar calendar was invented by Mirza Basheer-ud-Din Mahmood. The Bahai solar calendar was invented by Ali Mohammad Shirazi.

Can you find any other difference?

In 2008, the American Muslim community wept as Wallace Deen Muhammad returned to Allah. I’ve met many famous people in my life, but amongst the most memorable was meeting W. Deen Muhammad. It was Fall 2003, and I was a beardless 19 year old sophomore in college. I took a trip to North Carolina with some older African-American Muslim gentlemen to meet and schedule him to deliver a talk for our Muslim Students Association (MSA). He had striking blue eyes and a glow of wisdom that only comes with experience written on his face. He was glad to meet a member of the MSA, even a skinny 19 year old, happy we were continuing the tradition, and briefly mentioned how they helped him when his community had expelled him.

…But who was W. Deen Muhammad and why am I writing this on a blog about Ahmadiyya?

To understand who he was, you have to understand the history of the African-American community. By the early 1900s, in the throes of racial injustice and paradoxical increased freedom, the African-American community was searching for its identity. Knowing one’s lineage and ancestral customs is important to a person’s identity but the sharp lash of racial slavery eliminated all but a few remnants. To fill the void, many subcultures, movements and religions arose. Examples include the Moorish Science Temple and the Black Panthers. But the largest and one with the most profound impact on American culture was the Nation of Islam.

The Nation of Islam (NOI) was founded by Wallace Fard Muhammad (herein referred to as Fard). Fard was not an African-American. Even to this day his exact roots are clouded in mystery. But, what we do know is that he was the genesis of the “Nation of Islam”. The faith he created was a mixture of traditional Islam, Moorish Science Temple teachings and his own unique ideas. As I was personally told by a elderly African-American Muslim who used to follow his faith, the emphasis was not on specific beliefs. Instead, people were attracted to it because it was “not the religion of our slave masters” (Christianity) and gave them something to uplifting themselves through. The NOI preached morality, hard work  and community. It helped members stop the cycles of alcoholism, drug addiction, prostitution, gang violence, and other dysfunctional behavior.

One of the prominent early members was Elijah Muhammad (herein referred to as Elijah). Elijah joined the NOI in 1931 and rose to become the “Minster of Islam” for Detroit.

In 1934, while on a trip to Chicago, Fard completely disappeared. Though many theories exist, to this day no one knows what became of him. Following his disappearance, the movement found a new leader in Elijah. In the absence of Fard, Elijah became the de-facto leader of the Nation of Islam and led the movement forward from 1934 until his death in 1975.

Under Elijah, the movement grew many folds, including many new Temples, the newspaper Muhammad Speaks, a womens’ auxiliary organization, growing financial power and The Fruit of Islam, their security force. Malcolm X (El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz رحمه الله) joined the movement during this early period and was instrumental in attracting new members. (Malcolm X would later departed from the NOI and converted to Islam, but was assassinated in 1965.) With a large membership base and increased national recognition, by the ’50s and ’60s the movement was a force to be reckoned with in African-American community.

They did great community work, but what were the beliefs of the NOI? This sums it up:

We believe there is no God but Allah (God) and Muhammad is the Messenger of God. We believe that Allah appeared in the Person of Master W. Fard Muhammad on July 4, 1930, the long awaited Messiah of the Christians and the Mahdi of the Muslims.

The faith shared many common terms with Islam, such as Allah, Qur’an, Islam, Muslim, Muhammad, etc, but the beliefs were radically different. Tenants included Black Supremacy, that white people were a creation of Yakub, an evil scientist 6,600 years ago and other such quackery. Congregational prayers were held on Sunday, and services resembled American Protestant churches. It had little to do with Islam, other than name.

As the movement grew and members increased, little by little, members became aware of Islam – not Nation of “Islam” – but Islam. This was likely due to early Arab immigration to the US, mostly from Syria, Egypt and Lebanon. To investigate the origins of the faith, Elijah sent his son, Wallace Deen Muhammad, to Egypt to study Islam. He returned to become a Minister but was twice kicked out (ex-communicated) of the NOI for his “Unorthodox beliefs” – or in reality – his orthodox beliefs, specifically, that he did not accept that Fard Muhammad was Allah, and that Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم was the last prophet. He was later strategically readmitted.

In 1975, Elijah Muhammad died. So taken back were the NOI members that some of them were literally waiting for the world to end. At the national NOI conference to decide on the future of the movement, Wallace son of the “prophet”, came on stage, dressed in the Fruit of Islam uniform, and assumed leadership. What the Ministers did not know was that Wallace was now firmly a mainstream Sunni Muslim. One by one, the national minsters pledged allegiance (bay’at) to Wallace, including Louis Farrakhan, the current leader of the NOI. For two years, from 1975 to 1977, Wallace taught Orthodox Islam as the official belief system of the Nation of Islam. He introduced the five pillars, promoted mainstream Islamic belief through the Muhammad Speaks newspaper, introduced ‘Eid al-Fitr as a religious holiday instead of Saviors Day, and even led a delegation on Hajj. None of this was part of the previous NOI. He was taking the NOI from the religion of his father to the religion of Saydinaa Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم.

But with any movement towards Truth there are those who oppose it, which manifested in the person of Louis Farrakhan. In 1981, he revived the roots of the NOI, abandoned Orthodox Sunni Islam, and led the movement back into its original beliefs. This created a split between the communities of Wallace and Louis, as Louis went on to re-found the modern Nation of Islam.

What about Wallace? Allah put Wallace in the right place at the right time for a specific purpose. Wallace founded The World Community of Islam in the West. It was through Wallace that large numbers of NOI members left the beliefs of the NOI and embraced mainstream Islam. He reached out to the immigrant Muslim communities to build bridges and ties, which was unthinkable in the NOI. Wallace took a community deeply entrenched in absolute disbelief, claiming a man was Allah and in a new prophet, and led them to real Islam. This could not have been done by anyone but the son of the “prophet”.

To this day, 10th of Muharram 1433, the largest racial contention of Muslims in the US are not Arab of Desi, but African-American. This is through the work of Wallace Deen Muhammad. Though there are still hard-line believers of original NOI teachings, they are slowly but surely being pulled in the direction of mainstream orthodox Sunni Islam. Louis Farrakhan publicly declared his Shahada, they introduced Salah (Namaz) as Muslims perform it, changed the Nation of Islam’s day of worship from Sunday to Friday, and many other advances. Alhumdu lillah, they are slowly coming our way.

So we thank Allah for his providence. He was very merciful when he guided Wallace to Islam, and through him, guided many others.

What does any of this have to do with the Ahmadiyya…?

