LIVESTREAM: Q&A - Prophethood in Islam - Urdu-review by Dr. Shah, June-2025

Intro
In a recent Urdu live stream (June-2025), the Ahmadiyya Mullah team at True Islam UK (Hadi Ali Chaudhary, Maulvi Razi, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia and the host Maulvi Salman) were engaged by Bro Imtiaz. The format of this discussion was that the True Islam UK panel would ask one question of Bro Imtiaz first. Then, they would be open to answering a question by Bro Imtiaz.

Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia presented 22:75 (22:76 in the Kadiani Koran) as evidence for the continuation of prophethood. He then presents 7:35 (7:36 in the Kadiani Koran) as the second verse in support of the continuation of prophethood in the Muslim Ummah. However, and ironically, MGA never quoted these verses to argue for the continuance of prophethood.

Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia kept saying that Muslims are borrowing a prophet from the Jews to defend Islam! Nay putr..Eisa (As) is an Islamic prophet and follow’s Muhammad (Saw) already.

At 2:07:22, Bro Imtiaz reminds Maulvi Razi that in “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (1901)(see page 12), MGA called himself the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz (see the clip on TikTok and Twitter).

Bro Imtiaz mentioned the fact that MGA called the alleged death of Eisa (as) as a secret (raaz) that was opened to MGA (2:08:20)(see the clip on TikTok and Twitter). Shams ud Din RB also read a ref on a live stream with Imtiaz (30:24 time stamp)(see the clip on Tiktok and Twitter).

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
The host

His name is unknown. Salman.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
The review

—At 5:04 the stream starts. The host doesn’t even introduce himself. His name is Maulvi Salman. He says that the verse of “Khatam un Nabiyeen” as a truth for Ahmadiyya. At 6:45, Maulvi Salman alleged that there are some people who are fighters of “Khatme Nubuwwat” who do terrorism and other crimes and this is what they have learned from their religion (Islam). He then quoted MGA from “A’ina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam” and “Siraj-e-Munir” and quoted MGA in praise of Muhammad (Saw).

—At 9:42, Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins talking and is answering a question by the host, which is about the continuation of prophethood. He says that Muslims have totally changed everything about prophethood. Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary said thus, it was needed that someone come in the ummah and revitalize the prophethood of Muhammad (saw). He quotes 33:40 (33:41 in the Kadiani Koran). He then gives commentary about how all the sons of Muhammad (saw) had died as infants. He then quotes 108:3 (108:4 in the Kadiani Koran). Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that Muslims are all spiritiual sons of Muhammad (Saw) now and then says that Muhammad (saw) being the ender of the prophets can never be the interpretation of this verse. He argued that only the prophethood of Muhammad (saw) continues. He says what are these Muslims doing, praying at graves and begging from their peers.

—At 25:52, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and gives some of his own commentary on 33:40.

—At 26:19, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia starts speaking and also gives commentary on 33:40. He says it’s not the Urdu word Khutum, Muhammad (saw) isn’t the ender/finisher of the prophets. He admonishes Muslims in Pakistan as such. He says if Muslims believe that Allah will stop speaking (kalam), then this doesn’t help to raise the status of Muhammad (Saw). He says that we should a commentary which elevates the shining status of Muhammad (saw). He says that “Ghair-Ahmadi” (Muslims), give the commentary that “prophethood is finished”, “NO prophets can come”. He says that we should check if the other verses of the Quran support this idea or not. He says that Muslims need to show a verse from the Quran which clearly cuts off prophethood, he alleges that 33:40 is disputed. He says it again, he desperately want’s to see the verse wherein prophethood is fully cut off. He also quoted Fakhr al-Din al-Razi in terms of how verses of the Quran explain the Quran. He also says that Ahmadi’s believe that now NO prophet can come that doesn’t have the seal of attestation of the prophethood of Muhammad (Saw). He says it’s a huge gift if someone comes into the Muslims has Allah speaks to him abundantly. He presents 22:75 (22:76 in the Kadiani Koran) as evidence for the continuation of prophethood. He says this only one verse in support of the continuation of prophethood, he has others. He then presents 7:35 (7:36 in the Kadiani Koran) as the second verse in support of the continuation of prophethood in the Muslim Ummah. He quotes Suyuti and alleges that Suyuti called the “sons of Adam” refer to the people of the end times just as much as any other era. Thus, these are the 2 verses that Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia is presenting as proof (of the continuation of prophethood) that Allah is always choosing Rasul’s (he calls them Nabi’s at times) from among men as well as Angel’s.

