What the heck are you talking about are you smoking some cheap drugs your Bs shameless Hindutva mentality is revealed in your fucking post Pakistan is a gazillion times better than Endia.
A brilliant half an hour long interview summing up India.
- Thread starter cocomo
- Start date
IsThisNameAvailable
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2020
- Messages
- 651
- Reaction score
- -7
- Country
- Location
It is hilarious when the convertees boast about the freedom they provide to the originals after making them near extinct. Someone must be turning in his grave!
peagle
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2019
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
You really are an idiot, just like the other guy,
I hope the likes of you drown in your filth, good riddance.
Cliftonite
BANNED
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
- Messages
- 2,746
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Awww. I love you too.
MuhammedAli
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2015
- Messages
- 318
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
16.0 - Types Of Debaters/Discussers And Reason For Certain Behaviour:
Experience gained after debating/discussing literally hundereds of times on internet taught me there are three types of debaters/discussers: (i) Responds entire content of opposing party, answers questions asked, ask questions, presents his own understanding and its evidence, remains upon subject of discussion. (ii) Responds to parts not central to subject of discussion, cherry picks and avoids responding/refuting parts which are bitter to touch, jumps from one subject to another. (iii) Scheming and tactical, and non-stop questioner – every answer/clarification gives him ammo to ask more questions. (iv) Brother Cherub786 is the last type of debaters/discussers. Brother Cherub786 is asking these questions with Qadiyani understandings in his mind, conviction in his heart, and belief that nothing in Quran/Hadith will refute Qadiyanism. He is not asking questions to gain knowledge but to expose errors of Islamic belief and hoping that while answering these questions I will come to recognize, what he percieves to be, contradictions betweens orthodox Islam’s teaching and Quran/Ahadith. And when his percieved contradiction/error becomes obvious in my response then brother Cherub786 will step in and say this is how this contradiction is resolved. Or this is the proof for what I believe. And this resolution happens to be belief of Mirza and Qadiyanis therefore Qadiyanism is right and true Islam, and your Sunnism is wrong. Readers should note he did exactly this. (v) Please bear in mind the information in this section because it explains what I wrote in following section.
16.1 – Context Revealing Why Cherub786 Asked Fired Back With More Questions:
While I was writing response to Qadiyani’s following questions: “If Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is chronologically the last Prophet: (i) Then how is it that the Messiah son of Maryam who is a Prophet of God, will descend in the latter days? (ii) How do you resolve this puzzle?” Sections 8.0 to 14.1 are in response to these two qestions. I was saying that while I was writing answer, Cherub786, reposted these two questions to bring them to light. Or maybe he thought I was ducking these two questions because his deduction was return of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) establishes Khatam al-Nabiyeen does not mean last/end of Prophets. Whatever his intention/motive was these questions were posted once again. To begin a discussion by asking few questions and then developing discussion/debate based on the answers is absolutely fine. But brother Cherub786 made a habbit of asking questions – twice in a row. Thus it became apparent brother will not acknowledge fault, mistake, or even respond to criticism levelled against Qadiyanism so I wrote: “I am working on it. It is not being written on urgent basis because you're not answering questions asked, or even acknowleging you were wrong. Instead you just proceeded toward a new direction. And typically that is a sign person will not respond to anything and will continue to ask questions till cows fly. I will respond to your last post (i.e. sections 8.0 to 14.1). After that if you do not respond to what Iwrote in my previous post as it deserves to be responded to, then I will just leave you to it.” And in response to my post brother Cherub786 wrote: “I shall respond to some of your points, but I advise you not to write such long winded answers. Let's have a dialogue.” And low and behold brother Cherub786 came back with more questions. His ‘response’ will be quoted in its entirity in following section.
16.2 – Qadiyani Brother’s, Cherub786, Response To Islamic Arguments:
"Wahi came to Prophets via Gibraeel (alayhis salam) n Mirza said angel Teechi Teechi comes to him delivering reports. Proof that he was lieing."
Is Archangel Gabriel (alayhis salam) he Angel of Revelation exclusively, or is it that other Angels can also bring revelation from Allah (jallala jalahu)? [Cherub786.]
