Intro
Roughly 3 weeks after MGA finally claimed prophethood in “Eik Ghalti Ka Izala” (Nov-5-1901). Hafiz Muhammad Yusuf of Amritsar objected to MGA’s new claim of prophethood. Roughly 20 years earlier, Hafiz Muhammad Yusuf of Amritsar did Takfir on MGA in 1884 for MGA’s blasphemous writings in the Barahin series.
Nevertheless, via the Al-Hakam, 24 November 1901, pages. 9-15 (See also, “Prophethood in Islam” by Maulvi Muhammad Ali, 1915. page 22), Syed Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi responded to the criticism by Hafiz Muhammad Yusuf of Amritsar (scans are attached). On the surface it seems that Syed Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi is alleging that there is no NEW claim of MGA and only a denial of “independent-prophethood”. An English translation by the Lahori-Ahmadi’s is also posted in the below. Interestingly, Maulvi Muhammad Ali never mentioned this reference in his books vs.Qadianism.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Al-Hakam, 24 November 1901, p. 9
“Below we reproduce an invaluable letter by Maulana Sayyid Muhammad Ahsan of Amroha which, although written by him as a reply to a postcard from Muhammad Yusuf of Amritsar, is in fact a subtle exposition of that pamphlet which Hazrat Aqdas [Hazrat Mirza] published under the title Ayk Ghalati Ka Izala. The points of truth and knowledge contained in this letter need no advertisement from us — the name ‘scholar of Amroha’ is sufficient. But we would say that in this letter the scholarly gentleman is speaking with support of the Holy Spirit. …” (Al-Hakam, 24 November 1901, p. 9)
“Sir, the pamphlet with reference to which you say that Mirza sahib has claimed prophethood in it, that very pamphlet contains the following texts in which this claim is clearly and explicitly denied. It is to be regretted that you neither understood the claim itself nor the denial. The texts are as follows:
1. ‘There certainly cannot come any prophet, new or old.’
2 ‘Such a belief [i.e., in the continuity of ‘wahy nubuwwat’, the revelation which distinguishes a prophet from a non-prophet] is undoubtedly a sin, and the verse ‘he is the Messenger of God and the Khatam an-nabiyyin’ along with the hadith ‘there is to be no prophet after me is conclusive proof of the absolute falsity of this view.’
3. ‘I am strongly opposed to such beliefs.’ Look how strong is the denial.
4. ‘I have true and full faith in this statement.’ That is, the Seal of the Prophets verse.
5. ‘After the Holy Prophet Muhammad, the doors of prophecies have been closed till the Day of Judgment. … But one window, that of the path of Siddiq, is open. That is to say, the window of self-effacement in the Holy Prophet (fana fir-rasul).’ i.e., perfect successorship to the Holy Prophet, which is known in other words as ‘burooz’ [manifestation].
7. ‘All the windows of prophethood have been closed.’ That is, without becoming ‘fana fir-rasul’.
8. ‘There is no way to the graces of God except through the Holy Prophet’s mediation.’
9. ‘After our Holy Prophet Muhammad till the Day of Ju dgment, there is no prophet to whom a new shari‘ah is to be revealed.’ Look, in this extract it is denied that a law-bearing prophet will ever come after the Holy Prophet.
10. ‘And whoever makes a claim of prophethood bearing a new law commits heresy.’
11. ‘I am not the independent bearer of a shari‘ah.’ Mr. Hafiz, open your eyes to read this!
12. ‘Nor am I an independent prophet.’ Mr. Hafiz, read this sentence for God’s sake!
13. ‘I am not a bearer of law.’ Read this with fear of God!
14. ‘All these graces have not been bestowed upon me without mediation, rather, there is a holy being in heaven, namely, Muhammad mustafa, whose spiritual benefit I receive.’
Look how strong is this denial.
See how often this denial is repeated in a 3-page poster.
17. ‘Ignorant opponents raise the allegation against me that I claim to be a nabi [prophet] or rasul [messenger]. I make no such claim.’ Mr. Hafiz, it is the height of ignorance to level this charge after all these denials.
18. ‘I am neither a prophet nor an apostle in the sense which they have in mind.’
19. ‘Hence the person who maliciously accuses me of claiming prophethood and apostleship is a liar and an evil-minded one.’
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
Click to access A-Misconception-Removed.pdf
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was considered a Kafir in 1884, before his wildest claims
Maulvi Muhammad Ahsan Amrohi and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
Who is Maulvi Muhammad Ali in the history of Ahmadiyya? – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #mirzaghulamahmad
1 Pingback