In order to know where you are going, you have to know where you came from. When we look at the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, though he accepted their Islam of the common person, he focused his energy on the leadership. When he went to Ta’if, he spoke to the leaders (which later led to Du’a al-Ta’if). It was the leaders of Aws and Khazraj who accepted Islam and through them the common folk followed suit. It was a leader, Wallace Deen Muhammad, who accepted Islam and through them other NOI members shifted towards the Sunnah.

This is in no way to belittle the commoners who embrace Islam. In the past few years, we have witnessed an increasing number of Ahmadis leaving Ahmadiyya to embrace mainstream Islam. The vast majority silently depart and tell me not to disclose who they are. We are also happy for the likes of Shahid Kamal Ahmad, who started this site, or Sr. “Findings” who manages Cult Girl Confessions. But what we need are more national leaders, more spokesmen, more murabbis, and more missionaries to revert to traditional Islam. They can use their authority and influence to guide their community, if not all at once, then slowly through small hints and suggestions. And this is not without precedent, notable reverts include:

• Hassan bin Mahmood Odeh, Former Director General of the Arabic Section in the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community;
• Miklos Molnar, General Secretary of the Ahmadi Jama’at in Hungary;
• Ismail Babatunde Jose, Former President of the Ahmadiyya movement in Nigeria;
• I personally know Jamia Ahmadiyya students and Waqf-e-Nau leaders who accepted mainstream Islam and are slowly and secretly working in their communities;
• And many others

Perhaps one day, even their “khalifah” will have departed from Ahmadiyya to lead his followers towards mainstream Islam, after the example of Wallace Deen Muhammad. Before ‘Umar bin al-Khattab رضى الله عنه accepted Islam, the Muslims were weak and scattered. His conversion gave them strength and courage. May Allah give us an ‘Umar from the Ahmadiyya community.

This takes patience, courage and conviction. Dealing with the stubborn “Desi uncle mentality” can be a challenge. It will start off slow, and be difficulty convincing others. But a breakthrough in a few will result in others joining the fold. And we ask Allah for success.

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و صحبه و سلم

Now Enjoy the Presentation

Incident #1

In Surah al-’Araaf verse 143, Musa عليه السلام asks to see Allah. Allah says, “You will never (لن) [be able to] see me”. Then the light of Allah shone upon a mountain which crumbled to dust. That alone caused Musa عليه السلام to faint. Allah cannot be seen.

Incident #2

Once, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani was traveling from one city to another when, to his amazement, the heavens opened up and a figure appeared sky. The figure said, “O ‘Abd al-Qadir! I am God. Because of your devotion to me, I removed the burden of prayer to me from you!”

Did Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir rejoice? Was he happy? No, he said to the figure, “Shut up you enemy of Allah!”The figure then turned black and the voice said “O ‘Abd al-Qadir, I have led astray 30 mystics before you with this same trick, but on account of your intellect, I was not able to lead you astray.” Upon which, the Shaykh replied, “It was the favor of Allah that saved me!” He attributed his success to Allah, not himself. The figure fizzled away.

Allah is not a human being who has a physical form. So when the figure appeared before him claiming to be God, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir knew it was not Allah.

Incident #3

The same trick was done to Paul on the Way to Damascus. He used to persecute the original followers of ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام. One day he had a vision where God appeared before him. He fell victim to the trick and this eventually led to the distortion of Christianity as we know it today.

To this day, Paul’s version of Christianity has led millions astray.

Incident #4

The same trick also happened to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who wrote,

I saw God Almighty personified as a human being in a vision. He put His arm round my neck and said (Punjabi): If you will be devoted to Me, the whole world will be yours.

According to Mirza Ghulam, God has in human form and offered him Dunya, not Akhirah. The reference was taken from Tadhkirah, page 609 (page 571 in the hardcopy).

Where do you stand amongst the Four?

Whose example do you want to follow? Prophet Musa عليه السلام and Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir, who knew that Allah cannot be seen, or the Christian Saint Paul and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who both fell victim to the same trick?

Think about it. May Allah guide us all to what is true.

و صلى الله على محمد و على آله و سلم تسليما

Some of the Ahmadiyya leaders try to stereotype contemporary Islamic scholarship as a whole using some narrations recorded in Hadith works.

Before talking of the status of scholars (‘ulama) in the House of Islam and especially their role with regards to the Ahamdiyya cult, let us first see the narrations that some Ahmadiyya leaders use and scrutinize them to check their authenticity.

Narration 1:

The following is the translation of one such narration as it appears on the AlIslam.org website:

The Prophet once said, “There will come a time upon the people when nothing will remain of Islam except its name and nothing will remain of the Quran except its words. Their mosques will be splendidly furnished but destitute of guidance. Their divines will be the worst people under the Heaven; strife will issue from them and avert to them.”

In the following lines I will mention the wording of the narration as found in different works and dwell on the authenticity check for each narration in the light of scholarly works.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by ‘Ali (ra):

عَنْ عَلِيٍّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ عَلَى النَّاسِ زَمَانٌ لَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْإِسْلَامِ إِلَّا اسْمُهُ وَلَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِلَّا رَسْمُهُ مَسَاجِدُهُمْ عَامِرَةٌ وَهِيَ خَرَابٌ مِنَ الْهُدَى عُلَمَاؤُهُمْ شَرُّ مَنْ تَحْتَ أَدِيمِ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ عِنْدِهِمْ تَخْرُجُ الْفِتْنَةُ وَفِيهِمْ تَعُودُ» .

Narrated ‘Ali, the Messenger of Allah –may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him- said: “There will come a time upon the people when nothing will remain of Islam except its name and nothing will remain of the Quran except its words. Their mosques will be splendidly furnished but destitute of guidance. Their divines will be the worst people under the Heaven; strife (fitna) will issue from them and avert to them.” (Mishkat al-Masabih 1/91 Hadith 276)

As it is known to the students of Hadith, Mishkat al-Masabih is not the original Hadith source book. It has narrations with reference to other works giving full chain of narrators.

For this narration, the author of Mishkat al-Masabih, Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah al-Khatib al-‘Umri (d. 741 A.H.) has quoted it from Shu’b al-Imam of al-Baihaqi.

Its chain of narrators is;

Al-Baihaqi – Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Ahmad bin ‘Abdan –Ahmad bin ‘Ubayd as-Safar – Muhammad bin ‘Eisa bin Abi Iyas – Sa’id bin Suleman – ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn – Ja’far bin Muhammad – Muhammad bin ‘Ali – ‘Ali bin Hussain – ‘Ali bin Abi Talib – Messenger of Allah, on whom be the peace and blessings of Allah

Dr. Abdul al-‘Aliy Abdul Hamid has classified it as Da’if due to the weakness of ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn and due to the fact of the chain being interrupted as ‘Ali bin Hussain did not meet ‘Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him. See Shu’b al-Iman 3/317 Hadith 1763, Makteba al-Rushd, Riyadh, 2003

For those who are rather naive about the categorization of hadiths can have a introduction to this science HERE.

