بسم الله الرحمـن الرحيم
Did Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad Claim to be a Prophet?
In the first part of this
series we examined a quote from the book Haqiqat-ul-Wahi of Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad that was published in May 1907, in which he declared John Alexander Dowie
a false prophet on the basis that Prophethood terminated after our beloved
Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
However, some may object that if one continues to read what Ghulam Ahmad wrote
after that it becomes apparent that he too claimed Prophethood. Therefore, in
this entry I shall examine what proceeds the statement concerning Dowie, which
will necessarily begin a discussion concerning the idea of metaphorical
prophethood. Firstly, Ghulam Ahmad says:
“There is no Book after the
Furqan [Quran], which is superior to all of the previous Scriptures, and
neither any Shari’ah [divine law] after the Shari’ah of Muhammad. However, I
have been named a Prophet upon the tongue of the Best of Creation
[Muhammad ﷺ]. But
this is a matter of Zill [reflection] from perfect obedience to him,
otherwise I do not see any good in my own self. Everything I have acquired is
from this Holy Soul [Muhammad ﷺ]. Nothing is intended by my prophethood in the sight of Allah
except the frequency of divine conversation and communication. May the curse of
Allah be upon whomsoever intends anything beyond that, or who thinks anything
of himself, or frees his neck from subordination to his [Muhammad’s ﷺ] Prophethood. Our Apostle is Khaatam-an-Nabiyyeen and upon
him the the chain of Apostles ceased. Therefore, no one has the right to claim
prophethood after our Apostle al-Mustafa in an independent sense. Nothing else
remains after him except the frequency of divine conversation, and even that is
upon the condition of Ittibaa [subordination to Prophet Muhammad ﷺ], not without subordination to the Best of Creation. And by
Allah! I have not attained this station except through the light of subordination
to the Mustafawi rays.
وسُمِّيتُ نبيّا من اللّه على
طريق المجاز لا على وجه الحقيقة
اور اللہ کی طرف سے مجھے حقیقی طور پر نہیں بلکہ مجازی
طور پر نبی کا نام دیا گیا ہے۔
And I have been named as a
Prophet by Allah in a metaphorical sense, not in the literal sense.”
Reference: Damimah
Haqiqat-ul-Wahi pp.64-65; al-Istiftaa pp.154-155
The reader should not be
confused over a discussion of literal versus metaphorical. It is well known in
Islamic tradition that the Prophet’s ﷺ paternal uncle, sayyidina HamzahRA, is referred to,
upon the tongue of the Prophet ﷺ himself, as
أَسَدُ اللَّهِ ، وَأَسَدُ رَسُولِهِ
the Lion of God and the Lion of
His Apostle. Likewise, ‘Lion of God’ is the well-known epithet of sayyidina Ali
b. Abi TalibRA, while the Prophet’s devoted general, sayyidina
Khalid b. WalidRA was given the name ‘Sword of God’. Obviously these
are all metaphorical and not meant in a literal sense. Neither was sayyidina
Amir HamzahRA a beast of prey that moved on all fours, nor Khalid b.
WalidRA a sharp piece of steel. Rather, they were all human beings
who were given such names figuratively due to resemblance of certain qualities.
For example, being called a ‘Lion’ means a person is courageous and ferocious,
etc., as these are the well-known attributes of the lion. Hence, Ghulam Ahmad
has clarified that he was given the name of Nabi or ‘Prophet’ in a purely
figurative sense, due to being honored with frequency of divine communication. He
absolutely made no claim to Prophethood in a real or literal sense, such a
claim being indisputably kufr immediately resulting in the claimant
being expelled from the circle of Islam. To be continued, in sha Allah.
No comments:
Post a Comment