—At 37:10, Maulvi Razi begins to speak, he alleges that the sects in Islam like the Deobandi, Barelvi and Ahle-Hadeeth all call each other Kafir and deniers of “Khatm-e-Nubuwwat”. Maulvi Razi says the only difference in belief is that Ahmadi’s believe that Eisa (as) is dead and that someone in his place will come via imam ukum minkum (your Imam, among you). Maulvi Razi then avoids the second part, and says that everyone agrees that a Nabi comes in the time of need, so, anything could happen. It’s really hard to decipher his argument. He alleges that Ahmadi’s believe just like Muhammad (saw) and the sahaba. Maulvi Razi then does a lengthy presentation wherein he quoted many scholars and misrepresented some of them.

—At 47:10, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins to speak and alleges that Muslims are reducing the rank of Muhammad (saw) by not allowing others to become prophets.

—At 48:41, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and makes some illogical comments.

—At 49:13, Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins talking about the Arabic grammar of the word “Khatam”. Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary alleges that “Khatam” has 5 meanings, 2 are haqiqi (real) and 3 are majazi (metaphoric). He then gives a lengthy monologue.

—At 1:00:58, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and asks Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia to speak about the understanding of Muhammad (saw) and the sahaba on Khatme-Nubuwwat.

—At 1:01:11, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins talking and alleges that Ahmadi’s should only make those interpretations of the Quran which makes the light of Muhammad (Saw) shine brighter and raise his status. He refers to the famous hadith wherein Eisa (As) is called “Nabi-Ullah” and explains how Muhammad (Saw) prophesied about Eisa (as). He says, well, this is what Ahmadi’s believe, that only one prophet can come, but then these Muslims still disagree. He then mentions the famous hadith wherein Muhammad (Saw) says that there is NO prophet between him and Eisa (as). He then quotes the famous hadith wherein Muhammad (Saw) says that his ummah is the one with Muhammad (saw) at the beginning and that Eisa (as) bin maryam at the end (akhr). He then presented the famous hadith wherien Islam would be in decline and the mosques would be empty and etc. He then mentioned the 73-sect hadith. He says thus there was a need and someone came.

—At 1:04:55, Maulvi Razi begins to speak and accused Muslims of behaving like Jews and moving words and etc.

—At 1:06:44, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and asks Maulvi Razi about the Qiraat and specifically about Khatim.

—At 1:07:05, Maulvi Razi begins to respond and says that Ahmadi’s accept both Qiraat and the that the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa had also commented on this topic. Maulvi Razi then quoted Shah Wali Ullah and alleged that he argued that only a “Sharia-prophet” was prohibited in Islam.

—At 1:09:31, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and says that Ahmadi’s do those types of interpretations which raise the status and shine of Muhammad (Saw).

—At 1:11:22, Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins speaking and refers to some hadith. He argues that the fazilat (superiority) of Muhammad (saw) should be elevated. He accidentally mentions Ismuhu Ahmad (61:6). He basically says that the Islamic position is contradictory and nonsensical.

—At 1:13:40, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and tells the audience that the call lines are now open. Maulvi Salman then asks Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia to comment on the famous hadith, “La Nabiyya Badee”.

—At 1:14:50, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins to talk about “La Nabiyya Badee” and argues that sometimes, the wrong slogan could be used or misused. He mentioned the famous fabricated hadith by Aiesha (ra), i.e., ““Say [he is] khatamun Nabiyeen, but do not say La Nabiyya Badee.”

—At 1:20:00, Maulvi Salman begins speaking and asks Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary about “La Nabiyya Badee”.

—At 1:20:13, Maulvi Hadi Ali Chaudhary argues that many Islamic scholars had already believed this and the famous fabricated hadith by Aiesha (ra), i.e., ““Say [he is] khatamun Nabiyeen, but do not say La Nabiyya Badee.”

—At 1:23:57 Bro Imtiaz comes on and is asked by Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia as to why will be the Final prophet on Earth to spread the message of Islam. Bro Imtiaz explained that Muslims believe in the end of prophethood and the physical return of Eisa (as), there is no contradiction in this. Bro Imtiaz explained how in Ahmadiyya literature there are 2 types of prophethood, one is “haqiqi nabi” (sharia only) and the other is “mustaqil-nabi” (non-sharia).

