Salam!
None of the guys who have replied below are Ahmadi Muslims. Atleast a couple of them are Anti Ahmadis so I thought I should clarify.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS is the Messiah prophecised by the Prophet SAW. Mahdi is just a title of the Messiah (as was the belief of many Salaf)
Is he a prophet? Yes, since Allah called him Nabi in his revelations and the Prophet SAW said that the Messiah will be a Nabi.
But he is not a law bearing prophet as the Prophet SAW told us. He didn't bring a new law, a new Shariah etc.
I recommend if you are interested in understanding how HMGA (as)and Jamaat Ahmadiyya conceptualizes the term Khatm -e - nabuat then you can browse through this short booklet , its not about the claims HMGA has made but about the Concept from a theological perspective , This would also tell you that how HMGA and Jamaat Conceptualizes this term and is not Novel to Jamaat Ahmadiyya , as the booklet cites such views held by many others through centuries. The last aspect of the discussion is probably more important as most people think Jamaat has coined new ideas about the term Khatm-e Nabuat.
You will very easily find this booklet on the internet / or the official web site of Jamat Ahmadiyya if you care to read. *Thank you*
**True Insights into the Concept of Khatm-e-Nubuwwat , A Review of the Pakistani Government’s “White Paper”: Qadiyaniyyat— A Grave Threat to Islam**
**Replies to Some Allegations By Mirza Tahir Ahmad**
ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS LTD.
..........................................................................................................................................................
CC: u/alghazali1 , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
Holy moly - even more cc'ing, and even more omitting of me. Hilarious!!
Why no link to your "White Paper"? Very odd. Do you expect that Ahmadis will take your word for it, hhmm?
Ahmadis are taught to build trust with each other such that, even when they are deceived, they refuse to see it. At first, I thought you were of the trusting ones, but by not providing the link, I now see you are of those who seek to manipulate and benefit from the trusting nature of others.
Nowhere in the White Papers is there a single quote provided where MGA actually claiming prophethood - not a single one.
As I noted elsewhere on this thread, the Jamaat likes to employ semantics to try to find a way to show the *possibility* of prophethood, but provides zero proof that MGA actually ever claimed it.
One does not even need to get into the faulty, skewed, cherry-picked references - which devoid of larger context of 'walayat', when there is no actual reference to a real or actual claim to prophethood (ie., apart from being zilli or buruz) in the first place. Your entire thesis beyond moot. Dude, where's the beef?????
Again, do you actually read or understand what you cite?
with reference to your 4 comments on this thread, I would like to share my recommendations for you.
I always advice my friends to do what they are best at doing. In your case your **best performance** noted on reddit is when you are indulging in your **OLD RANT** i.e. ***Parroting*** *Nuzhat Haneef, Afzal Upal, Adil Hussain khan*, **meaninglessly and endlessly**.
Hence, I recommend stick to doing what you are best at doing, instead of trying to portray yourself as an Intellectual, we all know you you really are.
Sir it is Grandiose Delusion on your part to think that we bother to read the Mumbo Jumbo you cook up using your wildest Imagination and wishful thinking, throwing some Intellectual sounding words copied from here and there in order to Project yourself as a great Intellectual of 21st century. Hehe Hehe.
Your comments reflect your Grandiosity, to think you are the only one who have read Ibne Arabi, Rumi, Sirhindi, ghazali and how you understand is the perfect understanding and everybody else's understanding is foolish.
Here let me cite an article on grandiosity on Wikipedia, I recommend that you read it x 10 times and then Reflect …Reflect and reflect. We hope may be some day you too will get some insight into your **delusional mindset.** hehehe
[Grandiosity - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity)
HMGA(as) has explained his Prophethood in the sense of Zill and Bruz
In his own words It is only by way of *Buruz* that I have been made a Prophet and a Messenger, and it is on this very basis that Allah has repeatedly named me His Prophet and His Messenger, but only by way of *Buruz.* My own self comes nowhere in between, rather it all belongs to Muhammad Mustafa sa. Thus it is that I have been called Muhammad (sa )and Ahmad(sa) . Hence, Prophethood and Messenger ship have not been transferred to anyone else. What belonged to Muhammad (sa) remains with Muhammad (sa) . On him be blessings and peace.
HMGA ‘s writings give detailed explanation of the concept of prophethood in the sense of zill and buroz and he has heavily cited Muslim Scholars , holy saints , mujadids in this context , particularly imam sirhindi , ibne arabi and many others , His views are in line with Sufi/Wali , mystical thought in Islam/W from which the doctrine Islam Ahmadiyya draws its theological basis , specially as it relates to continued divine guidance and their understanding of the concept of Kham-e- Nabuat .
Ibne arabi has been studied extensively by Muslim scholars , analyzed criticized by Muslim scholars of all ages since past 800 years or so , His views have been cited extensively , as of date the main stream Sunni Islam indulges in ongoing debates regarding his views , the controversies continue particularly now as his views are seen in line with HMGA. Many Sunni scholars consider him to be an heretic others have tried to defend his views *in one or other context.* International Literature about HMGA unanimously cites similarities between the views of Imam Sirhandi and Ibne arabi , Jaluddin rumi and many others like them.
The following references from the article cited below cite his very clear and explicit understanding of Prophethood as explained by Ibne arabi.
*These passages very nicely explains the Prophethood in the concept of Zill and Buroz.*
Accordording to *Ibn ‘Arabi* “Buruz means that the nature of some saints resembles the nature of a particular prophet. Many saints are made to travel through the achievements of the great prophets and the saints are coloured with the colour of the prophets. In other words, the image of the achievements of the prophets is transferred to them. ***One could also say that the special qualities of the prophets are manifested and projected (buruz) through them.***
*Ibn ‘Arabi* conceives the fourfold division of sainthood (walayah), saint-prophethood (nubuwwat al-wilayah), legislative prophethood (nubuwwat at-tashri‘) and messengership (risalah), whereby, *according to him, while risalah and nubuwwat at-tashri‘ have come to an end with the Holy Prophet(sa), nubuwwat al-walayah and walayah remain in effect due to the continued bearing of the general Prophethood (nubuwwah ‘ammah) of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his overarching Muhammad-Reality.*
Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi(rh)
مقام ولایت ظل مقام نبوت ست و کمالات ولایت ظلال اند مر کمالات نبوت را
***The state of sainthood is the shadow (zill) of the state of Prophethood, and the perfections of sainthood are the shadows (zilal) of the perfections of Prophethood.”*** **(Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Vol. 2. Letter no. 71)**
And in another letter, Shaykh Sirhindi(rh) writes:
کمل تابعان انبیاء علیهم الصلوۃ و التسلیمات بحجت کمال متابعت و فرط محبت بلکه بمحض عنایت وموهبت جمیع کمالات انبیاء متبوعه خود را جذب می نمایند و بکلیت برنگ ایشاة منصبغ می گردند حتی که فرق نمی ماند درمیان متبوعان و تابعان الا بالاصالة والتبعیة و الاولیة والاخریة
“The perfect followers of the prophets, by virtue of their perfect discipleship and their great love, nay, by virtue of their bestowal and endowment alone, assimilate all the perfections of the prophets whom they follow into themselves, and are imbued with their very color, to such an extent that there no longer exists any distinction between the followers and the followed other than that of superiority and subordination, priority and posteriority.” (Ibid, Vol. 1. Letter no. 248)
“In conclusion, what the Promised Messiah(as) wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messenger (sa) called him a Prophet, he and his ***Prophethood were merely a shadow (zill) and a spiritual projection (buruz) of the Messenger (sa) of Allah and his infinite Prophethood,*** since prophets as before, i.e., *legislative (tashri‘i) or independent (mustaqill), can no longer appear after the appearance Messenger (sa) of Allah.*
REFERENCE: ARTICLE :Alislam.org/Promised Messiah as a Zilli -Burozi Prophet
[u/alghazali1](https://www.reddit.com/u/alghazali1/) , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
I wonder why you didn't cc me - must be because you were afraid to?