Muhammad bin Sa’d states that ‘Ali bin Hussain i.e. Zain al-‘Abidin was twenty-three of age at the tragic eve of pogrom at Karbala (See Tabaqat al-Kubra 5/212, Dar al-Sadir, Beirut 1968). We know the tragedy of Karbala took place in the year 63 A.H. and ‘Ali bin Abi Talib –may Allah be pleased with him- was martyred in the year 40 A.H. ‘Ali bin Hussain was therefore by any stretch of imagination no more than an year old when ‘Ali bin Abi Talib –may Allah be pleased with him- was martyred. This is enough to prove that ‘Ali bin Hussain –may Allah have mercy on him- could not report directly from the Pious Caliph.

The inqita’ (interruption) is mentioned by al-Baihaqi himself in his comment to a subsequent narration as we shall see below.

About ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn, Yahya bin Ma’in said: “He is nothing.” (See Lisan al-Mizan 7/260 No. 3503, Mo’assas al-‘Ilmi, Beirut 1971)

al-Dhahbi quotes the statement of Yahya bin Ma’in and then gives this narration pointing to its weakness. See al-Mizan al-A’itadal 2/417 No. 4296 Dar al-Ma’rifa, Beirut 1963.

Ibn ‘Adi mentions this report in the profile of ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn in his work al-Kamil fil Du’afa al-Rijal 5/377-378. This work was compiled to warn against the weak narrators. The chain also has the interruption  (inqita’) problem as above.

Abu Tahir Muhammad bin Fazl al-Maqdisi Ibn al-Qaysarani (d. 507 A.H.) has quoted the narration from Ibn A’Adi. About ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn he says, “He is nothing.” See Zakhirah al-Huffaz 5/2808 Narration 6583, Dar al-Salaf, Riyadh 1996

Shaykh Albani has referred to its weakness in his first research on Mishkat al-Masabih by stating that it is given by Ibn ‘Adi in his above mentioned work. See Mishkat al-Masabih 1/91 Hadith 276 pub. Al-Makteb al-Islami, Beirut 1979

In 1985 the Shaykh Albani’s second research on Mishkat al-Masabih was published in which he categorically graded it as Da’if i.e. dubious.

With the same chain the report is mentioned in Abu ‘Amr al-Dani’s (d. 444 A.H. ) Sunan al-Waridah fil Fitan No. 236

Same narration with the same chain from ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn onwards is given by Ibn Abi Dunya in his work ‘al-‘Uqubat 1/23 Hadith 8, Dar Ibn Hazm, Beirut, 1996.

The report is also found in Abu Bakr Ahmad al-Daynawari’s (d. 333 A.H.) al-Mujalisa wa Jawahir al-‘Ilm 2/359 Narration 519. Its chain is same from ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn onwards so it adds nothing to the equation. However in this work between al-Daynwari and ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn is a narrator named Muhammad bin Masalama who is much criticized. al-Dhahbi quotes al-Khallal who said, “He is extremely da’if (weak).”(Mizan al-A’itidal 4/42 No. 8179) Shaykh Mashhur bin Hasan has graded the narration as “Extremely Da’if”. See al-Mujalisa wa Jawahir al-‘Ilm 2/359 Narration 519, Dar Ibn Hazm, Beirut, 1998

The report is also quoted in al-Suyuti’s Jami’ al-Kabir (No. 11451) with reference to Ibn ‘Adi and al-Baihaqi.

Moreover, the narration is found in a Shiite scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi’s (d. 1111 A.H.) work Bihar al-Anwar (18/146 Chapter 12) as well. Its chain involves a narrator al-Sakouni who is Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad and he is a well known liar. Ibn Hibban said, “A great liar! It is not permissible to make a mention of him in hadith except by the way of condemnation.” (al-Majruhin 1/129 No. 50, Dar al-Wa’iy, Aleppo 1396 A.H)

In all the works the narration appears it has the same issues with its chain, so it remains Da’if and dubious. The point is mentioning all the works is to set the record straight lest someone may try to play clever by saying it is found in ‘other works’ as well.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by Ibn ‘Umar (ra):

In his Musnad (1/107) al-Daylami reports through al-Hakim the following, narrated by Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said:

سيأتي على الناس زمان لا يبقي من القرآن إلا رسمه، ولا من الإسلام إلا اسمه، يقسمون به وهم أبعد الناس منه، مساجدهم عامرة، خراب من الهدى، فقهاء ذلك الزمان شر فقهاء تحت ظل السماء، منهم خرجت الفتنة، وإليهم تعود

“Soon a time would come upon people when nothing will remain of Quran except its script, and nothing of Islam will remain except its name, they will divide and will be farthest from it. Their mosques will be furnished but devoid of guidance. The scholars of that age will be the worst people under the heavens. Strife will emerge from them and return to them.”

As Shaykh Albani mentions the chain of narrators of this report includes;

Khalid bin Yazid al-Ansari – Ibn Abi Zi’b – Nafi’ – Ibn ‘Umar — Messenger of Allah, on whom be the peace and blessings of Allah

Shaykh Albani has commented to it in detail in Silsala Da’ifa. He writes:

“Khalid- it is evident that he is al-‘Umri al-Makki. He narrates from Ibn Abi Zi’b. Abu Hatim and Yahya described him as a liar. And Ibn Hibban said, “He narrates fabricated narrations from trustworthy people.” (Silsala Da’ifa wa Mawdu’a 4/410 No. 1936. Dar al-Ma’arif, Riyadh, 1992)

For the original reference to Ibn Hibban’s statement about Khalid bin Yazid, See al-Majruhin 1/284-285 No. 308.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by Ma’az (ra):

Shaykh Albani further mentions:

“Then al-Daylami narrated it through, Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad – Thawr – Khalid bin Ma’dan from M’az, likewise. I say: ‘It is –like the earlier one- a fabrication. The trouble with it is (the narrator) Isma’il and he is al-Sakouni al-Qadi. Ibn Hibban said, “A great liar! It is not permissible to make a mention of him in hadith except by the way of condemnation.” (Silsala Da’ifa wa Mawdu’a 4/411 No. 1936)

For the origin reference to Ibn Hibban’s statement about Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad al-Sakouni, See al-Majruhin 1/129 No. 50

As a statement of ‘Ali (ra):

According to Shu’b al-Iman of al-Baihaqi ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, mentioned almost the same while addressing the people in Kufa. Abu Wa’il reports that he heard him saying:

