Intro
Most Ahmadi’s haven’t read enough to understand MGA’s prophethood. In the BA1-2, which was published in 1880, MGA was indirectly claiming prophethood. In fact, in the BA2 (see page 118), MGA quoted 18:109 (18:110, in the Ahmadi quran)(see also 31:27, the verse is identical) and says that “”Say, ‘If the ocean became ink for the words of my Lord, surely, the ocean would be exhausted before the words of my Lord came to an end, even though We brought the like thereof as further help.’. Thus, MGA was arguing from the Quran that Allah will continue talking (prophethood) to Muslims until the Day of Judgement and this Islam was superior to all other religions.
In BA-3 (See page 157), MGA quoted 9:32 and was discreetly claiming prophethood for himself. In fact, MGA’s first argument in the BA was that of the continuation of divine revelation, however, MGA wasn’t being clear (it was supposed to be 300 arguments). Many ulema responded by sending fatwa’s of Takfir in 1884. This was quoted again by MGA in 1901 via “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (See page 2, online English edition).
Even Nawab Siddiq Hassan Khan tore of the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya and sent it back to Qadian in that condition, which enraged MGA. MGA was also accused of claiming prophethood by the Ahl-e-Hadith, only Batalvi defended him. I have written a full review of BA3 herein. By 1884, MGA was openly being called a Kafir by most of the Ahl-e-hadith Muslims of North India. Nevertheless, after BA-4 (1884), MGA only published 2 books in 6-7 years (directed at the Hindus, and silent on his prophethood). He did publish the green announcement (sabz ishtihar) in 1888 wherein he argued that the prophecies of prophets and messengers failed all the time (or were misunderstood), thus, his failed prophecy (about the Musleh Maud) was common for prophets and messengers.
In 1890, via Izala Auham, MGA and his team of writers alleged that for the coming Messiah, the condition of prophethood is not necessary by Muhammad (saw)(naozobillah)(See Izala Auham, RK-3, page 59 and Bro Imtiaz, 3:15:13)(See also Izala Auham, part 1 RK, V-3 page 249).
In 1891, as MGA claimed to be the Messiah, he denied prophethood (See Elucidation of Objectives, pages 9-10, and via Muhammad Ali, Prophethood in Islam, 1915 edition). MGA denied prophethood an additional 40+ times in subsequent books from 1891 to 1901. MGA also quoted the famous hadith from Sahih Muslim wherein Eisa (as) has repeatedly been called “Nabi-Ullah” and called it fabricated.
In 1892 (Feb-3), Lahori-Ahmadi’s sources allege that MGA was in Lahore and published an announcement (See Majmu‘a Ishtiharat,2019 edition, volume 1, pages 329–330). Mirza Ghulam Ahmad issued a written public declaration at the end of a debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim, one of the Muslim Ulama. This writing was signed by eight witnesses, and it brought to an end the debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim. In this announcement, MGA told Muslims that if they are displeased with the word “Nabi” by MGA and if these words give injury to their feelings, they may regard all such words as amended and instead consider me to have used the word muhaddas. MGA said that the word nabi should be regarded as having been deleted. MGA also argued that in every place instead of the word nabi the word muhaddas should be understood.
In 1900, via his book Arba’in, MGA alleged that his followers were already calling him as (SAW)(or a version of it) and that this wasn’t objectionable (see page 12). Then, on page 133-134, MGA claims to be a law-bearing prophet in a strange way.
On Nov-5-1901, MGA and his team of writers published “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” and thus, the official claim of prophethood was made.
In the Al-Hakam of Nov-30-1901, after the publishing of “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala”), MGA alleged that he was Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah), and since Muhammad (Saw) has come again, that doesn’t mean a new prophet showed up (via Malfuzat-Urdu, page 375 and Al-Hakam, vol. 5, no. 44, 30 November 1901, pp. 1-4, via Malfuzat-4-English, pages 102-106).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1890-1891
Izala Auham, RK-3, page 59
https://www.youtube.com/live/K4Q7aX1LgzM?si=xSPGvvUjZNWp-8_3
In 1890, via Izala Auham, MGA and his team of writers alleged that for the coming Messiah, the condition of prophethood is not necessary by Muhammad (saw)(naozobillah)(See Izala Auham, RK-3, page 59 and Bro Imtiaz, 3:15:13).
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1890-1891
Izala Auham, part 1 RK, V-3 page 249
See Bro Imtiaz, 3:15:35
“In Hadees it has been informed that Ibn e Maryam, the one who is about to come, would be born from among you, so this sentence, in other words, means that the Son of Mary who is about to come would not be a prophet but he would be a follower only.”