—At 1:30:50, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia asked the same question again, however, this time he added “will it be Muhammad (Saw) who will be the Final prophet to deliver the message of Islam?”.

—At 1:31:25 Bro Imtiaz starts again. Bro Imtiaz explains how ALL prophets have already agreed to follow Muhammad (saw) and his mission, see 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran). Bro Imtiaz then argued that prophets following Muhammad (Saw) is not against the Quran.

—At 1:33:33, the host, Maulvi Salman stops Bro Imtiaz. He accuses Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question.

—At 1:34:00, Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins talking. Hadi Ali Chaudhary quotes how Bro Imtiaz said that these 2 types of prophethood have ended, “Tashree Nubuwwat” and “Ghair Tashree” (aka mustaqil). Hadi Ali Chaudhary agrees that these are closed. He also adds that a “Bara-e-Rast” (persian) Nabi means “directly” a prophet, cannot come either. Hadi Ali Chaudhary mentions 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran). He then makes some nonsensical arguments. He also mentioned 33:7 (33:8 in the Kadiani Koran).

—At 1:38:13, Hadi Ali Chaudhary argues that Muhammad (saw) said that Eisa (as) would descend amongst the “sahaba” of Muhammad (saw)(via hadith)(via minkum), he then argues that this meant the Ahmadi’s of MGA’s era.

—At 1:39:32, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins talking and accuses Bro Imtiaz of trying to change the topic and of not answering the question, which was about “who is the final prophet to walk on Earth carrying the message of Islam”.

—At 1:41:08, Maulvi Razi accuses Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question, which was about “who is the final prophet to walk on Earth carrying the message of Islam”.

—At 1:42:22, Bro Imtiaz was asked for the 3rd time the same question and he responded by saying that he already answered and doesn’t want to answer again. Maulvi Razi then argued that Muslims believe that another prophet (Eisa [as]) will physically return and thus they break Khatme Nubuwwat.

—At 1:43:47, Bro Imtiaz is allowed to ask his question. Bro Imtiaz asked for 3 mins, he said 2 mins was too small of a time frame. Maulvi Salman chimes and says NO. Bro Imtiaz complains about being interrupted too much. The host then agreed to give Bro Imtiaz 3 mins.

—At 1:47:26, Bro Imtiaz began. He explained how all prophethood has ended, it was from Adam (as) to Muhammad (Saw). Bro Imtiaz even said that the Ahmadiyya Movement agrees to this. Muhammad (saw) said another prophet will come, the messiah, the son of Maryam (as). Ahmadi’s believe this too. Bro Imtiaz explains that there is NO contradiction in this belief. Bro Imtiaz says that if there is an “apparent” contradiction, then it is solved by saying that Allah will not appoint anyone a new prophet ever again. In other words, no new person will get prophethood. Furthermore, Eisa (As) was given prophethood before Muhammad (Saw), thus, he doesn’t need to be made a prophet again. Bro Imtiaz then explained how the Ahmadiyya interpretation is different, Ahmadi’s believe that there is a 3rd type of prophethood, via Zilli and Buruzi. Ahmadi’s then brought someone else to take Eisa (as)’s spot, i.e., MGA. Bro Imtiaz explains if Ahmadi’s think that the Khatam un Nabiyeen is that person who is the last to walk on Earth, then, this means that Ahmadi’s believe that MGA is the Khatam un Nabiyeen.

–At 1:50:50, Hadi Ali Chaudhary starts speaking and accuses Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question. Hadi Ali Chaudhary acknowledges that Bro Imtiaz said that Eisa (as) was already a prophet and thus doesn’t need to be made a prophet again. Hadi Ali Chaudhary accidentally said that the person who comes at the end (akhr), he will be the last (akhree). Hadi Ali Chaudhary says in terms of the statement by Bro Imtiaz that the Ahmadiyya movement has created a 3rd category of prophets, is a lie! Hadi Ali Chaudhary says since in the Quran it says that now only the prophethood of Muhammad (saw) will continue. Hadi Ali Chaudhary then argues via 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran), Muslims are promised 4 levels, of which being a Nabi is one. Hadi Ali Chaudhary then quotes Ibn Arabi and says that the person to come (the messiah) is not the one who has died. A different person (a different Messiah) would come (this is a total lie). Hadi Ali Chaudhary then says that Muslims have always believed that Eisa (as) who had died will not be coming back. He said forget about Eisa (as), he is dead and never coming back. Hadi Ali Chaudhary again argues that Muhammad (Saw) said that some of the sahaba will see Eisa (as), and this meant that MGA’s friends are the sahaba in question. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that the Quran said that Eisa (as) died, the sahaba had ijma on this too, Muhammad (Saw) said that Eisa (as) also died. This hadith is metaphoric. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that if Eisa (as) returns physically, Muslims will have to remove many verses of the Quran.