يُوشِكُ أَنْ لَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْإِِسْلَامِ إِِلَّا اسْمُهُ، وَمِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِِلَّا رَسْمُهُ …. مَسَاجِدُكُمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ عَامِرَةٌ، وَقُلُوبُكُمْ وَأَبْدَانُكُمْ مُخَرَّبَةٌ مِنَ الْهوى، شَرُّ مَنْ تَحْتَ ظِلِّ السَّمَاءِ فُقَهَاؤُكُمْ، مِنْهُمْ تَبْدَأُ الْفِتْنَةُ، وَفِيهِمْ تَعُودُ “، فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ فَقَالَ: فَفِيمَ يَا أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ؟ قَالَ: ” إِِذَا كَانَ الْفِقْهُ فِي رُذَّالِكُمْ وَالْفَاحِشَةُ فِي خِيَارِهِمْ، وَالْمُلْكُ فِي صِغَارِكُمْ فَعِنْدَ ذَلِكَ تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ

“Soon nothing will remain of Islam except its name and of Quran except its script … In that day your mosques will be well furnished but your hearts and bodies will have no guidance. At that time the worst people under the sky will be your scholars, strife will originate with them and return to them.” A man stoop up and asked: “Why would this happen O Commander of the Faithful?” He said: “When the knowledge is the worst among you and when immorality spreads even amongst your best people and rule with the lowest amongst you, then the Doomsday will set in.” (Shu’b al-Iman, Hadith 1765)

Its chain of narrator is;

Al-Baihaqi – ‘Ali bin Ahmad bin ‘Abdan – Ahmad bin Abi Hassan Yahya bin Ahmad al-Dhibbi – Hafs bin Muhammad bin Najih al-Basri – Bishr bin Mihran – Sharik bin ‘Abdullah al-Nakhai’ – al-‘Amash – Abi Wa’il – ‘Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him.

Just after giving the report through this chain, al-Baihaqi writes:

هَذَا مَوْقُوفٌ، إِسْنَادُهُ إِلَى شَرِيكٍ مَجْهُولٌ، وَالْأَوَّلُ مُنْقَطِعٌ وَاللهُ أَعْلَمُ

“This is mawquf. Its chain up to Sharik is ‘majhool’ (i.e. contains unknown narrators) and the first one (i.e. earlier narration) is ‘munqati’’ (i.e. interrupted) And Allah knows the best!”

Practically expounding the above, Dr. Abdul al-‘Aliy Abdul Hamid mentions that Ahmad bin Abi Hassan Yahya bin Ahmad al-Dhibbi and Hafs bin Muhammad bin Najih al-Basri are both unknown. About Bishr bin Mahran, al-Dhahbi quotes Ibn Abi Hatim as saying, “My father (i.e. Abu Hatim) rejected his narrations.” (Mizan al-A’itadal 1/325 No. 1224)

The same report is quoted in Kanzul ‘Ummal (Hadith 44217)

As to the words of al-Baihaqi,

وَالْأَوَّلُ مُنْقَطِعٌ

“And the first one (i.e. earlier narration) is ‘munqati’’ (i.e. interrupted).”

It refers to the above discussed narration through ‘Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- attributing the words to the Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Narration 2:

Another narration that Murabbis use comes from Nawadir al-Usool of Hakim al-Tirmidhi (d. 320 A.H.).

It is narrated through Abu Umamah –may Allah be pleased with him. He said:

قَالَ رَسُول الله صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم تكون فِي أمتِي فزعة فَيصير النَّاس إِلَى عُلَمَائهمْ فَإِذا هم قردة وَخَنَازِير

“The Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: Terror and dismay will appear in my Ummah. The people will turn to their scholars while they will be (like) monkeys and pigs.” (Nawadir al-Usool 2/609 Narration 860, Makteba al-Imam al-Bukhari, Cairo 2008)

With reference to Nawadir al-Usool it is quoted in Kanzul ‘Ummal (Hadith 38727), al-‘Ayni’s ‘Umdatul Qari (21/177) and al-Tadhkirah (1/1256) of al-Qurtubi.

The chain of narrators for this narration is;

Hakim al-Tirmidhi – ‘Umar bin Abi ‘Umar – Hisham bin Khalid al-Damishqi – Isma’il bin ‘Ayyash – Laith [bin Abi Salim] – Ibn Sabit – Abu Umamah – the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah.

This chain is full of problems.

In this report Ibn Sabit is reporting from Abu Umamah, while we find al-Mizi (d. 742 A.H.) quoting ‘Abbas al-Douri who said: Yahya [bin Ma’in] was asked, if ‘Abdul Rahman bin Sabit heard anything from Abu Umamah? He replied, “No!” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 17/125 No. 3822, Mo’assas al-Risalah, Beirut 1980)

About the other narrator Laith bin Abi Salim, it is to be noted that Imam Ahmad, Yahya bin Ma’in, Muhammad ibn Sa’d , Ibn Abi Shayba etc. all have mentioned that he is weak and not reliable. (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 8/468 No. 835, Da’ira al-Ma’arif al-Nizamiya, Hyderabad Deccan, 1326 A.H.)

As to the narrator ‘Umar bin Abi ‘Umar [al-‘Abdi al-Balkhi] al-Suyuti mentions that he is majhool.i.e. unknown. (al-La’ali al-Masnu’a 1/89, Dar al-Kutab al-‘Ilmiyya, Beirut 1996)

So clearly the chain is interrupted and weak.

And in the first place the fact that report actually comes from Hakim al-Tirmidhi’s Nawadir al-Usool only is enough to maintain that it does not deserve a serious consideration.

al-Suyuti in his introduction to Jami’ al-Kabir writes that whatever comes from Nawadir al-Usool (alone) is Da’if and this knowledge suffices to speak of its weakness. See Jami’ al-Ahadith 1/6 Makteba al-Shamela ed.

Let’s not forget Ahmadiyya have themselves recognized al-Suyuti as a Mujaddid of his century.

So we see the reality of the narrations they use. But still see, how brave these people are and with what audacity they attribute these reports to the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!

Status of ‘Ulama in Islam:

Much can be said about the high status that scholars (‘ulama) have in the House of Islam. But to keep the thing brief I will just quote one Hadith.

The Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said:

إِنَّ الْعُلَمَاءَ وَرَثَةُ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ

“Verily the ‘ulama are the successors of the prophets.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 3641)

This report has been classified as Sahih by Ibn Mulaqqan (d. 804 A.H.) in Badr al-Munir 7/587. Al-‘Ayni also authenticated in ‘Umdatul Qari 2/40. Albani and Shu’aib Arna’ut too authenticated it.

Scholars, vis-à-vis Ahmadiyya-Muslim dialogue:

Now we come to the real issue. Where do, according to the Hadith, the Muslim scholars stand in the debate between Muslims and the Ahmadiyya? And if at all the two narrations discussed at length are to be accepted, who is their prime subject?