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1891
Elucidation of Objectives, pages 9-10, via Muhammad Ali, Prophethood in Islam, 1915 edition
“Here if it be argued that the like of Messiah should also be a prophet because Messiah was a prophet, the reply in the first instance will be that our Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), has not made prophethood a pre-requisite for the coming Messiah, but has clearly stated that he shall be a Muslim and abide by the Law of Islam like common Muslims. He shall not say anything beyond that he is a Muslim and their leader. Besides, there is no doubt that this humble servant has been raised by the Most High God as a muhaddath for this ummah and a muhaddath is in one sense a prophet too. This, however, is not perfect prophethood (nubuwwat-i tammah), yet a muhaddath is a prophet partially (juzi nabi) for he is endowed with the gift of being spoken to by God and matters Unseen are manifested to him and, like the revelations of messengers and prophets, his revelations are protected against the intervention of the devil. And the real kernel of the Law (Shari’ah) is disclosed to him and he is commissioned just like prophets, and it is obligatory on him, like prophets, that he should announce his mission publicly and anybody who rejects him deserves punishment. And prophethood in his case means only that the above characteristics are found in him.
If it is argued that the door of prophethood has been closed and a seal has been set on the revelation that descends on prophets, I shall say that neither the door of prophethood has been closed in all respects nor a seal has been set on every form of revelation. On the contrary, the door of revelation and prophethood has remained partially open for this ummah ever since. It is to be carefully remembered that the type of prophethood, which is to continue for ever, is not perfect prophethood but, as I have just mentioned, is only a partial prophethood, which in other words is termed muhaddathiyyah attainable by following the greatest and the most perfect of all human beings i.e., the Holy Prophet Muhammad, the embodiment of all the excellences of perfect prophethood (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
Now, may Allah guide you, make a note that a prophet is a muhaddath, and muhaddath is a prophet in the sense that he possesses one of the various kinds of prophethood. The Messenger of Allah is reported to have said that nothing is now left of prophethood, except mubashshirat (good news); that is to say from the kinds of prophethood only one kind is left, that is mubashshirat — such as true visions (al-ru’ya al-sadiqah), true sights (al-mukashifah al-sahihah) and the revelation which descends on the chosen servants of God (auliya). And that is a light which illumines the hearts of a gloomy people. Thus behold, O critic! The possessor of insight and understanding, is the door of prophethood entirely closed? On the other hand, the Hadith proves that the perfect prophethood which contained the revelation of Shari’ah has ceased but prophethood containing mubashshirat (good news) only shall exist till the Day of Judgement. And you are aware and have read in the books of Hadith that true vision is forty-sixth part of prophethood i.e., perfect prophethood. Thus when true visions could rank so high what would be the position of revelation which descends on the hearts of muhaddathin. To sum up, the door of partial prophethood has always been open. But nothing remains of prophethood except mubashshirat (good news), and munzirat (warnings), foreknowledge about Unseen matters, deep understanding of the Quran and divine knowledge. But prophethood which is perfect and complete and possesses all the excellences of revelation has been discontinued, and we believe in it from the time this was revealed: ‘Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and Khatam al-Nabiyyin (Seal of the Prophets)’ (33:40).”
___________________________________________________________________________
1892
Feb-3
Majmu‘a Ishtiharat, 2019 edition, volume 1, pages 329–330
Delete the word ‘Prophet’ from my writings and replace it with ‘Saint’
https://www.ahmadiyya.org/noclaim/state1.htm
In 1892 (Feb-3), Lahori-Ahmadi’s sources allege that MGA was in Lahore and published an announcement (See Majmu‘a Ishtiharat,2019 edition, volume 1, pages 329–330). Mirza Ghulam Ahmad issued a written public declaration at the end of a debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim, one of the Muslim Ulama. This writing was signed by eight witnesses, and it brought to an end the debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim. In this announcement, MGA told Muslims that if they are displeased with the word “Nabi” by MGA and if these words give injury to their feelings, they may regard all such words as amended and instead consider me to have used the word muhaddas. MGA said that the word nabi should be regarded as having been deleted. MGA also argued that in every place instead of the word nabi the word muhaddas should be understood.
