LIVESTREAM: Q&A - Prophethood in Islam - Part 4-Review by Dr. Shah

Intro
In June of 2025, Maulvi Razi and his team of paid Maulvi’s got caught lying by Adnan Rashid (2:44:40 timestamp) and Bro Imtiaz about many things (see the clips on TikTok and twitter). Maulvi Razi got caught mispresenting Ahmad Reza Khan, Shah Wali Ullah and many others. Bro Imtiaz made Maulvi Razi confess that Ahmadi’s never argue that scholars like Qurtubi, Shah Wali Ullah, Mujadid Suyuti and anyone else (See on TikTok and Twitter) said that the second coming of Muhammad (Saw) would happen via 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran). Bro Imtiaz reviewed this entire debate herein and tweeted about it and made a shorter video. Bro Imtiaz proved how all the arguments that the Ahmadiyya clergy made in this video were also denied by Razi when he was cornered by Bro Imtiaz.

Firstly, Ibrahim Ikhtalaf lied about a quote from Qurtubi (10:26 time stamp)(Read other quotes to from Qurtubi from Ahmadi’s herein). The book is Al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an (The General Judgments of the Qur’an) aka Tafsir al-Qurtubi. Ibrahim Ikhtalaf alleged that Qurtubi quoted 62:3 and argued that Qurtubi meant that Muhammad (saw) will be raised twice (naozobillah)(this is a total misinterpretation of Qurtubi).

Secondly, Ibrahim Ikhtalaf lied about a quote from Shah Wali Ullah wherein he alleged that Shah Wali Ullah supported the concept of Buruz in the form of a second coming of Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah). However, this is not a book by Shah Wali Ullah, it is a commentary via Mufti Muhammad Amin Palanpuri (from the Deoband school). Furthermore, the book is in either Urdu or Persian, which Ibrahim Ikhtalaf can’t read, nor has he had read this book from cover to cover.
Ibrahim Ikhtalaf seems to be reading an Arabic translation, he didn’t give his source. Ibrahim Ikhtalaf noticed that the word “Khatim” was used. Ibrahim Ikhtalaf then accused Shah Wali Ullah via Mufti Muhammad Amin Palanpuri (from the Deoband school) of arguing that the Buruz (clear copy, like a clone)) of Muhammad (Saw) would come again as Eisa (As)(Naozobillah). These are all lies! However, Ibrahim Ikhtalaf makes a huge blunder and reveals that this quote is about Eisa (as) the son of Mary (as) and how his physical return as a prophet doesn’t contradict Khatme Nubuwwat. In conclusion, Mansoor Ahmad Clarke argued that Shah Wali Ullah and Qurtubi promoted the concept of Buruz and the second coming of Muhammad (Saw)(naozobillah).

After that, Maulvi Razi used 47:38 (47:39 in the Kadiani Koran) and argued that this has the same meanings as 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran). Razi then quoted A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 5, page 220 and explained how MGA addressed the issue that Muslims say “Akhireena Minhum is plural” in terms of 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran). MGA then falsely argues that Muhammad (Saw) applied it to only one person (this is a lie), Salman Farsi. MGA then argues that this “one person” will be born in an era wherein there are philosophical differences. People would be in a state of extreme weakness. MGA then argues that the Quran called “Abraham” (as) as ummah (many people), however, Abraham (as) was only one person. Razi says further that a great Ummah will be raised, not just one person.

Maulvi Razi alleges that the famous Mujadid Suyuti said that 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran) is about Imam Abu Hanifa. However, Razi hides the fact that Suyuti didn’t say ONLY Imam Abu Hanifa, he simply included him in this verse, as one among others. Furthermore, Razi hid the fact that Imam Suyuti believed in the physical second coming of Eisa (as).

Maulvi Razi then alleges that Imam Ibn Abidin said in Radd al Muhtar that 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran) is about Imam Abu Hanifa. However, Razi hides the fact that Ahmad Raza Khan did Takfir on Ahmadi’s.

Maulvi Raheel Ahmad said that denial of MGA (the promised messiah) is Kufr (see on Tiktok and Twitter).