Now the situation is, while the Muslim scholars stand for the ideas established for last 1400 plus years, Ahmadiyya claim that through Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani “new truth” has dawned upon them which was somehow hidden from the Muslims of the past centuries. To the Muslims this “new truth” is the real strife (fitna) and Muslims scholars are trying to defend their faith against this fitna.

In this backdrop, the following narration says a lot;

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” يَرِثُ هَذَا الْعِلْمَ مِنْ كُلِّ خَلَفٍ عُدُولُهُ , يَنْفُونَ عَنْهُ تَأْوِيلَ الْجَاهِلِينَ , وَانْتِحَالَ الْمُبْطِلِينَ , وَتَحْرِيفَ الْغَالِينَ

The Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “In every successive century those who are reliable authorities will preserve this knowledge, rejecting the interpretations of the ignorant, lies of the treacherous and the corruption of the extremists.” (Sunan al-Kubra, Hadith 20911)

It is also quoted in Mishkat al-Masabih (Hadith 248). It has been classified as Sahih by Imam Ahmad, See al-‘Alai’s (d. 761 A.H.) Bughyah al-Multamis 1/35, ‘Alam al-Kutb, Beirut 1985
Shaykh Albani also classified it as Sahih in his research on Mishkat al-Masabih

The two narrations, if accepted, refer to the Murabbis:

This Hadith plainly established that in “every successive century” people with sound knowledge will protect it against all kinds of attacks. So who defends the truth now? Those who stick to and speak for the established beliefs that have been defended in “every successive century” or those who stand for the “newly dawned truth”?

This brings us to the simple plain conclusion that the so-called “newly dawned truth” is only a fitna. Therefore if by any means either of the above discussed two reports is to be considered- especially with reference Muslim-Ahmadiyya dialogue- they apply to the Ahmadiyya and not the Muslims. The murabbis are the subject of these narrations and not the Muslim ‘ulama.

One has to say; even if we agree with the Ahmadiyya interpretation how do they conclude  does it not fall upon the murabbis as well?

Ahmadis basking upon these false narrations and running away from the real points of discussion, remind me of a narration attributed to the Holy Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Although it’s manifestly weak but aptly fits the murabbis narrative. It says:

“Soon you will see the devils from amongst the men. One of them would listen to a hadith and apply it to other than himself. And will thus delude people away from listening about the person about whom it is actually said.” (Kanzul ‘Ummal, No. 29125)

Indeed Allah knows the best!-

Lets talk about Chanda! But first, a word from our sponsors:

The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم directed us to pay 2.5% of one’s end of year savings. This is the absolute minimum Allah has commanded us to give, which is distributed directly to the poor, not even to the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم. While giving is good, and truly necessary in some circumstances, the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم never made a general mandate to give money except to the poor.

However, the Ahmadiyya faith has created a new law: Chanda. Often described as a “financial sacrifice”, Chanda is a fee paid by all Ahmadis merely for being Ahmadi. This fee, a tithe, is given directly to the religious authorities. Tithes were not a practice of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, and thus constitutes a new religious innovation – a new law created in the faith, despite the claim that Mirza Ghulam was a “non-law-bearing” prophet.

Some of the Ahmadiyya religious apologists attempt to defend Chanda by citing verses from the Qur’an which speak about giving for the sake of Allah. It is undeniable that giving from one’s wealth, intellect, time, strength or any other forms of capital is a blessed act and rewarded by Allah. Let me be clear, no Muslims condemns giving wealth. May Allah increase the reward of those who do so. But, the objection raised by Muslims and questioning Ahmadis is not about the act of giving itself, the objection is about mandating such an act as an obligatory part of Islam, thus constituting a new law which the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم never did.

Still confused why its wrong? Take for example Salah (Namaz). Salah is often praised in the Qur’an. If a person were to consistently pray a sixth time in addition to the first five, that would be virtuous Nafl prayer, just a personal practice he takes upon him. But the moment he declares his sixth prayer to be an obligatory part of Islamic practice, then it becomes a religious innovation – a bid’ah. Islam mandates five prayers, no more, no less.

To make matters worse, people who refuse to pay up or question Chanda’s validity are deemed arrogant, miserly, or a possibly munafiq. This is essentially religious blackmail. New money schemes are concocted, members are to be “constantly reminded“, meetings are held about increasing Chanda “goals”, even children are pressured!

Even the very philosophy behind Chanda is backwards. Islam praised the giving of wealth by speaking about its virtues and rewards. This is called positive re-enforcement. Mirza Ghulam and his successors condemned those who did not give them money as arrogant, misers, being secret hypocrites, etc. This is negative re-enforcement.

So without further ado, below is a list of the different types of Chanda in the Ahmadiyya faith.

But Doesn’t Chanda Help Do Good Work?

One might argue that Chanda money is given to fund the myriad of Ahmadiyya institutions, such as MTA, flyer campaigns, bus campaigns, masjid building, and more!

As Muslims living in the west, our task is not merely to build tremendous houses of worship and marvel at their size. It is to create marvelous hearts that tremor when the name of Allah is mentioned. Are the Ahmadiyya institutions doing that? According to a recently leaked report, the UK Ahmadiyya population is a meek 22 thousand. This, in the country of residence of its supreme spiritual leader and who tells his followers they are growing at the speed of light. Just the number of Muslim converts, not born Muslims, in the UK alone exceed the entire UK Ahmadiyya population in 2010.

So what effect has all this money had, other than building massive and hollow centers?

But Doesn’t Chanda Help the Poor and Needy?

If your objective is to help the poor, then simply give Zakah or Sadaqa! Heck, even give to Humanity First, they seem to do great work. Why the need to pay the religious authorities, who take a cut off the top?

Ways you can push back

According to the famous Milgram Experiment, people who are commanded to do something against their conscience usually comply if they are ordered by an authority figure. Many rationalize their behavior after-the-fact. But, the number of objectors increases when an initial conscientious objector is introduced.

In order to stop Chanda, it takes a few initial brave Ahmadis or converted Muslims to take the first stand. The first to do so, al-Sabiqoon, may they be rewarded the highest.

So here are a few ways you can fight back:

1. Refuse to disclose your financial information. Tell them it is not their business;
2. Stress Zakah and Sadaqa to the poor and needy;
3. Slowly reduce the amount you pay every month without explanation;
4. Correct the misunderstandings Chanda collectors have about its obligatory status;
5. Refuse to pay until they provide a detailed explanation of where the money goes. After all, if they are privy to your financial information, you should be privy to theirs;
6. Just stop paying, cold turkey!

Finally, do not use this as an excuse to just withhold. There are needy causes all over the world, notably mass starvation in Somalia. And they need our help: http://www.islamic-relief.com/

و صلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على آله و صحبه و سلم

In this post we see quotes from various scholars about the meaning of “khatam al-nabiyyin”. Many issues that are often a subject of discussion among the Muslims and Ahmadis are dealt with in these quotes.