"al-Maseeh Isa Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam) was sent to Bani Israeel …"
If Masih Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam) was sent to Israel how will he be sent for this Ummah in the latter days? [Cherub786.]
"Yet Wahis gate has been closed and no prophet will recieve Wahi after last final prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)."
What is the proof that the gate of Wahi has been closed? Is there any Ayah in the Quran or a Hadith to that effect? [Cherub786.]
"In Hadith Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) also says Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will perform Salah behind Imam Mahdi …"
Please quote this Hadith will full citation. [Cherub786.]
"If that is the case then in the six hundered years between Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there was no Nabi/Rasool. During that period did the Nabuwah become curse?"
(a) First let me prove that Nubuwwah is a blessing from the Quran itself: “And when Moses said to his people, ‘O my people, call to mind Allah’s favor upon you when He appointed Prophets among you.” (Surah 5:20) So the Quran describes the appointing of Prophets among Israel as a Ni'mah. (b) The period between the Messiah and Prophet Muhammad (upon him be peace and blessings) is known as the Fatrah. Although there is a Hadith which says, "there was no prophet between me and him" according to Surat YaSin (36:13-14) there were three Messengers of Allah sent to a town (Antioch). According to majority of the exegetes they were Messengers who came after the Messiah, being from his Ummah, or from his disciples. That should be sufficient for now. [Cherub786.]
16.3 – And Some After Thoughts About Why I Decided To Respond:
Initially I had absolutely no plans to respond to our Qadiyani brother Cherub786. But all changed when I read the last part of his response – where he says Messengers were sent to Antioch. And then I thought, if I am to respond why not just to his entire post? Are you lazy when it comes to writing? No! You don’t have time? Plenty of time! And I had come to conclusion I have excuse so I decided I will respond comprehensively and refute all avenues of Qadiyani argument. And following is the story of how it all came to be.
17.0 - Angel Of Wahi/Revelation Only Jibraeel (alayhis salam):
I had written Mirza claims angel Teechi Teechi delivered Wahi to him. Yet Wahi was sent to Prophets via angel Jibraeel (alayhis salam) therefore he is a liar. In response to which Qadiyani brother Cherub786 asked the following question: “Is archangel Gabriel the angel of revelation exclusively, or is it that other angels can also bring revelation from Allah?” This certainly was a response but not justification or proof.
17.1 - Burden Of Evidence Is Upon Qadiyanis, And No Angel Came To Mirza:
(i) What you really need to do is to prove there is an angel called Teechi Teechi and that he delivered Wahi to Mirza. Mirza made this claim and you believe it. Now it is Mirza’s and your responsibility to prove it. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “’… the Messenger of Allah said: Were people to be given everything that they claimed, men would (unjustly) claim the wealth and lives of (other) people. But, the onus of proof is upon the claimant, and the taking of an oath is upon him who denies.” [Ref: Forty Ahadith – Nawavi, Hadith 33] (ii) I should point out there is not even chance of a Prophet after Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “... And indeed there shall be thirty imposters in my Ummah,each of them claiming that he is a Prophet. And I am the last of the Prophets, there is no Prophet after me.’" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2219, here.] Nor was/is there any possibility of any receiving revelation because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “… People were (sometimes) judged by the revealing of a divine inspiration during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle but now there is no longer any more (new revelation). Now we judge you by the deeds you practice publicly, so we will ...” [Ref: Bukhari, B48, H809, here.] al-Hasil there can be no Prophet after Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor there any chance of a Prophet receiving revelation from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this proves Allah (subnanahu wa ta’ala) did not send Wahi to Mirza via an angel called Teechi Teechi.
