Our Motto : 'In-Allah-ha-Ma'anaa' ("Be not grieved, for surely Allah is with us." - The Holy Quran 9:40). We find spiritual strength, courage and comfort, in the times of trials and  hardships, from this Divine Quranic revelation that descended upon the pure heart of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him), so as to console and compose him during one of the most perilous moments of his life. <Please click the 'Our Motto' link on our homepage for more details>

The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam (A.A.I.I.L. - Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam Lahore)

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian (the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement; the Mujaddid (Reformer) of the 14th Century Hijrah; and, the Promised Messiah and Mahdi) <Please read his biography in the 'Biography' section>

Please click here to SUBSCRIBE to this site!

Please click here to SEARCH this site!



What's New



Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)

Other Religions

My 1st Muslim Site for Children

Accusations Answered

Becoming a Muslim


Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian

Joining Our Movement

What Others Say About Us

Our Foreign Missions & Contact Info

Accusations Answered

News & Info

Other Ahmadiyya Sites


Qadiani Beliefs Refuted





Articles & Magazines


True Stories



Dreams, Visions & Prophecies


Questions & Answers





Dutch [Netherlands]

Dutch [Suriname]



India [Hindi/Urdu]









* MISC.:

Muslim Names

Muslim Prayer Times


Screen Savers


FREE E-mail Accounts:

* Click to:

[1] 'Subscribe' to this site!

[2] 'Recommend' this page to a friend!

[3] 'Search' this site!

[4] 'Send a Greeting Card'

* FREE CDs *


Books Section > The Last Prophet (Akhri Nabi) by Maulana Muhammad Ali > Finality of Prophethood and the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement

Finality of Prophethood and the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement:

Printer-friendly Page


The interpretation of the prophecy of Jesus Christ vis-à-vis the conception of the Finality of Prophethood has been discussed in detail by the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement and he has solved all the intricate points connected with the issue in such a beautiful way that the truth of Khatm-i Nubuwwat has shone like the mid-day sun. It is regrettable that those wrong meanings -- that is, that prophets will be made by following the Holy Prophet -- have been attributed to a person who clarified all the dim and hazy points which surrounded the subject of Khatm-i Nubuwwat. He said in plain and unmistakable terms that no prophet, new or old, could appear after the Holy Prophet. I quote only a few of his statements on the subject:

"And how was it possible that any prophet could come, after the Khatam an-Nabiyyin, in the complete and perfect sense, which is one of the conditions of perfect prophethood (nubuwwat-i tammah)? Is it not necessary that the perfect prophethood of such a prophethood should contain the essential requisites of revelation and the descent of Angel Gabriel? Because according to the express teachings of the Holy Quran, a prophet is one who has received the commands and creeds of faith through Angel Gabriel. But a seal has been set on the prophetic revelation for the last thirteen hundred years. Will this seal be broken then?" [This is not the "seal" about which Mian Sahib says that by bearing it prophets are made.]

"And I have written this several times that the coming of the Messiah, the Messenger of Allah, the son of Mary, after Khatam an-Nabiyyin is the cause of great disturbance. As a result, either it has to be accepted that prophetic revelation will start again, or that God will send the Messiah, son of Mary, after making him only a follower, depriving him of the essential characteristics of prophethood; but both these positions are prohibited." [Izalah Auham, p. 534.]

"Many doubts arise at this place that when the Messiah, son of Mary, would be a perfect follower (ummati) at the time of his descent, he cannot be in any way a messenger (rasul) because of his being a follower, for (the words) rasul and ummati in their meanings are antithetical. Moreover, our Prophet being Khatam an-Nabiyyin bars the coming of any other prophet except such a prophet who receives his light from the light of the prophethood of Muhammad and does not possess perfect prophethood, and who, in other words, is also called a muhaddath (one spoken to by God). Such a person is outside this restriction. On account of his discipleship and annihilation in the Messenger (fana fir-rasul) he is included in the being of the Seal of the Messengers (Khatam al-Mursalin) as a part is included in the whole." [Izalah Auham, p. 575.]