Qatada (d. circa 100 A.H.):

عن قتادة ، في قوله تعالى : ( وخاتم النبيين) قال :  آخر النبيين

It is narrated from Qatadah that he said about the word of Allah, “Wa Khātam al-Nabiyyin”: “[It means] Last of the Prophets.” (Tafsir Abdul Razzaq al-San’ani, Narration 2270)

Hassan al-Basri (d. 110 A.H.):

عن الحسن في قوله { وخاتم النبيين } قال : ختم الله النبيين بمحمد صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وكان آخر من بعث

It is narrated from Hassan [al-Basri] said about the word of Allah, “Wa Khātam al-Nabiyyin”: “Allah completed the series of the Prophets through Muhammad, may Allah bless him, and he is last [of them] in being raised.” (Durr al-Manthur cf. ‘Abd bin Hameed)

Abu Hanifa (d. 150 A.H.):

Imam Mofiq bin Ahmad al-Makki (d. 568 A.H.) narrates:

وتنبأ رجل فى زمن ابى حنيفة رحمه الله وقال امهلونى حتى اجئ بالعلامات فقال ابو حنيفة رحمه الله من طلب منه علامة فقد كفر لقوله عليه السلام « لا نبى بعدى »

A man in the time of Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, claimed to be a prophet and said, ‘Allow me to present proofs of my prophethood.’  Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, ruled: ‘Anyone who demands a proof of prophethood from him, will also turn a disbeliever, for the Messenger of Allah has said: ‘there is no prophet after me.’’ (Manaqib al-Imam al-‘Azam Abi Hanifa vol.1 p.161, Da’ira al-Ma’arif al-Nizamia, Hyderabad Deccan 1321 A.H.)

This shows that to the greatest of mujtahid Imams any consideration of what a claimant of prophethood may say was tantamount to disbelief. Simple!

Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310 A.H.):

Commenting on the words “Khātam al-Nabiyyin” he says:

الذي ختم النبوة فطبع عليها، فلا تفتح لأحد بعده إلى قيام الساعة

“He brought the Prophethood to end and sealed it. Now this door will not be opened for anyone till the establishment of Doomsday.” (Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari)

Al-Zamakhshari (d. 538 A.H.):

فإن قلت : كيف كان آخر الأنبياء وعيسى ينزل في آخر الزمان؟ قلت : معنى كونه آخر الأنبياء أنه لا ينبأ أحد بعده ، وعيسى ممن نبىء قبله ، وحين ينزل ينزل عاملاً على شريعة محمد صلى الله عايه وسلم ، مصلياً إلى قبلته ، كأنه بعض أمته

“If you ask; how can the Holy Prophet be the last of the Prophets when there is the belief that ‘Eisa will come down near the End of the Times before Resurrection? I shall say: The Holy Prophet is the last of the Prophets in the sense that no other person will be raised as a Prophet after him. As for the ‘Eisa (may Allah bless him), he is one of those who had been made the Prophets before the advent of the Holy Prophet. And when he comes again, he will come as a follower of the Shariah of Muhammad, may Allah bless him, and will offer prayers facing his qiblah like any other person of his Ummah.” (al-Kashshaf)

The same has been stated by;

Abu al-Barakat al-Nasafi (d. 710 A.H.) in Tafsir Madarik al-Tanzil
Nizamuddin al-Qumi (d. 728 A.H.) in Tafsir Gharaib al-Qur’an
Abu Sa’ud al-‘Imadi (d. 982 A.H.) in Tafsir Irshad al-‘Aql al-Salim Ila Mazaya al-Qur’an al-Karim
Abu al-Hassan al-Khazin (d. 741 A.H.) in Tafsir Lubab al-Tanzil
Ibn Ujayba (d. 1224 A.H.) in Tafsir Bahr al-Madid

Still if someone has any misgiving about the return of ‘Eisa عليه السلام and its relation to Finality of Prophethood then it is truly unfortunate.

Fakhruddin al-Razi (d. 606 A.H.):

Discussing Qur’an 33:40 and the Prophet’s compassion for his Ummah, he writes;

 وَخَاتَمَ النبيين : وذلك لأن النبي الذي يكون بعده نبي إن ترك شيئاً من النصيحة والبيان يستدركه من يأتي بعده ، وأما من لا نبي بعده يكون أشفق على أمته وأهدى لهم وأجدى ، إذ هو كوالد لولده الذي ليس له غيره من أحد

“In this context, the reason for saying Khātaman-nabiyyin is that, a prophet after whom another prophet is to be raised, leaves the work of admonition and explanation of injunctions somewhat incomplete, and the one coming after him can complete it. But the Prophet after whom no other Prophet is to be raised, is far more compassionate to his Ummah and gives them explicit guidance, for he is like the father who knows that after him his son has no guardian and patron to take care of him.” (Tafsir al-Kabir)

Did Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, leave anything incomplete? Was the deen not perfected before he died?

Al-‘Izz bin Abdus Salam (d. 660 A.H.):

He comments:

{وَخَاتَمَ النبيين} آخرهم

“{Wa Khatam al-Nabiyyin} (i.e.) Last of them” (Tafsir al-Qur’an li-‘Izz bin Abdus Salam)

Al-Qurtubi (d. 671 A.H.):

The great Spanish Muslim mufassir of the Qur’an quotes another great scholar Ibn Atya as saying;

هَذِهِ الْأَلْفَاظُ عند جَمَاعَةُ عُلَمَاءِ الْأُمَّةِ خَلَفًا وَسَلَفًا مُتَلَقَّاةٌ عَلَى الْعُمُومِ التَّامِّ مُقْتَضِيَةٌ نَصًّا أَنَّهُ لَا نَبِيَّ بَعْدَهُ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

“To the scholars of the ummah, of (both) the later and earlier times , these words are to be taken in absolute general terms whereby the text necessitates the meaning that there is no prophet after him –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.” (Tafsir Jami’ li-Ahkam al-Quran)

What a clear testimony that to the scholars of the Ummah these words must be taken in absolute general terms.  No exception to “non-shari’i”, “ummati” or “buruzi” prophet(s)!

Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi (d. 745 A.H.):

ألفاظ تقتضي نصاً أنه لا نبي بعده صلى الله عليه وسلم ، والمعنى أن لا يتنبأ أحد بعده ، ولا يرد نزول عيسى آخر الزمان ، لأنه ممن نبىء قبله ، وينزل عاملاً على شريعة محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم مصلياً إلى قبلته كأنه بعض أمته

“[These] words serve as evidence that there will be no Prophet after him, may Allah bless him. And the meaning is, no one will be made a prophet after him. And this does not contradict the descent of ‘Eisa near the End of Times, for he is one of those who were made prophets before him and he will descend following the shar’iah of Muhammad, may Allah bless him, praying facing his qibah like one from his own people Ummah.” (Tafsir Bahr al-Muhit)

Ibn Kathir (d. 774 A.H.):

فهذه الآية نص في أنه لا نبي بعده، وإذا كان لا نبي بعده فلا رسول [بعده] بطريق الأولى والأحرى؛ لأن مقام الرسالة أخص من مقام النبوة، فإن كل رسول نبي، ولا ينعكس

“This verse categorically states that there will be no Prophet [Nabi] after him. If there will be no Prophet [Nabi] after him then there will surely be no Messenger [Rasul] after him either, because the status of a Messenger is higher than that of a Prophet, for every Messenger is a Prophet but the reverse is not the case.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

Al-Baqa’i (d. 885 A.H.):

أي لأن رسالته عامة ونبوته معها إعجاز القرآن ، فلا حاجة مع ذلك إلى استنباء ولا إرسال ، فلا يولد بعده من يكون نبياً ، وذلك مقتض لئلا يبلغ له ولد يولد منه مبلغ الرجال ، ولو قضي أن يكون بعده نبي لما كان إلا من نسله إكراماً له لأنه أعلى النبيين رتبة وأعظم شرفاً ، وليس لأحد من الأنبياء كرامة إلا وله مثلها أو أعظم منها ، ولو صار أحد من ولده رجلاً لكان نبياً بعد ظهور نبوته ، وقد قضى الله ألا يكون بعده نبي إكراماً له ، روى أحمد وابن ماجه عن أنس وعن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال في ابنه إبراهيم : « لو عاش لكان صديقاً نبياً » ، وللبخاري نحوه عن البراء بن عازب رضي الله عنه ، وللبخاري من حديث ابن أبي أوفى رضي الله عنه : لو قضى أن يكون بعد محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي لعاش ابنه ، ولكن لا نبي بعده والحاصل أنه لا يأتي بعده نبي بشرع جديد مطلقاً ولا يتجدد بعده أيضاً استنباء نبي مطلقاً

 {And the seal of the prophets} means as his message is general and his prophethood carries a miracle of the Quran, so there is no more need to assign prophets or messengers, so no prophet is to born after him, and it also entails that none of his children will reach the age of manhood. Because if there were to be a prophet raised after him it would have been from his offspring as an honor to him because he is the highest of the prophets in status and greatest of them in nobility. And there was no honor for any one from amongst the prophets but similar or more of it was due to him. If any of his sons were to reach the age of manhood he would have been a prophet after him. And as an honor to him Allah had decreed that there is no prophet after him. Ahmad and Ibn Majah have narrated from Anas and Ibn ‘Abbas –may Allah be pleased with them both- that the Prophet –may Allah bless him- said about his son Ibrahim: “Had he lived he would have been a Siddiq and a Prophet.” And Bukhari has the same narrated from al-Bara’ bin ‘Aazib –may Allah bless him. And with Bukhari is a narration from Ibn Abi Aufa –may Allah bless him: “If it were decreed for a Prophet to be after Muhammad, may Allah bless him, his son would have lived but there is no Prophet after him.” And the conclusion is that there is no way for a prophet with a new law to come after him and similarly there is no chance of revival of assignment of prophethood after him. (Nazam al-Dorar wa Tanasub al-Ayat wal Suar)

There are many points of consideration here.

1. Finality of Prophethood means no prophet is to be born after him.
2. As some of earlier prophet’s had their sons raised to the status of prophethood it demanded that a son of the Prophet reaching the age of manhood should not be denied the same so Allah decreed for his sons not to reach that age. This way he was not denied an honor and was blessed with another honor of being of the last of all of the Prophets.
3. It also cuts at the roots of the Ahmadiyya’s cunning Appeal of Emotion when they say how come Holy Prophet spiritual power fails to originate another prophet because if it was to be so, some of his sons would have survived him.
4. At the end al-Baqa’i clarifies; neither a law bearing prophet would come after him nor would prophethood in general be revived after him. The learned scholar clearly mentioned the belief of Muslims denying possibility of the particular, the law-bearing prophet and then the same for in general terms thus clarifying prophethood of any kind is impossible after the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him.
5. Just like a) at the end he says revival of “assignment of prophethood” (istinba’ nabi) which does not contradict the return of ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, for he was born and assigned with prophethood before the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him.

 Isma’il al-Haqqi (d. 1127 A.H.):

 قرأ عاصم بفتح التاء وهو آلة الختم بمعنى ما يختم به كالطابع بمعنى ما يطبع به . والمعنى وكان آخرهم الذى ختموا به … وقرأ الباقون بكسر التاء اى كان خاتمهم … وهو بالمعنى الاول ايضا … فكانت علماء امته ورثته عليه السلام من جهة الولاية وانقطع ارث النبوة بختميته ولا يقدح فى كونه خاتم النبيين نزول عيسى بعده لان معنى كونه خاتم النبيين انه لا ينبأ احد بعده كما قال لعلى رضى الله عنه « انت منى بمنزلة هارون من موسى الا انه لا نبى بعدى » وعيسى ممن تنبأ قبله وحين ينزل انما ينزل على شريعة محمد عليه السلام مصليا الى قبلته كأنه بعض امته فلا يكون اليه وحى ولا نصب احكام بل يكون خليفة رسول الله … وقال اهل السنة والجماعة لا نبى بعد نبينا لقوله تعالى { ولكن رسول الله وخاتم النبيين } وقوله عليه السلام « لا نبى بعدى » ومن قال بعد نبينا نبى يكفر لانه انكر النص وكذلك لو شك فيه لان الحجة تبين الحق من الباطل . ومن ادعى النبوة بعد موت لا يكون دعواه الا باطلا

“’Asim has read the word as “Khātam”, which is the sealing instrument with which things are sealed. It implied that Holy Prophet came at the end and in him the line of the Prophets was closed and sealed … Some people have read it as “Khātim”, which means the one who put a seal … Thus, “Khātim” also is a synonym of “Khātam” … Henceforth the scholars of his Ummah will only inherit him in walayat (sainthood), the inheritance of the Prophethood having been brought to a close in him. And the second coming of Prophet ‘Eisa does not affect the Holy Prophet’s being the last Prophet, for Khātam al-nabiyyin means that no other prophet will be raised after him as he said to the Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, “You are unto me like Harun was to Musa except that there is no prophet after me.” And ‘Eisa had been raised a Prophet before him. When he comes the second time, he will come as a follower of the shari’ah of Muhammad, may Allah bless him. He will offer the prayer facing his qiblah, like any other man belonging to his Ummah. He will neither receive revelation nor issue new commands, but he will be a caliph of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him … And the followers of the Sunnah believe that there is no prophet after our Holy Prophet, for Allah has said: “But he is Messenger of Allah and the last of the Prophets,” and the Holy Prophet has declared: “There is no prophet after me.” Now whoever says that there is a prophet after our Holy Prophet, will be declared a kafir, for he has denied a fundamental article of the faith; likewise, the one who doubts it, will also be declared a kafir, for the Truth has been made distinct from falsehood. And the claim of the one who claims to be a Prophet after the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him, can be nothing but imposture.” (Tafsir Ruh al-Bayan)