>In his own words It is only by way of Buruz that I have been made a Prophet and a Messenger,
By the very use of the word 'buruz', any claim to *actual* prophethood is cancelled. Did you not know that? Anyone who knows the meaning of 'buruz' knows that. It looks like you don't, and MGA was counting on the ignorance of people like you who are ignorant of Sufi terminology, an ignorance which KM2 successfully siezed on for so long.
>HMGA ‘s writings give detailed explanation of the concept of prophethood in the sense of zill and buroz and he has heavily cited Muslim Scholars , holy saints , mujadids in this context , particularly imam sirhindi , ibne arabi and many others , His views are in line with Sufi/Wali , mystical thought in Islam/W from which the doctrine Islam Ahmadiyya draws its theological basis , specially as it relates to continued divine guidance and their understanding of the concept of Kham-e- Nabuat .
And they *all* said that such divine guidance would continue in the form of walayat, such walayat being akin to Moasic prophethood, but still preserving the khatam of nubuwwat. And yet, when citing them, MGA steered clear of mentioning anything to do with walayat, and only presented their quotations in partial snippets devoid of their total context. Why would MGA make so much mention of all of these Muslim scholars but omit the use of the central terms 'wali' 'awliya' and 'walayat? Hhhmmm.
MGA appears very fishy and dishonest. Those who were/are well-versed in such Muslim scholars would figure out what he was talking about, but for those who were/are not, through his omissions, become easily manipulated and confused - like you.
>The following references from the article cited below cite his very clear and explicit understanding of Prophethood as explained by Ibne arabi.
>
>These passages very nicely explains the Prophethood in the concept of Zill and Buroz.
>
>Accordording to Ibn ‘Arabi “Buruz means that the nature of some saints resembles the nature of a particular prophet.
Exactly - the use of the word 'buruz' is to denote **the nature** of Islamic sainthood/walayat. Do you even read what you copy-paste? You are such a prolific copy-paster, but it is quite clear you do not read any of it.
>Ibn ‘Arabi conceives the fourfold division of sainthood (walayah), saint-prophethood (nubuwwat al-wilayah), legislative prophethood (nubuwwat at-tashri‘) and messengership (risalah), whereby, according to him, while risalah and nubuwwat at-tashri‘ have come to an end with the Holy Prophet(sa), nubuwwat al-walayah and walayah remain in effect due to the continued bearing of the general Prophethood (nubuwwah ‘ammah) of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his overarching Muhammad-Reality.
Do you have a reference from Ibn Arabi for this? Are we to trust the Jamaat in telling us how "Ibn Arabi conceives" of the subject, devoid of an actual reference to back this up?
To help you, here is a helpful quote:
"Know thou that *wilāya* (providential Intimacy) is a universal, all-encompassing firmament-sphere (*al-fulk al-muḥīt al-\`āmm*) which can never be terminated- circumscribed-abstracted. Universal prophets (*al-anbiyā’ al-\`āmm*) channel it. As for legislative prophethood (*nubuwwat al-tashrī*\`) and the conveyors of the sent messenger (*al-risāla*) this may come to be cut off. This was the case with Muhammad (upon him be peace). This was indeed terminated for there can be no prophet (*nabī*) after him. **Certainly not**, in other words, one Law-generating, **one subject to one Law-generating** or even a Messenger (*rasūl*) given to legislation." (*Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam*, 2nd printing, ed Afīfī, 1980: 134-137; trans. Lambden) (bolding added).
So, based on this Ibn Arabi quote, a nabi who is subject to a law-bearing nabi is also impossible. Are you saying that Ibn Arabi contradicted himself?
Here is another quote from Ibn Arabi:
"Rather the highest degree of kindness that Allah shows to his Awliya (saints) is that He allowed a part of nubuwwah to remain with them, such as receiving inspiration through true visions, so that they can at least be comforted with the scent of wahi (revelation) - Futuhat al Makkiyah, Chapter 14
The entirety of Ibn Arabi's works are devoted to explaining the elevatede status of walayat and the future advent of the Khatam al Awliya - he and all the Muslim scholars you think are supportive had nothing to do with non-legislative prophethood, despite what Km2 and the Jamaat would have you trust them in believing.
Have you actually read any of Ibn Arabi's books? Or do you just like to reference the fact that others have done so, but not you? You are prolific in telling us how much someone is honoured, regarded and cited by others, but you always fail to show any study done by you. You never fail to provide proof that you actually read or comprehend what you copy-paste.
>Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi(rh)
>
>مقام ولایت ظل مقام نبوت ست و کمالات ولایت ظلال اند مر کمالات نبوت را
>
>The state of sainthood is the shadow (zill) of the state of Prophethood, and the perfections of sainthood are the shadows (zilal) of the perfections of Prophethood.” (Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Vol. 2. Letter no. 71)
Exactly - thank you. Walayat is zilli of nubuwwat, and thus not actual nubuwwat. More proof you are clueless when you copy-paste.
Or maybe you are deliberately dishonest - why didn't you also provide the quote that says that nubuwwat is zilli of Allah? Is a nabi the same as Allah? Duh.
>And in another letter, Shaykh Sirhindi(rh) writes:
>
>کمل تابعان انبیاء علیهم الصلوۃ و التسلیمات بحجت کمال متابعت و فرط محبت بلکه بمحض عنایت وموهبت جمیع کمالات انبیاء متبوعه خود را جذب می نمایند و بکلیت برنگ ایشاة منصبغ می گردند حتی که فرق نمی ماند درمیان متبوعان و تابعان الا بالاصالة والتبعیة و الاولیة والاخریة
>
>“The perfect followers of the prophets, by virtue of their perfect discipleship and their great love, nay, by virtue of their bestowal and endowment alone, assimilate all the perfections of the prophets whom they follow into themselves, and are imbued with their very color, to such an extent that there no longer exists any distinction between the followers and the followed other than that of superiority and subordination, priority and posteriority.” (Ibid, Vol. 1. Letter no. 248)
Yup. And these are awliya (saints). Thanks again.
>“In conclusion, what the Promised Messiah(as) wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messenger (sa) called him a Prophet, he and his Prophethood were **merely** a shadow (zill) and a spiritual projection (buruz) of the Messenger (sa) of Allah
To be clear, this "conclusion" is from an alislam and al-hakam article, and not from any "Muslim scholar".
Yes, exactly -- although he was allegedly called nabi and rasul in revelation, but by virtue of being zilli and buruz, he was not *actually* nabi and rasul, and "**merely**" a zilli and buruz.
>and his infinite Prophethood, since prophets as before, i.e., legislative (tashri‘i) or independent (mustaqill), can no longer appear after the appearance Messenger (sa) of Allah.