"If it is said, that the Messiah would only be told this much by revelation: ‘Follow the Holy Quran’, and then for the rest of his life revelation will be cut off and Gabriel would never descend on him and he (Jesus) would become like the followers after being absolutely deprived of prophethood, then all this is childish fancy, worth only a laugh. It is quite obvious that should revelation descend but once and should Gabriel bring only a single sentence and become silent forever thereafter, still this thought is contrary to the Finality of Prophethood, for when the seal of the finality is broken and the apostolic revelation begins to come down again, it is the same whether the revelations are few or frequent. Every wise person can understand that if God is true to His promise and the promise which has been granted in the verse Khatam an-Nabiyyin and whatever has been made so explicit in the Traditions - that after the death of the Holy Prophet, Gabriel has been forever prevented from bringing down prophetic revelation -- if all these matters are true and right, then no one can ever come in the capacity of a messenger after our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him)." [Izalah Auham, p. 577.]

"The Holy Quran does not permit the coming of another messenger, whether new or old, after the Khatam an-Nabiyyin because a messenger receives the knowledge of faith through the mediation of Gabriel and the door of the descent of Gabriel with apostolic revelation has been shut. And this is also an impossibility that a messenger should come to the world without apostolic revelation." [Izalah Auham, p. 614.]

"I have a firm faith that our Holy Prophet is Khatam al-Anbiya and no prophet, either new or old, shall appear after him in this Ummah." [Nishan-i Asmani, p. 28.]

"And I believe that our Holy Prophet Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets (Khatam al-Anbiya) and our book the Holy Quran is the source of Guidance. There is no prophet for us whom we should obey except Muhammad and there is no book for us which we should follow except the Holy Quran, the Guardian over the previous Scriptures. And I believe that our Messenger is the leader of the descendants of Adam and the leader of the messengers and surely God has brought an end to prophets with him." [A'inah Kamalat-i Islam (20th February 1893), p. 27.]

"Do you not know that the Lord, the Beneficent, has declared our Holy Prophet to be Khatam al-Anbiya without exception and our Holy Prophet has interpreted this verse [The Holy Quran, 33:40] with la nabiyya ba'di, -- ‘there is no prophet after me’ [Al-Bukhari, al-Muslim, etc. ch. Manaqib 'Ali.]. For the seekers of truth it is evident that if, after our Holy Prophet, we accept the lawfulness of the coming of another prophet, it means that we have opened the door of prophetic revelation which was closed and this is against the universal belief of Muslims. And how can a prophet appear after our Messenger, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, and verily after his death prophetic revelation has been cut off and God has brought an end to prophets with him?" [Hamamat al-Bushra, p.20.]

Such references from the books of the Founder can be produced in great number. As far as his followers are concerned to understand what his views were on Khatm-i Nubuwwat, these statements are enough for them to understand. If other people also ponder over the subject, it would not be difficult for them to understand that when Mian Sahib, with great audacity, can produce references from the writings of Ibn-i 'Arabi, Imam Sha'rani, Mujaddid Alf Thani, etc., after clipping and cutting according to his own liking, it would not he difficult for him to deal with the writings of the Founder of the Movement in the same manner.

Mian Sahib has gained another feather in his cap by inventing and issuing an extremely loose statement, that the writings of the Founder on the subject of prophethood prior to 1901 have been abrogated. In other words, the Founder's affirmations on oath that prophethood had come to an end with the Holy Prophet and that it was his firm belief that no prophet could appear after him -- this was all a lie and his affirmations were false. May Allah protect us from this! On one side the Founder is called Mujaddid, Promised Messiah and Mahdi, and on the other he is regarded as having faith in falsehood! This is the tribute which Mian Sahib, as a son, has paid to his father! This theory of change in 1901 [This subject has been discussed in detail in Maulana Muhammad Ali's Al-Nubuwwat fil Islam, particularly in chapter 9.] is mere fiction which cannot be accepted by anyone except by those disciples who blindly follow Mian Sahib. That Khatam an-Nabiyyin meant one who has brought prophets to an end, was the view advocated by the Founder before, and after 1901, as is mentioned in al-Wasiyyat written after 1901:

"With this particular prophethood is the end of all prophethoods and thus it ought to have been, for whatever has a beginning must also have an end." [Al-Wasiyyat (20th December 1905), p.10.]