“Be it known to all the Muslims that all such words as occur in my writings Fath Islam, Tauzih Maram and Izala Auham, to the effect that a muhaddas is in one sense a prophet, or that being a muhaddas is partial prophethood or imperfect prophethood, are not to be taken in their real sense, but have been used according to their root meaning in a straight-forward way; otherwise, I lay no claim whatever to actual prophethood. On the other hand, as I have written in my book Izala Auham, page 137, my belief is that our leader and master Muhammad mustafa — may peace and the blessings of God be upon him — is the Khatam-ul-Anbiya (Last of the Prophets).
So I wish to make it clear to all Muslim brothers that, if they are displeased with these words and if these words give injury to their feelings, they may regard all such words as amended, and instead consider me to have used the word muhaddas. For I do not like to create dissension and discord among the Muslims.
From the beginning, as God knows best, my intention has never been to use this word nabi as meaning actually a prophet, but only as signifying muhaddas, which the Holy Prophet has explained as meaning one who is spoken to by God. Of muhaddas it is stated in a saying of the Holy Prophet: “Among the Israelites who were before you, there used to be men who were spoken to by God, though they were not prophets, and if there is one among my followers, it is Umar” — Bukhari, v. 1, page 521, part 14, ch. Virtues of Umar.
Therefore, I have not the least hesitation in stating my meaning in another form for the conciliation of my Muslim brethren, and that other form is that in every place instead of the word nabi the word muhaddas should be understood, and the word nabi should be regarded as having been deleted.”
___________________________________________________________________________
1896
Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam
Ruhani Khuzain V-10, page 367
LIVESTREAM – CASE OF AHMADIAT IN THE COURT OF ITS OWN PEOPLE – ختم نبوت پر قادیانیت کا مقدمہ – YouTube
“””..all messengerships (tamam risalat), and prophethoods reached their height with Muhammad (saw)…”””
Scan
__________________________________________________________________________
1898
Raz-e-Haqiqat, page 168, RK-14
LIVESTREAM – CASE OF AHMADIAT IN THE COURT OF ITS OWN PEOPLE – ختم نبوت پر قادیانیت کا مقدمہ (youtube.com)
MGA says no prophet can come after Muhammad (Saw).
Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________1898
Ayyam as-Sulh, p. 75
Ayyam-us-Sulh, p. 74; RK, vol. 14, p. 309
See Bro Imtiaz, 3:18:10
The famous hadith from Sahih Muslim wherein Esa (as) is called Nabi-Ullah-evaluated – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
“And it should also be remembered that in ‘Sahih Muslim’ the word ‘nabi’ has occurred with reference to the Promised Messiah, that is to say, by way of metaphor.”
Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1899, Jan-10, page 8, Al-Hakam
https://www.youtube.com/live/cVY0BN4Jmk0?si=JLtRqytyjpaa3asI
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1900
https://ahmadiyyafactcheckblog.com/2017/02/23/noorudin-didnt-care-if-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-claimed-even-law-bearing-prophethood/#more-1402
In 1900, via his book Arba’in, MGA alleged that his followers were already calling him as (SAW)(or a version of it) and that this wasn’t objectionable (see page 12). Then, on page 133-134, MGA claims to be a law-bearing prophet in a strange way.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
1901
Malfuzat-Urdu, page 375
Allegedly on Nov-19-1901
Al-Hakam, vol. 5, no. 44, 30 November 1901, pp. 1-4, via Malfuzat-4-English, pages 102-106
In the Al-Hakam of Nov-30-1901, after the publishing of “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala), MGA alleged that he was Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah), and since Muhammad (Saw) has come again, that doesn’t mean a new prophet showed up (via Malfuzat-Urdu, page 375 and Al-Hakam, vol. 5, no. 44, 30 November 1901, pp. 1-4, via Malfuzat-4-English, pages 102-106).
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Majmua Ishtiharat, page 172, 2nd Volume
Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________1900–1902
Tohfah-e-Golarhviyyah , Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 17, page 61
https://www.youtube.com/live/Wa5s9nig3gc?si=Af-UR0QonlHT8Q5U
Transliteration
“”is jugga jo maree nisbut kalam elahi may Rasul aur Nabi ka lafuz ahktiar keea gaya, yay Rasul aur Nabi-ullah, yay atlaq, majaz, aur istakhara kay tor per hay””
Translation
“”In this place, when God has given me the title of Messenger and Prophet, this Messenger and Prophet of Allah, is non-real (majaz) and a metaphor (istakhara)””
Scan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1906
MALFOOZAT VOL-5, PAGE 17, REF:- BADR VOL-2 Number 17. DATED 26th APRIL, 1906
Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was accused of claiming prophethood in the 1879–1884 era
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism
December 30, 2021 at 7:10 pm
I understand that you are trying to show that Hadhrat Masih Maud (as) [God-Forbid] Denied prophethood, but why don’t you quote other references from the Same Book and time frame, since he was already blessed with Divine Revelation, he ensures that the common folk knew full well that he was receiving this blessing.