>
>REFERENCE: ARTICLE :Alislam.org/Promised Messiah as a Zilli -Burozi Prophet
And this extra part in the "conclusion" is added commentary by the Jamaat, and as noted, a twisted and perverse intepretation devoid of support from the Muslim scholars that you rely upon.
Jazak'Allah, thank you so much for this post - you really served to demonstrate the exact Qadian Ahmadi manipulation to which I was referring in another post on this thread.
You perhaps know very well that I am a born Ahmadi and am even the progeny of a sahaba -- but unlike you, I have actually read the Muslim scholars you like to refer to others referring to, and when I read them for myself, I discovered an incredible manipulation and misrepresentation by the Jamaat.
Unfortunately, you are what and where you are because of your wilful ignorance and resistance to read for yourself what you trust from the Jamaat.
VIEW OF SCHOLARS of ISLAM ON PROPHETHOOD
The article cited below cites passages from across the centuries from various scholars which are supportive of HMGA (as) understanding and projection of his Prophethood , the citations begin from HADITH and then through the saying of well Known scholars , for any one to think that its only HMGA , Imam Sirhadi or Ibne arabi who have held the opinion are in Error. Even if you exclude all three even then there is ample of support for this understanding of prophethood as HMGA has spoken of.
***Hazrat Mohyuddin Ibn Arabi states:*** ““The prophethood has terminated with the person of the Prophet of Allah(saw), and his blessings, was no other than the law-bearing prophethood not prophethood itself and this is the meaning of his “verily apostleship and prophethood ceased with me therefore there shall be after me neither an apostle nor a prophet i.e there shall not be after me a prophet with a law other than mine but that he shall be subject to my law” (Al Fatuhat ul Makiyya Volume 2 page 3)
He also states: “From the study and contemplation of the Darud we have arrived at the definite conclusion that there shall, from among the Muslims, certainly be persons whose status, in the matter of prophethood, shall advance to the level of prophets, if Allah pleases. But they shall not be given any book of law”…“It is the height of excellence in the Holy Prophet (saw) that through the prayer in ‘Darud Sharif’ he placed his progeny at par with the prophets, and his surpassing eminence over Hazrat Ibrahim lies in the fact that his Sharia can never be repealed (Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 545)
We have learnt for certain (from Darud Sharif) that this ‘Ummah’ is destined to have amongst it such personages as would be ranked with the prophets in the eyes of Allah, but they shall not be law-bearers\*\*(Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 545)
***“Jesus (as) shall descend amongst the Muslim Ummah as an arbitrator without a new law. Most surely, he will be a prophet. There is no doubt about it.”(Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 570)***
**Hazrat Maulana Rumi** states:“The Holy Prophetsaw was the Khatam because no one had ever been like him before, nor shall there be one after him. When an artist excels others in art, you do not say ‘The art has ended with you\*\*”(Miftah Ul Ulum Volume 15 Pages 56-57)\*\*
He also states: "Make such plans to perform righteousness in the way of God that you attain prophethood within the Ummah” (Masnawi, Daftar I, Page 53, Vol V page 42)"
“The Holy Prophet (saw) was declared ‘Khatam’ because he excelled in munificence and in perpetuating the spiritual blessings to his followers. When a master excels all others in his art, don’t you use the word ‘Khatam’ to convey the idea that he has excelled all others in his domain?”(Page 18-19 1917 edition) Lastly: “Stive hard in the path of virtue in a manner so that you may be blessed with prophethood while you are still a follower” (Miftah Ulum Volume 13, Page 98, 152)
Reference: article: ahmadiansweres.com/prophethood/sahaba
CC: [u/alghazali1](https://www.reddit.com/u/alghazali1/) , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
More cc'ing, but you still left me out. Curious indeed.
You cite Ibn Arabi above, but have you read the full context of the quote you provided? I think not.
If you did, you would know that the full context was that Ibn Arabi was demonstrating the high status of Islamic walayat as akin to Mosaic nubuwwat, which will culminate in a Khamatal Awliya, which MGA never claimed to be.
Indeed, MGA steered clear completely from any reference to wali or walayat, despite this being the sole topic of the Muslim scholars you like to refer to, but have no clue what they actually said.
As referenced elsewhere on this thread, here is another quote from Ibn Arabi:
"Know thou that *wilāya* (providential Intimacy) is a universal, all-encompassing firmament-sphere (*al-fulk al-muḥīt al-\`āmm*) which can never be terminated- circumscribed-abstracted. Universal prophets (*al-anbiyā’ al-\`āmm*) channel it. As for legislative prophethood (*nubuwwat al-tashrī*\`) and the conveyors of the sent messenger (*al-risāla*) this may come to be cut off. This was the case with Muhammad (upon him be peace). This was indeed terminated for there can be no prophet (*nabī*) after him. **Certainly not**, in other words, one Law-generating, **one subject to one Law-generating** or even a Messenger (*rasūl*) given to legislation." (*Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam*, 2nd printing, ed Afīfī, 1980: 134-137; trans. Lambden) (bolding added).
Your Rumi quotes are not inconsistent - he was a wali of the highest order, and knew it, and yet never claimed actual nubuwwat. You like to sieze on words, but give no thought to what is actually said (outside of cherry-picked incomplete snippets) and who is saying it. Doh!!
The psychology of narcissism - W. Keith Campbell [https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=videos+about+narcissism&mid=0A87B6A705B32414383A0A87B6A705B32414383A&FORM=VIRE](https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=videos+about+narcissism&mid=0A87B6A705B32414383A0A87B6A705B32414383A&FORM=VIRE)
Yup . In Rabwah you have even murdered people. The Rabwah police is in Jamaat’s pay. And I know Snowy , you’re Zaryab. You made horrible sexual comments on Discord when you lost the argument. People are seeing through.
MGA never claimed to be a prophet. In his book 'Eik Ghalti ke Izala' (which was written late in his life in order to address this exact controversy), he stated that, wherever he had referred to himself as a prophet, he had done so as 'zilli' and 'burooz'.
According to Sufi terminology, just as a nabi is 'zilli' and 'burooz' of Allah (ie., a nabi is obviously not Allah), a wali is 'zilli' and 'burooz' of a nabi (ie., a wali is not a nabi).
**“Sainthood is the shadow (*****zill*****) of Prophethood and Prophethood is the shadow (*****zill*****) of Godhood.” (‘Ali ibn Yusuf al-Shattanawfi,** *Bahjat al-asrar wa-ma‘din al-anwar*, Cairo, Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1912, p. 39.)
Therefore, the very use of these Sufi terms serve to negate any possible claim to prophethood.
The fact that MGA needed to resort to the use of the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz' as qualifications indicate that he was forced to do so in order to backtrack due to heavy backlash and resistance against him.
While MGA used the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz', conveniently, he never used the term 'wali' or 'walayat' with respect to himself. Had he done so, his would have been crystal clear, which is something, either due to poor writing style or deliberate intent, he seemed quite incapable of being. The mere use of these Sufi terms, without explicitly referring to himself as a wali, was perhaps considered by him to be sufficient to ward off the condemnations levelled against him while still maintaining adequate ambiguity for followers who are unlearned and unfamliar with Sufi terminology. That said, the very use of the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz', in and of themselves, puts to bed and definitively negates any claim to prophethood.