Is not Lecture (on Islam) in Sialkot, a book written after 1901? Read what he says in it:

"And the Finality of the Prophethood was granted to him not only because he appeared last of all, in period of time, but also because all the excellences of prophethood came to an end with him." [Lecture Islam, Sialkot (2nd November 1904), p.6]

Has it not been clearly indicated in Haqiqat al-Wahy:

"God the Most High ... created Adam, sent Messengers and Books and last of all he raised Muhammad, the Chosen one, (peace and blessings of God be upon him), who is Khatam al-Anbiya and the best of the messengers." [Haqiqat al-Wahy (15th May 1907), p. 141.]

In the Supplement of the same book he has explained the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin thus:

"And surely our Messenger is Khatam an-Nabiyyin and with him is cut off the chain of messengers, so no one has the right to claim substantial prophethood (mustaqil nubuwwat) after our Messenger, the Chosen one, and nothing remains after him except abundance of communication." [Haqiqat al-Wahy, Supplement, p. 64.]

Have any meanings other than the Last of the Prophets been given to the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin in these four places? However, in spite of all these clarifications, it is being propagated ceaselessly that the Founder did not interpret Khatam an-Nabiyyin as the Last of the Prophets.

Reflective (zilli) Prophethood:

The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, in speaking of reflective (zilli), baruzi [A mystical term indicating the manifestation or reflection of another person's prophethood. Tr.] prophethood and the station of being annihilated in the love of the Messenger (fana fir-rasul), is not solitary in this realm. Similar statements have been made by other Muslim saints too. But there is no remedy for a person who blindfolds himself and keeps on saying that zilli or baruzi prophethood is real and true prophethood. Until now, nobody in the world has declared reflection (zill) to be real and metaphor (majaz) a reality. However, Mian Sahib, in his keenness to propagate the doctrine of the continuity of prophethood, has bypassed all the terminologies and has thrown himself in the distant realms of fantasy.

If zilli nubuwwat is real nubuwwat then zill al-Allah means Allah himself and when the saints call themselves azlal (azlal is plural of zill. Tr) of the Rahman (the Beneficent), they should also be considered gods, and a king should also be accepted as God -- because in the Hadith the term zill al-Allah has been used for a king.

To hide his fallacious views, Mian Sahib also comes out with the excuse at times that he also accepts the prophethood of the Promised Messiah as zilli and baruzi. If this is true, then it is not prophethood but wilayat (sainthood), because the zill (reflection) of prophethood is wilayat. It seems that Mian Sahib has found a way out of this dilemma to conceal his real doctrine and to keep his disciples in the dark, because he also says that the terms zilli and baruzi have not been coined by God but by the Founder himself. In the same court case, Mian Sahib's close friend, Zulfiqar Ali Khan, Secretary or Additional Secretary, when interrogated about the differences between the two sections of the Ahmadis, recorded the following statement:

"We accept the other party of the Ahmadis as Ahmadis. We believe Mirza Sahib (i.e., the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement. Tr.) to be a prophet. But they believe Mirza Sahib to be a baruzi and a zilli prophet."

This clearly shows that Mian Sahib and his choice disciples, in fact, do not accept Mirza Sahib as a baruzi and a zilli prophet. Perhaps the disciples of Mian Sahib generally cannot accept everything at the moment; prima facie this new doctrine lifts the veil gradually. Thus, the Founder's view that prophethood in the form of zill and baruz and the excellences of prophethood (kamalat-i nubuwwat) remain in this Ummah should be understood in the same sense in which Ibn-i 'Arabi and Mujaddid Alf Thani have expressed their views on the subject. And this is the view of the whole Ummah, and this is what the Founder said before and after 1901. For instance, he says in Izalah Auham (1891):

"Moreover, our Prophet being Khatam an-Nabiyyin bars the coming of any other prophet except one who receives his light from the light of the Prophethood of Muhammad and does not possess perfect prophethood, who in other words is also called a muhaddath (one spoken to by God). Such a person is beyond this restriction; rather, on account of his perfect discipleship and annihilation in the Messenger (fana fir-rasul), he is included in the being of the Seal of the Messengers (Khatam al-Mursalin) as a part is always included in the whole." [Izalah Auham (3rd September 1891), p. 575.]