Yes at a time he understood the status as Muhaddath, but never Denied the concept of Prophethood or that a Prophet was needed.
“Besides, there is no doubt that this humble servant has been raised by the Most High God as a muhaddath for this ummah and a muhaddath is in one sense a prophet too.” (pg 16) ****[1891]****
The Holy Prophet(sa) says that of the different kinds of Prophethood, nothing remains except Mubashirat—glad tidings. In other words, only one kind of Prophethood is left, namely, spiritual experiences, for example, true dreams, visions and revelations of which the elect of God are the recipients and the accompanying light that illumines the dismal hearts of suffering humanity. Do consider, my sharp and wise critic! How can you ever conclude from this that the door to all kinds of Prophethood is totally closed? On the contrary, this tradition of the Holy Prophet (as) proves that Prophethood of the principal kind containing revealed law has of course been terminated but the Prophethood comprising Mubashshirat—true dreams, visions, revelations, etc., continues and will never come to an end till the day of resurrection and shall never be terminated. [Pg 18] ****[1891] ******
I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying, “Nothing is left of the prophethood except Al-Mubashshirat.” They asked, “What are Al-Mubashshirat?” He replied, “The true good dreams (that conveys glad tidings). [Bukhari 6990]
I know with perfect certainty and it is my firm belief that our Prophet (as) is Khatamul Anbiyya’. No Prophet, new or old, will come after him and not an iota or title of the Qur’an will be abrogated. Yes, Muhaddath will come, who have converse with Allah, the Exalted, and in whose persons certain characteristics of Perfect Prophethood are manifested.
Indeed, in certain respects, they have the very grace and dignity of Prophethood, and I am one of them. (Nishan-e-Asmani Pg 52) ****[1892] ****
One who is repeatedly blessed with this discourse is called a Prophet or a Muhaddath (The sign of a true religion is
that its teachings continue to produce such virtuous individuals who attain the station of a Muhaddath— to whom God Almighty speaks directly [A Conclusive Argument in Favour of Islam pg 2] (1893)*****
In sum, Divine Providence requires that God in His grace and favour send a Prophet or a Muhaddath in this era. He has appointed him to implement this plan, and has chosen him to reform mankind. He will come at a time when the pure-hearted will bear witness to the need of a Caller from the Glorious God. (The True Nature of the Mahdi Pg 60) ****[1899] *****
December 30, 2021 at 8:54 pm
You are totally incorrect. MGA straight up denied prophethood from 1891 to 1901. The 2nd Khalifa explained it all in 1915. But you don’t know.
ADMIN
August 14, 2024 at 6:10 am
Nauzubillah what are you saying,now I understand why people used to say that qadianis are mulhid and kuffar.you people have been righteously excommunicated from islamic ummah.And first of all there is a clear definition who is a prophet or Nabi,according to Quran and sunnah.A Prophet is the one who call people or guide people back to Islam,and also he is endowned with miracles,and prophecies with the permission of Allah,to establish the truthfulness that he is Prophet.And also some Prophet were both Messenger and also Prophet.Prophet muhammed is the last Prophet and also Messenger who was sent to all mankind.Read clear verses from quran and sunnah,which testified to the truth of khatme nubuwat. And the hadith does not say,if you have good dreams you are a Prophet.It actually says, that good dream where part of prophets,because Prophet used to have good dreams.So a believer may have good dreams or bad dreams.And what revelation your false Mirza brought, and by saying such things and calling Mirza Prophet nauzubillah.You have stated that Islam is not complete,Prophet muhammed revelation is incomplete.That Islam is neither final message,neither final revelation.Nauzubillah,if you believe that kazzab Mirza is Prophet then you not just reject khatme nubuwat,but you are a total mulhid,and kaafir.
October 25, 2025 at 10:24 am
There is no such thing as “different kinds of prophethood.” Theres only one type and it ENDED with Prophet Muhammed (saw).
March 5, 2022 at 9:25 pm
Only Allah knows the truth
March 6, 2022 at 6:20 pm
huh? You don’t like facts?
ADMIN
August 14, 2024 at 6:12 am
Only Mirza incarnation of false god Krishna knows the truth.Qadiani is a lie of devil.