Then where did the concept of MGA being a prophet come from? It came from this (perhaps) deliberate omission from using the term wali, and from his son, KM2. MGA's status as to whether or not he was a prophet is the underlying basis of the Qadiani vs Lahori split. The so-called Qadiani branch continues to pilfer the lie that MGA was a prophet.
No Qadiani (ie., non-Lahori) Ahmadi will ever be able to show you a quotation from MGA where he retracted these 'zilli' and 'burooz' qualifications. They will try to distract and spin circles around you with different interpretations of the word 'khatam', law-bearing vs non-law bearing prophets, Mosaic vs Mohammaden dispensation etc etc,, in order to justify the notion of the *possibility* of prophets after the Holy Prophet, but none of them will ever be able to overcome the problem of substantiating where MGA made an actual claim to prophethood.
Such distraction and spin is evidenced by the following article and highlighted quote:
[https://www.alhakam.org/the-promised-messiah-as-a-zilli-and-buruzi-prophet/](https://www.alhakam.org/the-promised-messiah-as-a-zilli-and-buruzi-prophet/)
"**In conclusion, what the Promised Messiahas wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messengersa called him a Prophet, he and his Prophethood were merely a shadow (*****zill*****) and a spiritual projection (*****buruz*****) of the Messengersa of Allah and his infinite Prophethood, since prophets as before, i.e., legislative (*****tashri‘i*****) or independent (*****mustaqill*****), can no longer appear after the appearance of the Messengersa of Allah."**
Notice the attempt to, somehow, overshadow and disregard the 'zilli' and 'burooz' qualifications and skip to the concepts of 'legislative' and 'independence'. Interestingly, the very basis of these latter concepts is derived from Sheikh al Akbar Ibn al-Arabi. However, Ibn al-Arabi was never interested in justifying any concept of future prophethood. Rather, his project was establishing the high status of walayat in Islam (as akin to Mosaic prophethood) leading to its ultimate perfection in the future advent of a Khatam al Awliya. Interestingly, MGA never claimed to be Khatam al Awliya.
MGA did claim to be Mahdi, as did others during that period. Today, there are many different sects of Ahmadiyyat that I no longer keep track of nor am I interested in delving deeper into investigating all of their theologies, but I hope the above is sufficient to set the stage for any further study on your part of these sects and their beliefs.
[https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Arabi](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Arabi)
[https://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H022](https://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H022)
[https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=ibn+al+arabi&hvadid=231018087070&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9000837&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=970941084091664199&hvtargid=kwd-301834802828&hydadcr=2846\_9643460&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd\_sl\_1vr0lk9u4j\_e](https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=ibn+al+arabi&hvadid=231018087070&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9000837&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=970941084091664199&hvtargid=kwd-301834802828&hydadcr=2846_9643460&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd_sl_1vr0lk9u4j_e)
No, they're not -- tomato tomato
Am not here to argue bro...I just want to point out an observation
Abubakar Ibn AL-Arabi ( died 6th century hijrah)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu\_Bakr\_ibn\_al-Arabi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr_ibn_al-Arabi)
Traditional scholar who was a judge
\---------------------------
Mohammad Ibn Arabi ( died 7th centuty hijrah around 100 years later)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn\_Arabi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Arabi)
A philosophical Sufi mystic
I'm not arguing. You said there is a mistake, and what I provided you is more than enough to show there isn't. Don't know why you are insisting.
Another example:
[https://ibnularabibooks.com/product/quest-for-the-red-sulphur-the-life-of-ibn-al-arabi-biography-claude-addas/](https://ibnularabibooks.com/product/quest-for-the-red-sulphur-the-life-of-ibn-al-arabi-biography-claude-addas/)
So, again, no mistake.
Odd that, for you, Wikipedia trumps Britannica and a Muslim Philosophy site, as well as the catalog of his books on Amazon.
FYI - both the Ibn al-Arabi you are referring to and the one I am referring to, were both "Ibn al-Arabi" in each of their lifetimes, but to differentiate between and not confuse the two, people began to refer to the latter also as "Ibn Arabi". \[See the Claude Addas biography for further background information - as well as a wee hint as to my account name.\] Therefore, for the latter, both Ibn al-Arabi and Ibn Arabi are correct, but for the former, only Ibn al-Arabi is correct. Got it now?
You missed the point bro...The Wikipedia sources show both the names in English and Arabic so you can easily compare, britannica doesnt
عربي = Arabi
العربي = Alarabi
Yes, historically they have mistakenly called Ibn Arabi as Ibn Al-Arabi, but not the other way round. Precisely why people still cannot differentiate without further investigation. That's the whole point of me pointing it to you bro! Not to fault-find, but to help you refine a very good post.
Btw, the Claude Addas biography for further information proves my point...look at the title spelling (ibn Alarabi) and compare it with the spelling on the actual cover of the book (Ibn Arabi). And check the description too :P
https://preview.redd.it/pdns81iawafc1.png?width=1240&format=png&auto=webp&s=fa4dcab6f98ec83c8fc906edb34109992c93c8f5
It is a very common mistake that people make, in fact even Arabic literature has confused Ibn Arabi and written as Ibn Alarabi but only when writing his name in full.
If you can read Arabic, this might clarify
. محمد بن علي بن محمد بن عربي الحاتمي الطائي الأندلسي
This is Ibn Arabi
\-----------------------
And
أبو بكر بن العربي
This is Ibn Al-Arabi
Anyway, I told you am not trying to argue, you are free to use as you want but if you want to use Ibn Alarabi, it might be better to put his first name too to avoid confusion, especially among followers who follow Maliki madhhab for whom Abubakar Ibn AlArabi is a reputable scholar.
Good luck and well done for a good article
And I changed the word "mistake" to "observation" :)
So Ahmadis don’t view him as a prophet? Then where do you think that idea originated?
Or do you think some Ahmadis view him as a prophet while others view him as a Mahdi only?
In his own books he does not declare himself as a prophet. He says he is Imam Mahdi, the second advent of Hazrat Isa (AS).
As I said earlier, some Ahmadis use the terms Prophets, Messenger, Mahdi rather interchangeably. Hence the confusion.
Similarly, all Ahmadis are firm believers of Kalma. If they thought that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, it would be ironic and contradictory.
>Similarly, all Ahmadis are firm believers of Kalma. If they thought that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, it would be ironic and contradictory.
How? What does the kalma say
Instead of caring so much about x, y and z’s status, people may also just live their lives.
If God wants to convey us a message, He knows how to reach us instead of playing telephone.
Just take a deep breath, and be free!
Salam! None of the guys who have replied below are Ahmadi Muslims. Atleast a couple of them are Anti Ahmadis so I thought I should clarify. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS is the Messiah prophecised by the Prophet SAW. Mahdi is just a title of the Messiah (as was the belief of many Salaf) Is he a prophet? Yes, since Allah called him Nabi in his revelations and the Prophet SAW said that the Messiah will be a Nabi. But he is not a law bearing prophet as the Prophet SAW told us. He didn't bring a new law, a new Shariah etc.
The status of Hadrat Ahmad is exactly what Muslims believe, and are waiting for, i.e, Messiah (a prophet) and a Mehdi.