17.2 – By Allah There Is No Doubt Mirza Received Revelation:
Aren’t you being controversial with that heading Mr Ali? Deobandi hold your killing you is Halal for me. Smile. (iii) I am not contesting Mirza receiving revelation. I actually accept and firmly and genuinely believe he received Wahi. But I do not believe he received Wahi from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor I believe his Wahi came through an angel. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Shayateen inspire/reveal to their friends to dispute with Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Muslims: “And certainly, the Satans do inspire (i.e. لَيُوحُونَ) their friends to dispute with you, and if you obey them then you would indeed be polytheists.” [Ref: 6:121] This indicates Shayateen send their own Wahi to their own friends to cause rift and sow chaos amongst Muslims. Another verse of Quran explains these friends of Shayatin are people and Jinn; each doing the bidding of their Shayatin masters: “And so We have appointed for every Prophet enemies - Satans among mankind, and Jinn, inspiring (i.e. يُوحِي) one another with adorned speech as a delusion (or by way of deception).” [Ref: 6:112] There is no doubt in my mind Mirza was receiving Wahi some of his close friends as well as Shayatin/Jinn. It is likely a Shaytan introduced himself to Mirza as angel Teechi Teechi. This Jinn and others massaged his ego enough for him to believe he is combination of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah). And revealed to him misguidance as Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Wahi which compelled Mirza to alter religion of Islam. And he tried make Islam compatible with his Satanic Jinn’s Wahi. Sending of Prophets has ceased and Wahi being sent to Prophets has ceased: “… People were (sometimes) judged by the revealing of a divine inspiration during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle but now there is no longer any more (new revelation). Now we judge you by the deeds you practice publicly, so we will ...” [Ref: Bukhari, B48, H809, here.] Therefore Teechi Techi and others could have been names of Jinns who revealed misguidance as Wahi of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but definitely not angel.
18.0 - Descension Of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) Will Be In Which Capacity:
In my earlier response I stated Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) was sent as a Prophet to Bani Israeel. Mirza claimed to be second coming of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and a Prophet of entire mankind. Which establishes Mirza’s claim of Prophet-hood is incompatible with reality of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam).
Instead of refuting explaining away my evidence in support of my position, or refuting Islamic understand through contradictory evidences Qadiyani brother asked: “If Masih Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam) was sent to Israel how will he be sent for this Ummah in the latter days?” This is hardly a response which brother Cherub786 said will follow but I respond to it.
18.1 - Prophet Isa (alayhis salam), He Was Sent To Bani Israeel:
(i) Our Qadiyani brother like all Qadiyanis believes and agrees with, Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) being sent to Bani Israeel. I don’t know the technical word for this type of, if, but it often used to bring contradictory evidence to light. There is no, if, in regards to Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) being sent to Bani Israeel. He indeed was sent to Bani Israeel as following evidence prove: “And He will teach him the Book and Al-Hikmah (and) the Taurat and the Injeel. And will make him a Messenger to the Children of Israel (saying): ‘I have come to you with …” [Ref: 3:48/49] “And (remember) when Isa, son of Maryam said: ‘O Children of Israel! I am the Messenger of Allah unto you, confirming the Taurat before me, and giving glad tidings of a ...’" [Ref:66:6]
18.2 – Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) an Ummati And A Imam:
(ii) In which capacity will Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) return? This answer has been comprehensively responded to in my second rebuttle which starts from section 8.0 and ends at 14.1. Instead of a lengthy response I will quote Hadith: “It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah observed: What would you do when the son of Mary would descend amongst you and would lead you as one amongst you? Ibn Abi Dhi'b on the authority of Abu Huraira narrated: Your leader amongst you. Ibn Abi Dhi'b said: Do you know what the words: "He would lead as one amongst you" mean? I said: Explain these to me. He said: He would lead you according to the Book of your Lord and the Sunnah of your Apostle.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H292, here.] Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) would lead us as a Ummati and like an Ummati would have led us - meaning a Ummati would lead us upon teaching of Quran/Sunnah. And as an Ummati he would do all as he could to make Islam superior over all ideologies and religions: "It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikoon hate it." [Ref: 9:33] And to make this happen it is recorded Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will fight for cause of Islam: “… looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B38, H4310, here.] And this cause is to fight for Quran/Sunnah until both have been established as superior over all religions and ideologies.