And in 1901, in his leaflet Ek Ghalati ka Izalah, which according to Mian Sahib has abrogated the previous writings, the Founder says:

"So it is evident that by earning the names Muhammad and Ahmad by way of baruz two Muhammads and Ahmads have not come into existence; similarly, calling (a person) prophet or messenger in the form of baruz does not mean that the seal [Does this seal make prophets or bring prophets to an end?] of Khatam an-Nabiyyin is broken, because a baruz is a part of its original."

And then after 1901 he again wrote:

"And finally it should be remembered that if a follower receives a station of revelation, inspiration and prophethood merely by following the Holy Prophet and is exalted by being given the name ‘prophet’, it does not break the seal of prophethood because he is a follower and does not possess a separate existence of his own." [Chashma Masihi (1st March, 1906), p. 40.]

The Seal of Prophethood:

What is this "Seal of Prophethood", the breaking of which has been mentioned in the writings of the Founder? Does this Seal of Prophethood mean anything other than that prophethood has come to an end? Has it been denied here or clearly admitted that Khatam an-Nabiyyin means the Last of the Prophets? It is true that once or twice the Founder has also argued from the word khatam that the word seal points out towards the imparting of the Holy Prophet's grace. While quoting this reference, Mian Sahib has cleverly omitted a part which explained the true sense of the passage. Mian Sahib quotes from Haqiqat al-Wahy thus:

"God, Who is eminent in His glory, has made the Holy Prophet the possessor of the Seal, that is, He granted him a Seal, which was not granted to any other prophet at all, for the dissemination of excellences, then he was called Khatam an-Nabiyyin, that is to say, excellences of prophethood are obtained by following him and his spiritual care (ruhani tawajjuh) is a prophet-fashioner."*

* This has been the general practice by other scholars and authors of the Rabwah section Tr.

Haqiqat al-Wahy, p. 97 footnote. The last sentence could also be translated thus: "and his care is a prophet-fashioner of a spiritual category." This, in fact, will be in consonance with the text which subsequently mentions the coming of the like of prophets (not prophets) in the Ummah. It is interesting to note that one of the revelations of the Founder is:

"Thou art to me like the prophets of Israel (that is by way of reflection, thou resemblest them)" (Tabligh-i Risalat, vol. i, p. 61, originally quoted from Ishtihar, 20th February 1886. Tr.)

See also Maktubat Ahmadiyya, vol. i, Letter No. 271, already quoted in ch. iii.

By writing these words in bold letters Mian Sahib has tried to prove that the Founder of the Movement did not render Khatam an-Nabiyyin as the Last of the Prophets but gave this term the same meaning which Mian Sahib had all along advocated, that in future prophets will be raised by following the Holy Prophet. The fact that in the above passage only the receiving of the excellences of prophethood (kamalat-i nubuwwat) has been mentioned, explains the true significance of the aforementioned passage:

"And this holy power did not come to the share of any other prophet. And this is the true meaning of the tradition: Ulama-u ummati ka-anbiya-i Bani Israil, that is, ‘the learned of my Ummah will be like the Israelite prophets.’" [Haqiqat al-Wahy, p. 97 footnote.]

What a great injustice Mian Sahib has done to his father, that by curtailing and pruning his writings he has mutilated the whole sense of the passage. The Founder only wanted to convey the point that by following the Holy Prophet the learned of this Ummah will become like the prophets of the Israelites and Mian Sahib is stretching it to mean that by the Holy Prophet's seal, prophets will be made! The whole Ummah believes in the doctrine of the learned ones becoming like the prophets of the Israelites, but their actually becoming prophets is something which has been repudiated by the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin itself. Let Mian Sahib ponder for a moment what kind of techniques he is applying to extract his own ideas from a writing of the Founder. He has not done this once, or twice, but all the time, while quoting the other Muslim divines and dignitaries as well.