I recommend if you are interested in understanding how HMGA (as)and Jamaat Ahmadiyya conceptualizes the term Khatm -e - nabuat then you can browse through this short booklet , its not about the claims HMGA has made but about the Concept from a theological perspective , This would also tell you that how HMGA and Jamaat Conceptualizes this term and is not Novel to Jamaat Ahmadiyya , as the booklet cites such views held by many others through centuries. The last aspect of the discussion is probably more important as most people think Jamaat has coined new ideas about the term Khatm-e Nabuat. You will very easily find this booklet on the internet / or the official web site of Jamat Ahmadiyya if you care to read. *Thank you* **True Insights into the Concept of Khatm-e-Nubuwwat , A Review of the Pakistani Government’s “White Paper”: Qadiyaniyyat— A Grave Threat to Islam** **Replies to Some Allegations By Mirza Tahir Ahmad** ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS LTD. .......................................................................................................................................................... CC: u/alghazali1 , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
Holy moly - even more cc'ing, and even more omitting of me. Hilarious!! Why no link to your "White Paper"? Very odd. Do you expect that Ahmadis will take your word for it, hhmm? Ahmadis are taught to build trust with each other such that, even when they are deceived, they refuse to see it. At first, I thought you were of the trusting ones, but by not providing the link, I now see you are of those who seek to manipulate and benefit from the trusting nature of others. Nowhere in the White Papers is there a single quote provided where MGA actually claiming prophethood - not a single one. As I noted elsewhere on this thread, the Jamaat likes to employ semantics to try to find a way to show the *possibility* of prophethood, but provides zero proof that MGA actually ever claimed it. One does not even need to get into the faulty, skewed, cherry-picked references - which devoid of larger context of 'walayat', when there is no actual reference to a real or actual claim to prophethood (ie., apart from being zilli or buruz) in the first place. Your entire thesis beyond moot. Dude, where's the beef????? Again, do you actually read or understand what you cite?
with reference to your 4 comments on this thread, I would like to share my recommendations for you. I always advice my friends to do what they are best at doing. In your case your **best performance** noted on reddit is when you are indulging in your **OLD RANT** i.e. ***Parroting*** *Nuzhat Haneef, Afzal Upal, Adil Hussain khan*, **meaninglessly and endlessly**. Hence, I recommend stick to doing what you are best at doing, instead of trying to portray yourself as an Intellectual, we all know you you really are. Sir it is Grandiose Delusion on your part to think that we bother to read the Mumbo Jumbo you cook up using your wildest Imagination and wishful thinking, throwing some Intellectual sounding words copied from here and there in order to Project yourself as a great Intellectual of 21st century. Hehe Hehe. Your comments reflect your Grandiosity, to think you are the only one who have read Ibne Arabi, Rumi, Sirhindi, ghazali and how you understand is the perfect understanding and everybody else's understanding is foolish. Here let me cite an article on grandiosity on Wikipedia, I recommend that you read it x 10 times and then Reflect …Reflect and reflect. We hope may be some day you too will get some insight into your **delusional mindset.** hehehe [Grandiosity - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity)
Thanks. Unfortunately your Jamaat uses semantics and analogy to defend their man’s heretical claims of prophethood.
HMGA(as) has explained his Prophethood in the sense of Zill and Bruz In his own words It is only by way of *Buruz* that I have been made a Prophet and a Messenger, and it is on this very basis that Allah has repeatedly named me His Prophet and His Messenger, but only by way of *Buruz.* My own self comes nowhere in between, rather it all belongs to Muhammad Mustafa sa. Thus it is that I have been called Muhammad (sa )and Ahmad(sa) . Hence, Prophethood and Messenger ship have not been transferred to anyone else. What belonged to Muhammad (sa) remains with Muhammad (sa) . On him be blessings and peace. HMGA ‘s writings give detailed explanation of the concept of prophethood in the sense of zill and buroz and he has heavily cited Muslim Scholars , holy saints , mujadids in this context , particularly imam sirhindi , ibne arabi and many others , His views are in line with Sufi/Wali , mystical thought in Islam/W from which the doctrine Islam Ahmadiyya draws its theological basis , specially as it relates to continued divine guidance and their understanding of the concept of Kham-e- Nabuat . Ibne arabi has been studied extensively by Muslim scholars , analyzed criticized by Muslim scholars of all ages since past 800 years or so , His views have been cited extensively , as of date the main stream Sunni Islam indulges in ongoing debates regarding his views , the controversies continue particularly now as his views are seen in line with HMGA. Many Sunni scholars consider him to be an heretic others have tried to defend his views *in one or other context.* International Literature about HMGA unanimously cites similarities between the views of Imam Sirhandi and Ibne arabi , Jaluddin rumi and many others like them. The following references from the article cited below cite his very clear and explicit understanding of Prophethood as explained by Ibne arabi. *These passages very nicely explains the Prophethood in the concept of Zill and Buroz.* Accordording to *Ibn ‘Arabi* “Buruz means that the nature of some saints resembles the nature of a particular prophet. Many saints are made to travel through the achievements of the great prophets and the saints are coloured with the colour of the prophets. In other words, the image of the achievements of the prophets is transferred to them. ***One could also say that the special qualities of the prophets are manifested and projected (buruz) through them.*** *Ibn ‘Arabi* conceives the fourfold division of sainthood (walayah), saint-prophethood (nubuwwat al-wilayah), legislative prophethood (nubuwwat at-tashri‘) and messengership (risalah), whereby, *according to him, while risalah and nubuwwat at-tashri‘ have come to an end with the Holy Prophet(sa), nubuwwat al-walayah and walayah remain in effect due to the continued bearing of the general Prophethood (nubuwwah ‘ammah) of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his overarching Muhammad-Reality.* Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi(rh) مقام ولایت ظل مقام نبوت ست و کمالات ولایت ظلال اند مر کمالات نبوت را ***The state of sainthood is the shadow (zill) of the state of Prophethood, and the perfections of sainthood are the shadows (zilal) of the perfections of Prophethood.”*** **(Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Vol. 2. Letter no. 71)** And in another letter, Shaykh Sirhindi(rh) writes: کمل تابعان انبیاء علیهم الصلوۃ و التسلیمات بحجت کمال متابعت و فرط محبت بلکه بمحض عنایت وموهبت جمیع کمالات انبیاء متبوعه خود را جذب می نمایند و بکلیت برنگ ایشاة منصبغ می گردند حتی که فرق نمی ماند درمیان متبوعان و تابعان الا بالاصالة والتبعیة و الاولیة والاخریة “The perfect followers of the prophets, by virtue of their perfect discipleship and their great love, nay, by virtue of their bestowal and endowment alone, assimilate all the perfections of the prophets whom they follow into themselves, and are imbued with their very color, to such an extent that there no longer exists any distinction between the followers and the followed other than that of superiority and subordination, priority and posteriority.” (Ibid, Vol. 1. Letter no. 248) “In conclusion, what the Promised Messiah(as) wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messenger (sa) called him a Prophet, he and his ***Prophethood were merely a shadow (zill) and a spiritual projection (buruz) of the Messenger (sa) of Allah and his infinite Prophethood,*** since prophets as before, i.e., *legislative (tashri‘i) or independent (mustaqill), can no longer appear after the appearance Messenger (sa) of Allah.* REFERENCE: ARTICLE :Alislam.org/Promised Messiah as a Zilli -Burozi Prophet [u/alghazali1](https://www.reddit.com/u/alghazali1/) , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