—At 1:56:54, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia starts talking, he says he doesn’t understand why Muslims believe that an old prophet can come by a new one can’t. He makes a silly argument about Muslims borrowing Eisa (as) from the Bani Israel to defend Islam.

—At 2:00:15, Maulvi Razi starts talking, he says that Hadi Ali Chaudhary gave the answer to the Ahmadi question, Bro Imtiaz didn’t. Maulvi Razi objects to the argument by Bro Imtiaz that Ahmadi’s consider MGA as the “Khatam un Nabiyeen”. Maulvi Razi says that this is what Muslims believe, not Ahmadi’s, i.e., the one who comes last is “Khatam un Nabiyeen”. Maulvi Razi alleges that Ahmadi’s believe that Muhammad (Saw) is the “Khatam un Nabiyeen”, whereas Muslims believe in Eisa (as) to be the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah). Maulvi Razi then alleges that Muslims believe that Eisa (As) was a Rasul to Bani Israel only up to the point wherein he was Rafa’a (4:158). Bro Imtiaz visibly objected to this! Maulvi Razi then says that Bro Imtiaz said that there will be NO new Nabi appointed after Muhammad (saw). Maulvi Razi then argues that this is the word “Maboos”, he then alleges that Muhammad (saw) used this word for Eisa (as). Maulvi Razi then says again that Muslims believe that Eisa (as) is the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah).

—At 2:02:50, Bro Imtiaz asks for the opportunity to respond to the allegations that Maulvi Razi made. The host refused, Bro Imtiaz then said this isn’t fair, this isn’t justice. The host said forget about it. We asked our question and you didn’t even answer. Now go ahead and ask your question. Bro Imtiaz insisted on responding while in their presence.

—At 2:04:22, Maulvi Razi says that this is just the way it is. Someone has to be last. Razi says that this debate will never end in this case. Bro Imtiaz called this unfair.

—At 2:06:54, Bro Imtiaz begins speaking, at 2:07:22, Bro Imtiaz reminds Maulvi Razi that in “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (1901), MGA called himself the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz. Hadi Ali Chaudhary had accused Bro Imtiaz of believing that the prophethood of Eisa (As) will continue, Bro Imtiaz objects to this and said that he never said as such. Bro Imtiaz reiterates that after the appointment (maboos)of prophethood of Muhammad (saw), only this prophethood is continuous until the Day of Judgement and this is the Islamic belief. Bro Imtiaz reiterates that Eisa (As) is returning to work under and support the prophethood of Muhammad (saw). Bro Imtiaz pointed out how Hadi Ali Chaudhary argued that this person or that person (flahn)(it was Ibn Arabi) had even said that a different person would return, i.e., not Eisa (As), but Hadi Ali Chaudhary doesn’t realize that by this statement, he turns MGA into a liar. Bro Imtiaz says that he has 10 references from MGA’s works wherein MGA argued that Eisa (as) had died and that someone else would come in-place of Eisa (As) was a secret that no person ever in the world knew before MGA. Bro Imtiaz explains how Hadi Ali Chaudhary falsely argued that some of the sahaba would be alive to see Eisa (As), this is a total lie! Hadi Ali Chaudhary purposely did a mistranslation. Bro Imtiaz explains how Hadi Ali Chaudhary falsely argued that an old prophet can come but a new one can’t, Bro Imtiaz never said this. Bro Imtiaz explains how Ibrahim (as) and Musa (as) are old prophets, it is not our belief that they will physically reappear, Muslim’s are only told about the physical return of Eisa (as), no one else and we only believe this since Muhammad (saw) said so. Bro Imtiaz explained how Ahmadi’s don’t even follow MGA’s comments on 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran). Bro Imtiaz explains how Muslims aren’t going to borrow a prophet from anyone, this is a ridiculous thing to say. In the end, MGA called himself the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah).

—At 2:09:57, Maulvi Salman (the host) chimes in and says that time is up. Again, he accused Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question.