From the beginning to the end, the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has rendered Khatam an-Nabiyyin as the Last of the Prophets and the hadith, la nabiyya ba'di (there is no prophet after me), has been considered by him as its true and clear interpretation and this is the only meaning which he has accepted of Khatm-i Nubuwwat. It is true that he has also accepted the word khatam as implying another meaning, that is, the imparting of prophetic excellences. But the result of Mian Sahib's lack of deliberation is this: that he thinks that this implication has abrogated the previous meanings of the term. The Holy Prophet's passing on prophetic excellences has been mentioned in the earlier and later works of the Founder as well.

In Haqiqat al-Wahy which tells us of the Seal which imparts the Holy Prophet's grace, he also mentions that Khatam an-Nabiyyin means the termination of the dispensation of Prophethood: "and that God sent our Holy Prophet after all other prophets." [Haqiqat al-Wahy, Supplement, p. 44.]

Again in Haqiqat al-Wahy, the Founder interprets Khatm-i Nubuwwat as the termination of the chain of prophethood thus:

"And surely our Messenger is Khatam an-Nabiyyin and with him is cut off the chain of messengers." [Haqiqat al-Wahy, Supplement, p. 44.]

And then he says:

"And nothing remains after him except the abundance of communication." [Haqiqat al-Wahy, Supplement, p. 44.]

Thus, according to the Founder, the receiving of "abundance of communication" (kathrat-i mukalimah), and prophethood or messengership, are not one and the same, as otherwise the statement should read like this:

"With him has been cut off the chain of messengers and nothing remains after him except messengership."

and this obviously is a meaningless statement.

As in the saying: "Nothing has been left of prophethood except mubashshirat (good news)," it is not possible that mubashshirat should be considered true prophethood ('ain-i nubuwwat), similarly, it is not possible that in the statement above: "Nothing remains after him except the abundance of communication," the abundance of communication should be considered prophethood. The Founder further writes:

"And I have been called a prophet by God by way of metaphor, not by way of reality." [Haqiqat al-Wahy, Supplement, p. 44.]

And in Izalah Auham he has already stated that a prophet in the metaphorical sense is called a muhaddath (one spoken to by God). [Izalah Auham (3rd September, 1891), p. 579, detailed ref. quoted in ch. V. See also Izalah Auham, pp. 349, 421.] Thus, in spite of this clear explanation, to give a contrary meaning to a statement of the Founder is to make a mockery of his writings and this is what Mian Sahib has done and has played a similar game with the writings of Ibn-i 'Arabi, Mujaddid Alf Thani, Imam Sha'rani, etc. The Founder had explained the point in a subtle manner for the sake of his less knowledgeable opponents and Mian Sahib on this basis has found an excuse to wash the earlier and later writings of the Founder down the drain.

The Finality of Prophethood and the Transmission of Prophetic Excellences:

There is a fine point underlying the use of khatam instead of khatim, although they carry the same meaning. Mian Sahib neither understood this point, nor did he try to do so. On the other hand, all the writings of the Founder, before or after 1901, where he explained the meaning of Khatam an-Nabiyyin as the Last of the Prophets were abrogated ["The writings before 1901 wherein he denied being a prophet have been abrogated now, and it is wrong to argue from them" (Haqiqat an- Nubuwwat, p. 121, by Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, 1915 edition). Tr.] by him and he raised an objection against one of my writings saying that I have now changed my views on the subject. According to him, I used to explain Khatam an-Nabiyyin in the same sense in which he used to explain it and now I render it in a different way. A person who does not pay close attention to a matter and is in the habit of picking up at something and running away with it at top speed should most probably be excused for not grasping such a delicate point, that Khatam an-Nabiyyin means the Last of the Prophets and that it also implies, in a subtle manner, that prophethood has itself attained perfection.