18.3 – Mirza Goes Against Quran And Prophetic Sunnah:
Hadith makes if clear Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) would lead Ummah following and leading according to teaching of Quran/Sunnah. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani completely did the opposite of what is stated in the Hadith. Instead of ruling/judging and bringing people to Quran/Sunnah Mirza climbed the closed gate of prophet-hood and said Wahi comes to him. He says Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has made his teachings/Wahi the ship of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) – meaning anywho excepts it will be saved and anywho rejects it will be in hell-fire. He also said explicitly that Wahi sent to him also renew crucial parts of Shariah of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). For referrence see, Arbain, Roohani Khazain, Vol17, P435/436, here, Urdu. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani not only contradicted Islamic teaching he was also smart enough to go against his own teachings but that is another article. Instead of calling people to Quran/Sunnah he invited people to his Satanic Wahi proving he was a major Liar and minor-Dajjal.
19.0 – Qadiyani Said Quote Me Evidence Wahi To Prophets Has Ended:
In my earlier response [section 1.11] it was said Mirza claimed to receive Wahi yet gate of Wahi has been closed. And no Prophet after Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will receive Wahi. Reacting to that comment brother Cherub786 enquires: “What is the proof that the gate of Wahi has been closed? Is there any Ayah in the Quran or a Hadith to that effect?” Originally evidence was not offered that is why brother Cherub786 as demanded it. I assumed it would be known him. While writing my third rebuttle I have completely over hauled the first two rebuttles and inserted evidences where I believed it was important to do so. Anyhow once again this is not really a response just continuation of un-ending questions.
19.1 – Evidence Wahi To Prophets Has Ended And No Prophet After Last Prophet:
Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “… the Messenger of Allah said: ‘The Hour shall not ... And indeed there shall be thirty imposters in my Ummah,each of them claiming that he is a Prophet. And I am the last of the Prophets, there is no Prophet after me.’" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2219, here.] “… The Prophet said: ‘The Israelis used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Caliphs who will increase in number.’ The people asked: ‘O Allah's Messenger! What do you order us (to do)?’ He said: ‘Obey the one who will be given the pledge of allegiance first. Fulfil ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H661, here.] In another Hadith it is recorded he said: “Abu Hurairh reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The similitude of mine and that of the Apostles before me is that of a person who built a house quite imposing and beautiful, but for one brick in one of its corners.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ended it by saying: “People would go round it, appreciating the building, but saying: Why has the brick not been fixed here? He said: I am that brick and I am the last of the prophets.” [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5675, here.] This proves there is no Prophet after last Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the Wahi that came to Prophets has therefore ceased. And following Ahadith explicitly state and prove after his departure from earthly life Wahi received by Prophets has ceased: “… (this worldly life). She said: I weep not because I am ignorant of the fact that what is in store for Allah's Messenger (in the next world) is better than (this world), but I weep because the revelation which came from the Heaven has ceased to come. This moved both of them to tears and they began to weep along with her.” [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6009, here.] “… People were (sometimes) judged by the revealing of a divine inspiration during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle but now there is no longer any more (new revelation). Now we judge you by the deeds you practice publicly, so we will trust and favor the one who does good deeds in front of us, and we will not call him to account about what he is really doing in secret, for Allah will judge him for that; ...” [Ref: Bukhari, B48, H809, here.] Only thirty Liars and minor-Dajjals will claim prophet-hood: “Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: Last Hour would not come until there would arise about thirty impostors, liars, and each one of them would claim that he is a messenger of Allah.” [Ref: Muslim, B54, H108, here.] “Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said: ‘The Hour will not be established till there is a war between two groups among whom there will be a great number of casualties, though the claims (or religion) of both of them will be one and the same. And the Hour will not be established till there appear about thirty liars, all of whom will be claiming to be the messengers of Allah.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H806, here.] Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani was none other then a Liar and a minor-Dajjal.
20.0 - Imam al-Mahdi Leading Salah And Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) Following:
In order to prove Mirza cannot be Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) and Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) individually or two combined in one; I had said Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will perform Salah behind Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) according to Hadith. Qadiyani responded by asking for referrence: “Please quote this Hadith will full citation.” Qadiyani has realized the implications that if Islamic position is supported as presented by me then Mirza cannot be combined two in one. He asked for evidence which establishes both are two different personalities. First I will address foundation of Qadiyani misguidance. And then in, 20.4, I will provide demanded evidence.