—At 2:10:33, Maulvi Razi starts to speak and accuses Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question. Maulvi Razi admitted that MGA called himself “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz in
“Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (1901)(see page 12). Maulvi Razi then challenges Bro Imtiaz to put a fatwa on anyone who calls himself the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz. Maulvi Razi argues that MGA didn’t mean in reality (haqiqat), thus, only metaphoric. Maulvi Razi argues that many Islamic scholars have claimed the same in the past. Maulvi Razi then accuses of Shah Wali Ullah of claiming to be “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz. Maulvi Razi then accuses Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani of the same crime. Maulvi Razi then quotes “Tafheemat Ilaheyyah” by Shah Wali Ullah, (In a recent livestream (2024), Maulvi Razi argued that Shah Wali Ullah had called himself the Khatam-un-Nabiyeen. However, Adnan Rashid disproved it quickly, this was a from a book called “Anfas-ul-Arifeen”, Razi was reading the Urdu translation, not the original Persian) and alleges that MGA did the same. Maulvi Razi then calls Bro Imtiaz a liar and says that he accused MGA of called “Nuzul-e-Maseeh” (as) a secret (raaz). Maulvi Razi alleges that MGA wrote in almost every single book that it is the ijma of the sahaba that Eisa (as) died, and this was also the belief of Muhammad (Saw)(this is a lie). Maulvi Razi then accused Bro Imtiaz of not knowing Arabic. Maulvi Razi alleged that Hadi Ali Chaudhary quoted Muhammad (Saw) and it was called a mistranslation or a misrepresentation or a lie. However, Maulvi Razi is purposely misunderstanding with Bro Imtiaz said, which was that Hadi Ali Chaudhary misrepresented Muhammad (Saw), this was in terms of the sahaba being alive when Eisa (As) returns. Maulvi Razi then says that in terms of 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran), Ahmadi’s also believe that this is about Muhammad (Saw). Maulvi Razi then accused Bro Imtiaz of saying that if anyone says that 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran) is not about Muhammad (Saw) then they are the friend of Satan. Bro Imtiaz immediately waved his finger NO. Maulvi Razi quoted Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti from 1902 and made some unintelligible argument.

—At 2:16:50, Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that Maulvi Razi has answered everything. Hadi Ali Chaudhary is confused if Bro Imtiaz denied that hadith about the sahaba meeting Eisa (as) and is making unintelligible comments. Hadi Ali Chaudhary mentions 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran) and 33:7 (33:8 in the Kadiani Koran). Hadi Ali Chaudhary then alleges that Muhammad (Saw) died just like Eisa (as) and mentions “Tawaffa” (5:116). Hadi Ali Chaudhary then alleges that Abu Bakr said the same in the famous hadith at the time of death of Muhammad (Saw), 3:144 is also mentioned, “Qad Khalat”. Hadi Ali Chaudhary then lied and said none of the sahaba objected to this. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that Muslims have no defense to any of this.

—At 2:20:18, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins talking and accuses Bro Imtiaz of falsely accusing MGA of claiming to be the “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah). However, he doesn’t address the quote in question from “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (1901)(see page 12) and how MGA included himself in it. Again, he accuses Muslims of borrowing a prophet from Bani Israel to come and spread Islam (naozobillah). Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia then discusses the hadith which Ahmadi’s think says that Eisa (as) would descend amongst the “sahaba” of Muhammad (saw)(via hadith)(via minkum). Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia then accuses Bro Imtiaz of deceptive tactics.

—At 2:24:20, Maulvi Salman tells Bro Imtiaz that he can ask his question now. Bro Imtiaz says that the Ahmadi’s made off topic comments. Maulvi Salman says that he doesn’t want answers from Bro Imtiaz, he can only ask his question now. Bro Imtiaz admonishes the Ahmadiyya Mullah team and tells them to post the entire clips of his comments, not like the Jews to only publish certain words and cutting others.

—At 2:25:51, Bro Imtiaz starts with his question. He mentions the famous hadith wherein Muhammad (Saw) says that there is NO prophet between him and Eisa (as). MGA also called himself as the “Akhree Mursal” (translated as Last Messenger by the Qadiani’s). Thus, Ahmadi’s admit that there was NO prophet between Muhammad (Saw) and MGA. Ahmadi’s also argue that at the end, is the Messiah. With all of this in mind. Then why do Ahmadi’s say that a prophet can still come?