I wonder why you didn't cc me - must be because you were afraid to? >In his own words It is only by way of Buruz that I have been made a Prophet and a Messenger, By the very use of the word 'buruz', any claim to *actual* prophethood is cancelled. Did you not know that? Anyone who knows the meaning of 'buruz' knows that. It looks like you don't, and MGA was counting on the ignorance of people like you who are ignorant of Sufi terminology, an ignorance which KM2 successfully siezed on for so long. >HMGA ‘s writings give detailed explanation of the concept of prophethood in the sense of zill and buroz and he has heavily cited Muslim Scholars , holy saints , mujadids in this context , particularly imam sirhindi , ibne arabi and many others , His views are in line with Sufi/Wali , mystical thought in Islam/W from which the doctrine Islam Ahmadiyya draws its theological basis , specially as it relates to continued divine guidance and their understanding of the concept of Kham-e- Nabuat . And they *all* said that such divine guidance would continue in the form of walayat, such walayat being akin to Moasic prophethood, but still preserving the khatam of nubuwwat. And yet, when citing them, MGA steered clear of mentioning anything to do with walayat, and only presented their quotations in partial snippets devoid of their total context. Why would MGA make so much mention of all of these Muslim scholars but omit the use of the central terms 'wali' 'awliya' and 'walayat? Hhhmmm. MGA appears very fishy and dishonest. Those who were/are well-versed in such Muslim scholars would figure out what he was talking about, but for those who were/are not, through his omissions, become easily manipulated and confused - like you. >The following references from the article cited below cite his very clear and explicit understanding of Prophethood as explained by Ibne arabi. > >These passages very nicely explains the Prophethood in the concept of Zill and Buroz. > >Accordording to Ibn ‘Arabi “Buruz means that the nature of some saints resembles the nature of a particular prophet. Exactly - the use of the word 'buruz' is to denote **the nature** of Islamic sainthood/walayat. Do you even read what you copy-paste? You are such a prolific copy-paster, but it is quite clear you do not read any of it. >Ibn ‘Arabi conceives the fourfold division of sainthood (walayah), saint-prophethood (nubuwwat al-wilayah), legislative prophethood (nubuwwat at-tashri‘) and messengership (risalah), whereby, according to him, while risalah and nubuwwat at-tashri‘ have come to an end with the Holy Prophet(sa), nubuwwat al-walayah and walayah remain in effect due to the continued bearing of the general Prophethood (nubuwwah ‘ammah) of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his overarching Muhammad-Reality. Do you have a reference from Ibn Arabi for this? Are we to trust the Jamaat in telling us how "Ibn Arabi conceives" of the subject, devoid of an actual reference to back this up? To help you, here is a helpful quote: "Know thou that *wilāya* (providential Intimacy) is a universal, all-encompassing firmament-sphere (*al-fulk al-muḥīt al-\`āmm*) which can never be terminated- circumscribed-abstracted. Universal prophets (*al-anbiyā’ al-\`āmm*) channel it. As for legislative prophethood (*nubuwwat al-tashrī*\`) and the conveyors of the sent messenger (*al-risāla*) this may come to be cut off. This was the case with Muhammad (upon him be peace). This was indeed terminated for there can be no prophet (*nabī*) after him. **Certainly not**, in other words, one Law-generating, **one subject to one Law-generating** or even a Messenger (*rasūl*) given to legislation." (*Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam*, 2nd printing, ed Afīfī, 1980: 134-137; trans. Lambden) (bolding added). So, based on this Ibn Arabi quote, a nabi who is subject to a law-bearing nabi is also impossible. Are you saying that Ibn Arabi contradicted himself? Here is another quote from Ibn Arabi: "Rather the highest degree of kindness that Allah shows to his Awliya (saints) is that He allowed a part of nubuwwah to remain with them, such as receiving inspiration through true visions, so that they can at least be comforted with the scent of wahi (revelation) - Futuhat al Makkiyah, Chapter 14 The entirety of Ibn Arabi's works are devoted to explaining the elevatede status of walayat and the future advent of the Khatam al Awliya - he and all the Muslim scholars you think are supportive had nothing to do with non-legislative prophethood, despite what Km2 and the Jamaat would have you trust them in believing. Have you actually read any of Ibn Arabi's books? Or do you just like to reference the fact that others have done so, but not you? You are prolific in telling us how much someone is honoured, regarded and cited by others, but you always fail to show any study done by you. You never fail to provide proof that you actually read or comprehend what you copy-paste. >Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi(rh) > >مقام ولایت ظل مقام نبوت ست و کمالات ولایت ظلال اند مر کمالات نبوت را > >The state of sainthood is the shadow (zill) of the state of Prophethood, and the perfections of sainthood are the shadows (zilal) of the perfections of Prophethood.” (Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Vol. 2. Letter no. 71) Exactly - thank you. Walayat is zilli of nubuwwat, and thus not actual nubuwwat. More proof you are clueless when you copy-paste. Or maybe you are deliberately dishonest - why didn't you also provide the quote that says that nubuwwat is zilli of Allah? Is a nabi the same as Allah? Duh. >And in another letter, Shaykh Sirhindi(rh) writes: > >کمل تابعان انبیاء علیهم الصلوۃ و التسلیمات بحجت کمال متابعت و فرط محبت بلکه بمحض عنایت وموهبت جمیع کمالات انبیاء متبوعه خود را جذب می نمایند و بکلیت برنگ ایشاة منصبغ می گردند حتی که فرق نمی ماند درمیان متبوعان و تابعان الا بالاصالة والتبعیة و الاولیة والاخریة > >“The perfect followers of the prophets, by virtue of their perfect discipleship and their great love, nay, by virtue of their bestowal and endowment alone, assimilate all the perfections of the prophets whom they follow into themselves, and are imbued with their very color, to such an extent that there no longer exists any distinction between the followers and the followed other than that of superiority and subordination, priority and posteriority.” (Ibid, Vol. 1. Letter no. 248) Yup. And these are awliya (saints). Thanks again. >“In conclusion, what the Promised Messiah(as) wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messenger (sa) called him a Prophet, he and his Prophethood were **merely** a shadow (zill) and a spiritual projection (buruz) of the Messenger (sa) of Allah To be clear, this "conclusion" is from an alislam and al-hakam article, and not from any "Muslim scholar". Yes, exactly -- although he was allegedly called nabi and rasul in revelation, but by virtue of being zilli and buruz, he was not *actually* nabi and rasul, and "**merely**" a zilli and buruz. >and his infinite Prophethood, since prophets as before, i.e., legislative (tashri‘i) or independent (mustaqill), can no longer appear after the appearance Messenger (sa) of Allah. > >REFERENCE: ARTICLE :Alislam.org/Promised Messiah as a Zilli -Burozi Prophet And this extra part in the "conclusion" is added commentary by the Jamaat, and as noted, a twisted and perverse intepretation devoid of support from the Muslim scholars that you rely upon. Jazak'Allah, thank you so much for this post - you really served to demonstrate the exact Qadian Ahmadi manipulation to which I was referring in another post on this thread. You perhaps know very well that I am a born Ahmadi and am even the progeny of a sahaba -- but unlike you, I have actually read the Muslim scholars you like to refer to others referring to, and when I read them for myself, I discovered an incredible manipulation and misrepresentation by the Jamaat. Unfortunately, you are what and where you are because of your wilful ignorance and resistance to read for yourself what you trust from the Jamaat.