Mian Sahib has also taken notice of my English comments of the Holy Quran (on verse 33:40) and has discussed my use of the words "primarily" and "secondarily" ["The word Khatam means primarily a seal, and secondarily, the end or the last part or portion of a thing, the latter being the primary significance of the word khatam," The Holy Quran (English) by Muhammad 'Ali, under verse 33:40, 1920 edition. Tr.] If I start quoting the lexicons on this point it would need another long article, therefore, I would only say that in my commentary of the Holy Quran I have given both meanings, firstly, "a seal" and secondly "the last". It is also true that the word khatam is mostly used in the sense of a seal and less in the sense of ‘the last’, and this is what I meant when I adopted these meanings in my notes. Both the readings, khatim and khatam, have been mentioned in the reports, but the Holy Quran which is being recited today contains the reading khatam. The popular meaning of the word khatim is the "end", although it is used in the sense of a seal also. The preference given to khatam is for the reason that the object of setting a seal on something is that nothing else will enter therein. Thus, Khatam an-Nabiyyin does mean the Last of the Prophets but it also carries a deeper significance that finality now has been combined with the highest form of perfection and nothing more will enter therein from outside. In other words, prophethood has become perfect and has also come to an end. The use of the word khatim could not convey this significance. And only in this sense could the saying of Hazrat Aishah be considered as correct that: "Say Khatam an-Nabiyyin but say not: there is no prophet after him," because in the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin is included the meaning of la nabiyya ba 'duhu [that is, There will be no prophet after him -- Tr.] as well as the conception of the perfection of prophethood, and la nabiyya ba 'duhu only contains one meaning, that is to say, simply the termination of prophethood.

According to the Founder of the Movement, the word muhr (seal) denotes the transmitting of prophetic excellences also. He has pointed this out, so that when khatam is explained as a seal (muhr), it may not be understood that when a seal is set on something nothing at all can come out of it, which will amount to rejecting the continuous transmission of the prophetic grace (among the followers of the Holy Prophet). On the other hand, this is such a seal that has brought prophethood to perfection, that nothing can be added to it, and at the same time, it has also brought the bestowing of prophetic bounties to perfection; because the real object of prophethood is the transmission of spiritual excellences -- if this is lacking in prophethood, that is not real prophethood. The only true object of prophethood is that it should make others drink to the full from the same stream from which the Holy Prophet himself drank and should illuminate others from the same source from which the Holy Prophet himself received his illumination. Thus, the prophethood of Khatam an-Nabiyyan, as well as its transmission of spiritual excellences, both attained perfection. The Founder expresses the same view in the following words:

"He became Khatam an-Nabiyyin but not in the sense that no spiritual grace will be obtained from him, but he is the possessor of the seal (sahib-i khatam) in the sense that no grace can be obtained by any person except by his seal and that for his followers the door of divine communication and communion shall never be shut . . . substantive prophethood has come to an end with the Holy Prophet but the reflected (zilli) prophethood, which means the receiving of revelation only by the grace of Muhammad, shall remain to the Last Day so that the door for the perfection of human beings may not be closed. " [Haqiqat al-Wahy, pp. 27, 28.]

How beautiful was the whole explanation which was distorted into something entirely different!

Follower Prophet:

Mian Sahib has also stumbled over the term "follower and prophet" (ummati aur nabi). What it actually means has been clearly explained by the Founder himself in the following words:

"So the fact that he has been called a prophet as well as a follower indicates that he shall possess both the aspects of followership (ummatiyyat) and prophethood (nubuwwat) as it is necessary that both these aspects should be found in a muhaddath. But the possessor of perfect prophethood (sahib-i nubuwwat-i tammah) owns one aspect of prophethood only. In short, muhaddathiyyat is imbued with both colours. That is why in Barahin-i Ahmadiyyah, God the Most High gave this humble servant the name of follower as well as prophet." [Izalah Auham (3rd September 1891), p. 533. A detailed discussion on this point will be fund in An-Nubuwwat fil Islam, ch. 7 and 8, Ahmadiyya Movement, ch. 4. Tr.]

Mian Sahib's views correspond with those of the Babis:*

* Ali Muhammad Bab of Shiraz (born March 26, 1821 executed July 8, 1850) expounded a new doctrine abrogating and altering the Quranic Law. After the death of Bab, schism divided the Babis into two sects, the Azabis and the Baha'is. For a detailed discussion see Babi Movement by Muhammad 'Ali. Tr.