—At 2:27:50, Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins to speak. Hadi Ali Chaudhary accidentally confesses that Muhammad (Saw) said that at the end will come the Messiah, Eisa (as) ibn Maryam. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that being LAST doesn’t mean anything, it doesn’t mean the best or something. In other words, there is no value in being last. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that Muslims believe that Muhammad (saw) is the best because he was the LAST. There is no value in any of this. Hadi Ali Chaudhary emphatically argues that there is NO benefit in being LAST. Hadi Ali Chaudhary alleges that Qasim Nanotvi said the same. Hadi Ali Chaudhary alleges that other ulema have also said this. Hadi Ali Chaudhary mentioned 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran). Hadi Ali Chaudhary argues that being LAST in time means nothing. Hadi Ali Chaudhary then accuses Muslims of borrowing Eisa (as) for Islam (naozobillah).

—At 2:33:00, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia begins talking and says that Khatam un Nabiyeen doesn’t mean the LAST prophet, it means the best prophet. Now all prophets must come with the seal of attestation. He argues emphatically that there is NO benefit in being LAST. He then makes strange and unintelligible arguments about other prophets being last or not. He then argues that Ahmadi’s don’t believe MGA to be the Akhree Nabi.

—At 2:36:56, Maulvi Razi starts talking and accuses Muslims of believing in a “Mustaqil Nabi” after Muhammad (Saw)(this is a lie) who will abrogate the Quran. Thus, Razi alleges that Muslims break the seal of prophethood with their beliefs. Maulvi Razi accused Bro Imtiaz of not answering the question that was posed to him. Maulvi Razi accuses Muslims of calling Muhammad (Saw) the last prophet, however, Muslims open the door for Eisa (as) and then close it up. Maulvi Razi then argues that MGA only claimed to be the “Akhree Mursal” (translated as Last Messenger by the Qadiani’s) in terms of being like Adam (as) and named the Messiah (this is a lie). Maulvi Razi then quotes Ibn Arabi and his prophecy.

—At 2:40:05, Bro Imtiaz starts talking and mentions how Maulvi Razi attacked the character of himself. Bro Imtiaz says that he doesn’t have time to defend his character and make academic arguments. Maulvi Razi apologizes for criticizing the character of Bro Imtiaz. This was about why does Bro Imtiaz chop his streams down to 4 hours from 7. Bro Imtiaz explained it was only the Qadiani parts of the True Islam UK stream that he cuts out, since it is irrelevant. Bro Imtiaz then says that Maulvi Razi accused him of showing partial references, for example in the case of being the “Akhree Mursal” (translated as Last Messenger by the Qadiani’s), however, Bro Imtiaz says that he has not presented any reference in this current discussion. Bro Imtiaz then says that he has no personal grudge with Razi or any Ahmadi.

—At 2:43:05, Maulvi Razi apologizes. Bro Imtiaz is muted.

—At 2:43:37, Bro Imtiaz accuses Maulvi Razi of lying. Maulvi Salman chimes in too. Lots of back and forth. Maulvi Salman interjects.

—At 2:46:40, Bro Imtiaz begins to give feedback on the question he asked. Bro Imtiaz explains how Ahmadi’s have admitted that at the end of the Muslim Ummah is the Messiah (via the famous hadith wherein Muhammad (Saw) says that there is NO prophet between him and Eisa (as). Bro Imtiaz says, since there is NO prophet between Muhammad (Saw) and Eisa (as), that solves one matter. What about after MGA? How do Ahmadi’s make this argument after all the data goes against them? With this line of argumentation, Ahmadi’s turn themselves into liars. In other words, to believe in these two arguments, that between Muhammad (Saw) and Eisa (as) there is no prophet, and that the Messiah will come at the end, and to still say that a nabi can come! Thus, Ahmadi’s do nafee (contradiction)! There is a contradiction herein. Bro Imtiaz then says that Ahmadi’s say that there is NO benefit in being the LAST. Bro Imtiaz points out how MGA argued that being the LAST is Fazeelat (worthy of merit). Bro Imtiaz says that if he has time, he can show how MGA said that the LAST to come is Afzal (best). Bro Imtiaz also argues that in Ahmadiyya writings (apkee jamaat), it was argued that being the LAST is worthy of merit (fazilat). If Ahmadi’s want these refs, Bro Imtiaz can post them all. Bro Imtiaz then says that Ahmadi’s have closed the door of prophethood themselves, however, they accuse Muslims of it. Ahmadi’s push MGA through the door of prophethood, then closed it. There is NO prophethood in Ahmadiyya. In the Ahmadiyya belief, the Ummah ends with the Messiah. Bro Imtiaz mentions how it is written in the Al-Fazl (1914-1915) that MGA is the LAST prophet (Akhree Nabi and Mamur min Allah). In other words, Ahmadi’s have closed every single door to prophethood. Bro Imtiaz mentions how the 2nd Qadiani-Ahmadi Khalifa said that only someone who has went crazy claims prophethood. Again, Bro Imtiaz argues that MGA argued that being the LAST is Fazeelat (worthy of merit), however, Hadi Ali Chaudhary said the opposite. Who should we believe.