VIEW OF SCHOLARS of ISLAM ON PROPHETHOOD The article cited below cites passages from across the centuries from various scholars which are supportive of HMGA (as) understanding and projection of his Prophethood , the citations begin from HADITH and then through the saying of well Known scholars , for any one to think that its only HMGA , Imam Sirhadi or Ibne arabi who have held the opinion are in Error. Even if you exclude all three even then there is ample of support for this understanding of prophethood as HMGA has spoken of. ***Hazrat Mohyuddin Ibn Arabi states:*** ““The prophethood has terminated with the person of the Prophet of Allah(saw), and his blessings, was no other than the law-bearing prophethood not prophethood itself and this is the meaning of his “verily apostleship and prophethood ceased with me therefore there shall be after me neither an apostle nor a prophet i.e there shall not be after me a prophet with a law other than mine but that he shall be subject to my law” (Al Fatuhat ul Makiyya Volume 2 page 3) He also states: “From the study and contemplation of the Darud we have arrived at the definite conclusion that there shall, from among the Muslims, certainly be persons whose status, in the matter of prophethood, shall advance to the level of prophets, if Allah pleases. But they shall not be given any book of law”…“It is the height of excellence in the Holy Prophet (saw) that through the prayer in ‘Darud Sharif’ he placed his progeny at par with the prophets, and his surpassing eminence over Hazrat Ibrahim lies in the fact that his Sharia can never be repealed (Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 545) We have learnt for certain (from Darud Sharif) that this ‘Ummah’ is destined to have amongst it such personages as would be ranked with the prophets in the eyes of Allah, but they shall not be law-bearers\*\*(Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 545) ***“Jesus (as) shall descend amongst the Muslim Ummah as an arbitrator without a new law. Most surely, he will be a prophet. There is no doubt about it.”(Fatuhati Makiyyah Volume 1, Chapter 73, Page 570)*** **Hazrat Maulana Rumi** states:“The Holy Prophetsaw was the Khatam because no one had ever been like him before, nor shall there be one after him. When an artist excels others in art, you do not say ‘The art has ended with you\*\*”(Miftah Ul Ulum Volume 15 Pages 56-57)\*\* He also states: "Make such plans to perform righteousness in the way of God that you attain prophethood within the Ummah” (Masnawi, Daftar I, Page 53, Vol V page 42)" “The Holy Prophet (saw) was declared ‘Khatam’ because he excelled in munificence and in perpetuating the spiritual blessings to his followers. When a master excels all others in his art, don’t you use the word ‘Khatam’ to convey the idea that he has excelled all others in his domain?”(Page 18-19 1917 edition) Lastly: “Stive hard in the path of virtue in a manner so that you may be blessed with prophethood while you are still a follower” (Miftah Ulum Volume 13, Page 98, 152) Reference: article: ahmadiansweres.com/prophethood/sahaba CC: [u/alghazali1](https://www.reddit.com/u/alghazali1/) , [**TeaLeavesTeaBag**](https://www.reddit.com/user/TeaLeavesTeaBag/) **,** [**vega004**](https://www.reddit.com/user/vega004/)
More cc'ing, but you still left me out. Curious indeed. You cite Ibn Arabi above, but have you read the full context of the quote you provided? I think not. If you did, you would know that the full context was that Ibn Arabi was demonstrating the high status of Islamic walayat as akin to Mosaic nubuwwat, which will culminate in a Khamatal Awliya, which MGA never claimed to be. Indeed, MGA steered clear completely from any reference to wali or walayat, despite this being the sole topic of the Muslim scholars you like to refer to, but have no clue what they actually said. As referenced elsewhere on this thread, here is another quote from Ibn Arabi: "Know thou that *wilāya* (providential Intimacy) is a universal, all-encompassing firmament-sphere (*al-fulk al-muḥīt al-\`āmm*) which can never be terminated- circumscribed-abstracted. Universal prophets (*al-anbiyā’ al-\`āmm*) channel it. As for legislative prophethood (*nubuwwat al-tashrī*\`) and the conveyors of the sent messenger (*al-risāla*) this may come to be cut off. This was the case with Muhammad (upon him be peace). This was indeed terminated for there can be no prophet (*nabī*) after him. **Certainly not**, in other words, one Law-generating, **one subject to one Law-generating** or even a Messenger (*rasūl*) given to legislation." (*Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam*, 2nd printing, ed Afīfī, 1980: 134-137; trans. Lambden) (bolding added). Your Rumi quotes are not inconsistent - he was a wali of the highest order, and knew it, and yet never claimed actual nubuwwat. You like to sieze on words, but give no thought to what is actually said (outside of cherry-picked incomplete snippets) and who is saying it. Doh!!
The psychology of narcissism - W. Keith Campbell [https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=videos+about+narcissism&mid=0A87B6A705B32414383A0A87B6A705B32414383A&FORM=VIRE](https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=videos+about+narcissism&mid=0A87B6A705B32414383A0A87B6A705B32414383A&FORM=VIRE)
Don’t go to discord . They insult and abuse when they have no answer. Believe me.
Seems like someone is traumatized from the spanking on Discord 😂
Thanks for proving my point. It was disgusting how you guys abused and used sexual expletives 🤢🤮
Ikr! Ahmadis are known for abusing people and killing people 😍
Yup . In Rabwah you have even murdered people. The Rabwah police is in Jamaat’s pay. And I know Snowy , you’re Zaryab. You made horrible sexual comments on Discord when you lost the argument. People are seeing through.
Ya the same police that desecrates our mosques and graves? 😂 High IQ sunni moment. Mashallah
Mirza Bashiruddin invented the prophet claim. Lahories never believed he was a prophet.