Before concluding, I would like to put a question to Mian Sahib. When he has categorically denied the meaning of Khatam an-Nabiyyin as the Last of the Prophets, from which verse of the Holy Quran does he bring Law-bearing prophethood to an end? Had he said that although Khatam an-Nabiyyin means the Last of the Prophets, but by this is actually meant the last of the Law-bearing prophets, then he would have kept himself aloof from the Babi doctrine. However, by denying the termination of absolute prophethood he has fully fallen in line with the Babis. If he had said that the verse "This day have I perfected for you your religion," [The Holy Quran, 5:3] denotes that the Law (Shariah) has come to an end, then Mian Zahir-ud-Din, [Mian Zahir-ud-Din, a clerk in the Canal Department at Gujranwala wrote a book entitled Nabi Ullah Ka Zahur (The Appearance of a Prophet of God) in 1911. In this book the writer tried to prove that the Holy Prophet was not the last of the prophets and that prophets would continue to appear after him. The author had some correspondence with the Maulana Nur-ud-Din after which he was excommunicated from the Ahmadiyya community. This was followed by repentance on the part of Zahir-ud-Din, but the repentance was not long-lived. In 1913 he published another pamphlet in which he tried to defend his previous views. For the promulgation of these beliefs, the Ahmadiyya community again cut off all connections with him. It is also alleged that he claimed khilafat for himself and that was one of the reasons of his excommunication. Tr.] who conforms to his ideas to a certain extent, argues that such words are also to be found about the law of Moses: "Again, We gave the Book to Moses to complete (Our blessings) on him who would do good, and making plain all things and a guidance and a mercy," [The Holy Quran, 6:155] and Mian Sahib's own disciples sometimes use this very argument.

I say that if the Law (Shariah) has been made perfect, it has consequently come to an end; similarly, if prophethood has reached a stage of perfection it necessarily means that prophethood has also come to an end. And this is a decisive and ultimate argument against him. It is now up to him to reject it and adopt for himself an entirely different religion or join the followers of the Bab.

I have given conclusive proof from the lexicons about the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin, that it was invariably explained by the words ‘the last of the prophets’ and until now Mian Sahib has not quoted the authority of a single lexicon to prove that the term meant ‘prophet by following whom prophets will be made in future,’ or, khatam al-qaum meant ‘that person, by following whom, a nation shall come into existence.’ Similarly, I have quoted the evidence of nine different reports by the Holy Prophet and have also mentioned that there are forty reports like that on the subject where the Holy Prophet's being the final prophet has been clearly explained. But Mian Sahib has not quoted a single report which would support his meaning -- that by following the Holy Prophet new prophets shall be made in future.

Then I have shown from the writings and sayings of Muslim savants, including the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, that they all believed that the Holy Prophet was the Last Prophet. There have been a few exceptions of those who believe in the coming of Jesus Christ, but they have interpreted it in this way, that Jesus had been born or appointed before the Holy Prophet -- and this assumption of theirs is wrong -- or have declared him only a mujaddid (at the time of his second coming) which is correct, but Jesus was prophet of God and his coming as a mujaddid after being deposed from his office of prophethood is not proper. This doctrinal error has been rectified by the Founder.

On the other hand, Mian Sahib has not shown from the writings of any of the Muslim divines, including the Promised Messiah, that prophets shall be made in future by following the Holy Prophet. The true and real basis of our faith is the Holy Quran and the Tradition (Hadith). I have cited all these other testimonies as additional and conclusive proof against him. And my final demand is that he should produce even a solitary authority from the Hadith, lexicons and the sayings of the Imams in support of his meaning about the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin.


Books Section > The Last Prophet (Akhri Nabi) by Maulana Muhammad Ali > Finality of Prophethood and the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement


'E-mail' this page to a friend!

E-mail Us!
This website is designed, developed and maintained by the members of:
Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam
Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam, Lahore -- A.A.I.I.L.)
and is being managed in the Netherlands.

The responsibility of the content of this website lies with the respective authors
You may print-out and spread this literature for the propagation of Islam provided our website [aaiil.org] is acknowledged

Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha'at-e-Islam Lahore (Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propagation of Islam)

Thank you for visiting us at aaiil.org or ahmadiyya.ws or muslim.sh or islam.lt !