—At 2:49:16, Hadi Ali Chaudhary begins speaking and alleges that Bro Imtiaz is now speaking emotionally. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that MGA never said that being the LAST is Fazeelat (worthy of merit). Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that it was Muhammad (Saw) who said the Messiah would be the Akhr (Last). This is the prophecy by Muhammad (Saw). Hadi Ali Chaudhary said that the dead Messiah of Islam who would become alive again, would be the akhr (last). Hadi Ali Chaudhary emphatically says that Muhammad (saw) said that the Messiah would come in the end (akhr). Hadi Ali Chaudhary argues that the Quran has kept prophethood open forever (via 7:35). Hadi Ali Chaudhary mentions some verses of the Quran without giving a proper reference. He says it’s up to Allah to send them or not. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that the Ahmadiyya jamaat doesn’t close to the door to prophethood after MGA at all. There was a prophecy about one, and that one has come. Hadi Ali Chaudhary says that if someone comes after MGA, they will have to make their arguments. Hadi Ali Chaudhary specifically quoted 7:35 (7:36 in the Kadiani Koran) and says prophets can come. He then quotes “minan nabiyeen”, which seems to be from 4:69 (4:70 in the Kadiani Koran). Hadi Ali Chaudhary then started crying about persecution. He said the lands of Ahmadi’s keep growing and the lands of Muslims are decreasing.

—At 2:54:12, Maulvi Mansoor Ahmad Zia starts talking and accuses Bro Imtiaz of repeating himself many times and not answering the questions of Ahmadi’s. He says that they don’t call MGA as the last (akhr), it was Muhammad (saw) who said so. He then says that Muhammad (Saw) said that in the end of his ummah is Eisa (as). He then argues that the Quran said that nabi’s can come (most likely, 7:35, 7:36 in the Kadiani Koran). He says that there is NO prophecy of anyone coming after the Messiah. He then alleges that MGA never said that the LAST is Fazeelat (worthy of merit) or the LAST to come is Afzal (best).

—At 2:57:45, Maulvi Razi argues that Ahmadi’s don’t say that prophethood has ended. However, there is only one prophecy. Per the Quran, prophethood is open (most likely, 7:35, 7:36 in the Kadiani Koran). Maulvi Razi says that if scholars don’t answer questions they will be punished on the day of judgement, he is referring to Bro Imtiaz and accusing Bro Imtiaz in a heinous way.
Maulvi Razi then quoted Ahmadi Rida Khan and alleged that if someone doesn’t give their aqeeda, it is faulty.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
From Shah Wali Ullah

Maulvi Razi then accuses of Shah Wali Ullah of claiming to be “Khatam un Nabiyeen” (naozobillah), via Buruz. Maulvi Razi then accuses Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani of the same crime. Maulvi Razi then quotes “Tafheemat Ilaheyyah” by Shah Wali Ullah, (In a recent livestream (2024), Maulvi Razi argued that Shah Wali Ullah had called himself the Khatam-un-Nabiyeen. However, Adnan Rashid disproved it quickly, this was a from a book called “Anfas-ul-Arifeen”, Razi was reading the Urdu translation, not the original Persian) and alleges that

Razi on X: “Their own tarjama explains that Shah Waliullah is speaking about himself These seven stages are mentioned through teachings of Prophets and what the auliya go through The context is so explicit that Shah Waliullah went through this He later claims he was given a light from the https://t.co/4f7o48lvcs” / X

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1902
Maulvi Abdul Karim Sialkoti in terms of 3:81 of the Quran (3:82 in the Qadiani Quran)

Scan

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s