Bro Imtiaz came on at 3:08:19 and discussed the fact that MGA said that Muhammad (Saw) didn’t finish his mission and MGA was here to complete it.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Firstly, Ibrahim Ikhtalaf lied about a quote from Qurtubi

Scans

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Secondly, Ibrahim Ikhtalaf lied about a quote from Shah Wali Ullah

Shah Wali Ullah, Ahmadiyya literature, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and how they misquote Shah Wali Ullah

This is Khairul Katheer!, English translation and commentary on Fauz al-Kabir of Shah Waliullah from the Urdu work by Mufti Muhammad Amin Palanpuri.

Scans

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 5, page 220

23:15 timestamp

MGA addresses the issue that Muslims say “Akhireena Minhum is plural” in terms of 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran). MGA then falsely argues that Muhammad (Saw) applied it to only one person (this is a lie), Salman Farsi. MGA then argues that this “one person” will be born in an era wherein there are philosophical differences. People would be in a state of extreme weakness. MGA then argues that the Quran called “Abraham” (as) as ummah (many people), however, Abraham (as) was only one person. Razi says further that a great Ummah will be raised, not just one person.

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Maulvi Razi then quotes Suyuti

Imam Suyuti on the physical descent of Esa (as)

Scan
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Ibn Abidin – Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Abidin

Maulvi Razi then alleges that Imam Ibn Abidin said in Radd al Muhtar that 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran) is about Imam Abu Hanifa.

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Maulvi Razi then quotes Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi aka Ahmad Rida Khan

Maulvi Razi alleges that Ahmad Rida Khan wrote in terms of 62:3 (62:4 in the Kadiani Koran) that this verse was about one Persian man who will attain the deen even if it went to the heavens. Razi alleges that Ahmad Rida Khan then said that the children of Persians would attain the deen. Razi alleges that Ahmad Rida Khan then said that this hadith and Quranic verse refer to Imam Abu Hanifa.

Scans

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ahmad Rida Khan

Maulvi Razi then quotes Ahmad Raza Khan again and alleges that Ahmad Raza Khan said that ALL the “Kamalat” (perfection, completeness, or excellence) of Muhammad (Saw) were also inside of him (a total lie by Razi) Jamali and Jalali. Maulvi Razi then quotes Ahmad Raza Khan and alleges that he mentioned all of this about Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani and that all the qualities of Allah are in Muhammad (saw).

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Shah Wali Ullah again
al-tafheemat al۔ilahiyya by Shah Waliullah Mohaddis Delhvi | Rekhta
https://www.rekhta.org/ebooks/detail/al-tafheemat-al-ilahiyya-shah-waliullah-mohaddis-delhvi-ebooks

Maulvi Razi quotes al-tafheemat al ilahiyya by Shah Wali Ullah and alleged that Shah Wali Ullah said that all the qualities of the Angels reflected in me and that all the “Kamalat” (perfection, completeness, or excellence) of the prophets from Adam (as) to Muhammad (saw) are in him.

______________________________________________________________________________________________
Mirza Bashir Ahmad denies that anyone can have the kamalat of Muhammad (Saw)

This quote seems to be after 1920, before 1920, Mirza Bashir Ahmad made all of his blasphemous statements.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Maulvi Razi quotes Ahmad Sirhindi

Maulvi Razi argues that Ahmad Sirhindi said that any Muslim who reaches the status of prophethood get’s those attributes of prophethood.

Scans

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Maulvi Razi accuses Shah Wali Ullah of Shirk
Futuh al-Haramayn (Emanations or Spiritual Visions of Mecca and Medina)

Maulvi Razi accuses Shah Wali Ullah of shirk (see page 111 of Futuh al-Haramayn). Razi alleges that Shah Wali Ullah said he in a dream that he was God (Kime-au-zaman)(this is a lie). Maulvi Razi then says that the relatives of Shah Wali Ullah had the same dream and also themselves as God (naozobillah).

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Aina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 5, page 120 and 121
https://www.youtube.com/live/TcP266EWBzw?si=RdE1fTlBoit5spY_

In June of 2025, on a live stream (2:53:57), Maulvi Razi argued that in 1892-1893, MGA said only Muhammad (Saw) was given the perfect light. However, this was early on in MGA’s career, this would change later.

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Razi quotes Ibn Arabi on the Mahdi being a mercy for manking (rrahmatullahi ‘alaihi/‘alaiha/‘alaihim