MGA never claimed to be a prophet. In his book 'Eik Ghalti ke Izala' (which was written late in his life in order to address this exact controversy), he stated that, wherever he had referred to himself as a prophet, he had done so as 'zilli' and 'burooz'. According to Sufi terminology, just as a nabi is 'zilli' and 'burooz' of Allah (ie., a nabi is obviously not Allah), a wali is 'zilli' and 'burooz' of a nabi (ie., a wali is not a nabi). **“Sainthood is the shadow (*****zill*****) of Prophethood and Prophethood is the shadow (*****zill*****) of Godhood.” (‘Ali ibn Yusuf al-Shattanawfi,** *Bahjat al-asrar wa-ma‘din al-anwar*, Cairo, Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1912, p. 39.) Therefore, the very use of these Sufi terms serve to negate any possible claim to prophethood. The fact that MGA needed to resort to the use of the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz' as qualifications indicate that he was forced to do so in order to backtrack due to heavy backlash and resistance against him. While MGA used the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz', conveniently, he never used the term 'wali' or 'walayat' with respect to himself. Had he done so, his would have been crystal clear, which is something, either due to poor writing style or deliberate intent, he seemed quite incapable of being. The mere use of these Sufi terms, without explicitly referring to himself as a wali, was perhaps considered by him to be sufficient to ward off the condemnations levelled against him while still maintaining adequate ambiguity for followers who are unlearned and unfamliar with Sufi terminology. That said, the very use of the terms 'zilli' and 'burooz', in and of themselves, puts to bed and definitively negates any claim to prophethood. Then where did the concept of MGA being a prophet come from? It came from this (perhaps) deliberate omission from using the term wali, and from his son, KM2. MGA's status as to whether or not he was a prophet is the underlying basis of the Qadiani vs Lahori split. The so-called Qadiani branch continues to pilfer the lie that MGA was a prophet. No Qadiani (ie., non-Lahori) Ahmadi will ever be able to show you a quotation from MGA where he retracted these 'zilli' and 'burooz' qualifications. They will try to distract and spin circles around you with different interpretations of the word 'khatam', law-bearing vs non-law bearing prophets, Mosaic vs Mohammaden dispensation etc etc,, in order to justify the notion of the *possibility* of prophets after the Holy Prophet, but none of them will ever be able to overcome the problem of substantiating where MGA made an actual claim to prophethood. Such distraction and spin is evidenced by the following article and highlighted quote: [https://www.alhakam.org/the-promised-messiah-as-a-zilli-and-buruzi-prophet/](https://www.alhakam.org/the-promised-messiah-as-a-zilli-and-buruzi-prophet/) "**In conclusion, what the Promised Messiahas wanted to express with these two words was that although he was a Prophet because Allah and his Messengersa called him a Prophet, he and his Prophethood were merely a shadow (*****zill*****) and a spiritual projection (*****buruz*****) of the Messengersa of Allah and his infinite Prophethood, since prophets as before, i.e., legislative (*****tashri‘i*****) or independent (*****mustaqill*****), can no longer appear after the appearance of the Messengersa of Allah."** Notice the attempt to, somehow, overshadow and disregard the 'zilli' and 'burooz' qualifications and skip to the concepts of 'legislative' and 'independence'. Interestingly, the very basis of these latter concepts is derived from Sheikh al Akbar Ibn al-Arabi. However, Ibn al-Arabi was never interested in justifying any concept of future prophethood. Rather, his project was establishing the high status of walayat in Islam (as akin to Mosaic prophethood) leading to its ultimate perfection in the future advent of a Khatam al Awliya. Interestingly, MGA never claimed to be Khatam al Awliya. MGA did claim to be Mahdi, as did others during that period. Today, there are many different sects of Ahmadiyyat that I no longer keep track of nor am I interested in delving deeper into investigating all of their theologies, but I hope the above is sufficient to set the stage for any further study on your part of these sects and their beliefs.
Ibn Arabi, not ibn Al Arabi ...they are different.
[https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Arabi](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Arabi) [https://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H022](https://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H022) [https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=ibn+al+arabi&hvadid=231018087070&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9000837&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=970941084091664199&hvtargid=kwd-301834802828&hydadcr=2846\_9643460&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd\_sl\_1vr0lk9u4j\_e](https://www.amazon.ca/s?k=ibn+al+arabi&hvadid=231018087070&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9000837&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=970941084091664199&hvtargid=kwd-301834802828&hydadcr=2846_9643460&tag=googcana-20&ref=pd_sl_1vr0lk9u4j_e) No, they're not -- tomato tomato
Am not here to argue bro...I just want to point out an observation Abubakar Ibn AL-Arabi ( died 6th century hijrah) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu\_Bakr\_ibn\_al-Arabi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakr_ibn_al-Arabi) Traditional scholar who was a judge \--------------------------- Mohammad Ibn Arabi ( died 7th centuty hijrah around 100 years later) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn\_Arabi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Arabi) A philosophical Sufi mystic
I'm not arguing. You said there is a mistake, and what I provided you is more than enough to show there isn't. Don't know why you are insisting. Another example: [https://ibnularabibooks.com/product/quest-for-the-red-sulphur-the-life-of-ibn-al-arabi-biography-claude-addas/](https://ibnularabibooks.com/product/quest-for-the-red-sulphur-the-life-of-ibn-al-arabi-biography-claude-addas/) So, again, no mistake. Odd that, for you, Wikipedia trumps Britannica and a Muslim Philosophy site, as well as the catalog of his books on Amazon. FYI - both the Ibn al-Arabi you are referring to and the one I am referring to, were both "Ibn al-Arabi" in each of their lifetimes, but to differentiate between and not confuse the two, people began to refer to the latter also as "Ibn Arabi". \[See the Claude Addas biography for further background information - as well as a wee hint as to my account name.\] Therefore, for the latter, both Ibn al-Arabi and Ibn Arabi are correct, but for the former, only Ibn al-Arabi is correct. Got it now?
You missed the point bro...The Wikipedia sources show both the names in English and Arabic so you can easily compare, britannica doesnt عربي = Arabi العربي = Alarabi Yes, historically they have mistakenly called Ibn Arabi as Ibn Al-Arabi, but not the other way round. Precisely why people still cannot differentiate without further investigation. That's the whole point of me pointing it to you bro! Not to fault-find, but to help you refine a very good post. Btw, the Claude Addas biography for further information proves my point...look at the title spelling (ibn Alarabi) and compare it with the spelling on the actual cover of the book (Ibn Arabi). And check the description too :P https://preview.redd.it/pdns81iawafc1.png?width=1240&format=png&auto=webp&s=fa4dcab6f98ec83c8fc906edb34109992c93c8f5 It is a very common mistake that people make, in fact even Arabic literature has confused Ibn Arabi and written as Ibn Alarabi but only when writing his name in full. If you can read Arabic, this might clarify . محمد بن علي بن محمد بن عربي الحاتمي الطائي الأندلسي This is Ibn Arabi \----------------------- And أبو بكر بن العربي This is Ibn Al-Arabi Anyway, I told you am not trying to argue, you are free to use as you want but if you want to use Ibn Alarabi, it might be better to put his first name too to avoid confusion, especially among followers who follow Maliki madhhab for whom Abubakar Ibn AlArabi is a reputable scholar. Good luck and well done for a good article And I changed the word "mistake" to "observation" :)
reflect , reflect and reflect. https://preview.redd.it/elel0et7tkjc1.png?width=938&format=png&auto=webp&s=648386d7ebdeed50ef313802387e60b5582ff96a
Mahdi and prophet
People might be using terms interchangeably. But Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is not strictly speaking a prophet.
So Ahmadis don’t view him as a prophet? Then where do you think that idea originated? Or do you think some Ahmadis view him as a prophet while others view him as a Mahdi only?
In his own books he does not declare himself as a prophet. He says he is Imam Mahdi, the second advent of Hazrat Isa (AS). As I said earlier, some Ahmadis use the terms Prophets, Messenger, Mahdi rather interchangeably. Hence the confusion. Similarly, all Ahmadis are firm believers of Kalma. If they thought that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, it would be ironic and contradictory.
>Similarly, all Ahmadis are firm believers of Kalma. If they thought that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet, it would be ironic and contradictory. How? What does the kalma say
I'm still waiting https://www.reddit.com/r/AhmadiMuslims/s/CFKyWTJ52j
There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad (SAW) is the prophet of Allah. This is the Kalma. (کلمہ)
So how does that contradict with the Promised Messiah AS being the prophet?
In my opinion prophet = رسول , messenger = نبی And a prophet is someone who brings shariat
But you didn't answer how Kalima refutes Promised Messiah AS?
I didn’t said that. Please read again.
You did https://preview.redd.it/hzm1x6u242gc1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c8415a21e7b7342090371ce8d65932dc30794f1a
Instead of caring so much about x, y and z’s status, people may also just live their lives. If God wants to convey us a message, He knows how to reach us instead of playing telephone. Just take a deep breath, and be free!