Al-Shaukani (d. 1250 A.H.):

وقرأ الجمهور : « خاتم » بكسر التاء . وقرأ عاصم بفتحها . ومعنى القراءة الأولى : أنه ختمهم ، أي جاء آخرهم . ومعنى القراءة الثانية : أنه صار كالخاتم لهم الذي يتختمون به ويتزينون بكونه منهم

“The majority of the scholars have read the word as “Khātim” and ‘Asim as “Khātam”. According to the first reading, it would mean: “The Holy Prophet closed the lines of the Prophets i.e. he came at the end of them.” And according to the second reading it means, “He was like a seal for them, with which their line was sealed, and with whose inclusion their group was embellished.””(Fath al-Qadir)

Conclusion:

1. Top scholars from various times in Islamic history agree that “khatam al-Nabiyyin” simply means last of the prophets with whom the lines of prophets came to end. And even a possible consideration of what any claimant of prophethood after the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, may say is tantamount to disbelief.
2. “Khatam” or “khatim” make no difference and the significance remains the same i.e. Final Seal of Prophets.
3. Return of ‘Eisa عليه السلام is not against the Finality of Prophethood for what it signifies is that no new prophet will be born and no one will be assigned prophethood after the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him. And we know ‘Eisa عليه السلام was born and assigned with prophethood before the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him.
4. And al-Baqa’i stating the unanimous belief of the Ummah first denied the possibility of more specifically a law-bearing prophet and then followed it by categorical mention that assignment of prophethood will not be revived after the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم. Thus he clarified the Muslim belief that there will not be any kind of prophethood now.
5. The scholars of the Ummah have always taken the words “khatam al-nabiyyin” to signify the end of Prophethood in absolute general terms leaving room for no exception at all.

I hope these references help the common Ahmadis to have an idea of what the real beliefs of the greatest scholars of this Ummah have been. It’s a call to give up the slavery of the cult and return to the Ummah of the Holy Prophet Muhammad al-Mustafa صلى الله عليه و سلم.

* For all the references to Tafasir check under ayah 40 of surah 33.

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Lets start with two simple questions:

Was the Islam that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم was upon “True Islam”? Undoubtedly Yes.

Is the Islam practiced by Muslims today the “True Islam”? Muslims would argue Yes, and the Ahmadiyya would argue No.

Assuming that the Islam practiced by the Muslims today is no longer “True Islam”, that would imply that somewhere in the last 1432 years separating us from the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم all Muslims spontaneously and simultaneously went astray in belief, hence the need for Mirza Ghulam to create the Ahmadiyya faith. This is the standard Ahmadiyya narrative and it seems to make sense.

But lets take a closer look….turn back the clock 1300 years.

During the first few centuries, Islam spread into Persia, the former Byzantium Empire, India and Central Asia. When the people from these areas embraced Islam, they would often unintentionally bring with them their previous religious ideas. For example, one’s previous faith might hold God to be both good and evil, so when they embraced Islam, their view of Allah is that he is also part evil. Compounding this problem, some new Muslims would understand the Qur’an to conform to these types of previously held beliefs. It was not merely an issue of “Can you prove your beliefs from the Qur’an”, because everyone cited the Qur’an and made arguments for their side.

As these new ideas became more popular, especially in the outskirts of the Muslim lands, the Masters of Islamic Sacred Knowledge (‘Ulema) thought it prudent to document and codify the original interpretations of the faith, lest it be lost amongst the rising sea of new beliefs. It was not that the Qur’an was not sufficient, indeed it is! But if you presented an ayah negating one’s distorted version of Islam, he would simply re-interpret it. For the masses, the question arose “Whose understanding of the Qur’an the original, and hence the Truth?” It seemed that Islam would be lost to corruption.

But God willed otherwise for his Ummah…

With great hesitation and care, the Muslim scholars penned theological works to document the original beliefs of Islam. As Shaykh Hamza Yusuf put it, “at some point, it becomes absolutely necessary” to prevent a distortion of the faith. In general, they were written in a minimalism response format, such as “Regarding the disputed matter, we believe ABC” to only clarify a dispute, and leave the rest to the Qur’an. These documents represented the original understanding of Islam, as taught by the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم himself. For all practical purposes, they represent “True Islam”, as understood by the Prophet, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Usman, ‘Ali, et al.

One of these texts is titled Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar, written by Imam Abu Hanifah رحمه الله.

Fast-Forward to present times: The dispute between Ahl al-Sunnah and Ahmadiyya. Who is following “True Islam” and who is following a distortion?

Would it not be wise to look back into our literary tradition and see what “True Islam” thought of the very dispute we have today? For example, with regards to the Last Days and ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام, Imam Abu Hanifah wrote,

و خروج الدجال و ياجوج و ماجوج و طاوع الشمس من مغربها و نزول عيسى عليه السلام من السماء و سائر علامات يوم القيامة على ماوردت به اللأخبار الصحيحة حق كائن

The emergence of the Dajjal [anti-christ] and of Ya’joog and Ma’joog [Gog and Magog], the rising of the sun in the West, the descending of ‘Isa, alayhi assalam [Jesus], from heavens, are inevitable facts, so are all the other signs of the Day of Judgment, as narrated in authentic Ahaadeeth [Prophetic sayings]

If you are interested in what the Muslims of the 2nd century were saying, I suggest this text: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/tahawi.htm. Start at point 29. For the 7th century, read this: http://www.marifah.net/articles/matnalnasafiyya.pdf

If we want to know what the “True Islam” of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم is, we can look at these texts. And you will quickly realize that it was quite different from Ahmadiyya. The Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم taught that he was the Last Prophet and that towards the end of time, ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه و سلام would return. We invite our readers to click the links above and see for yourselves.

In closing, if you bring this article to the Murabbis (and please do!), they will likely respond with a series of isolated quotations in support of what they believe. Sadly, the average Ahmadi accepts them without verifying. Question what the Murabbis! Find the original source books and look it up yourselves. Do not simply take their statements at face value. I am confident that by merely double-checking them, you will realize how misleading they are. But few do….

May Allah guide us all to the “True Islam”

و صلى الله على محمد و على آله و سلم