20.1 - Mirza Taught Prophet Isa And Imam Mahdi Are One And The Same:
Qadiyanis believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) will be one and the same personality. You have to note Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani was foundation of this belief. He came up with this belief on account of a DAIF (i.e. weak) Hadith recorded in Sunan Ibn Majah. It states the only Imam al-Mahdi is Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “… Messenger of Allah said: ‘Adhering to religion will only become harder and worldly affairs will only become more difficult, and people will only become more stingy, and the Hour will only come upon the worst of people, and the only Mahdi is Isa Ibn Maryam.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4039, here.] That last part of Hadith does not fit into the context of narration. The addition seems random and it seems someone inserted this into text of Hadith. Imam Zahbi (rahimullah) in his Mizan ul-Itidaal said this report is rejected/Munkar.
20.2 - Reconciliation Between Seemingly Contradictory Ahadith Is Best Policy:
This Hadith is against other authentic Ahadith. There is are two routes to take, one to completely abandon the Hadith on two accounts, it is Daif, and because it contradicts numerous Sahih/Hassan Ahadith. Or to reconcile this Hadith with others so no conflict remains. I have always preferred reconciliation. Practice of reconcliation between Ahadith is common and best demonstration of it is in Ahadith of innovation. There is obvious contradictions which are reconciled one way or another. Take for example, every innovation is misguidance which takes to hell-fire. Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are innovations in linguistic sense but are they misguidance? Wait before you give verdict. Another Hadith states whoever introduces a good Sunan in Islam for him and one who follows it will have equal reward. So will Imam Bukhari, and Imam Muslim have reward as well as those who followed their footsteps and benefited from these books of Ahadith? Because both sets of Ahadith are equally valid we have to explain both sides so there remains no contradiction between them. Point being made is reconciliation is not a new thing but a standard practice in scholarship of Hadith. So reconciling the Hadith with more authentic Ahadith is absolutely fine. Clearly a Da’if Hadith cannot over-rule numerous Sahih and Hassan Ahadith. In the best case scenario Hadith of, only al-Mahdi is Prophet Isa (alayhis salam), has to be reconciled with authentic Ahadith, in the worst case scenario because it is Da’if/weak we reject it completely. In both cases the Hadith cannot over-rule literal reading of authentic Hadith.
20.3 - Reconciling Weak Hadith With Numerous Authentic Hadith Is The Way:
Methodology of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is to bring reconciliation between Ahadith which seemingly are contradictory. Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah), Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Imam Qurtubi (rahimullah), and others have said that the Hadith means, and the only perfect, the only true, the only Masoom i.e. without-sin al-Madhi is Prophet Isa Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam). According to this interpretation Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is said to be al-Madhi in his own right. Word Mahdi is not in technical usage but in linguistic usage. In other words it should be translated as, and the only rightly-guided one is [Prophet] Isa Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam). The phrase in this light means, and the only perfect and sinless rightly-guided one is Isa Ibn Maryam (alayhis salam). In other words Hadith is saying Imam al-Madhi (rahimullah) man from progeny of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will not be more pious, righteous, and without fault and sin compared to Prophet Isa (alayhis salam). And following Hadith is proof that Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) will be prepared for his responsibility over a night: “It was narrated from Ali that the Messenger of Allah said: ‘Mahdi is one of us, the people of the Household. Allah will rectify him in a single night.’" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4085, here.] This Hadith hints that life of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) before/after his preparation may not be 100% free of sins/faults because he is an Ummati and not a Prophet. And only Prophets are Masoom (i.e. sinless, fault-less).
20.4 - Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) Perform’s Salah Behind Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah):
One Hadith states Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will lead Salah and the other says Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) will lead the Salah: “He said: 'On that day they will be few, and most of them will be in Baitul-Maqdis (Jerusalem), and their leader will be a righteous man. When their leader has stepped forward to lead them in Subh/Fajr prayer, 'Isa bin Maryam will come down to them. Their leader will step backwards so that Isa can come forward and lead the people in prayer, but Isa will place his hand between his shoulders and say to him: ‘Go forward and pray, for the Iqamah was given for you.’ Then their leader will lead them in prayer. When he has finished, Isa will say: ‘Open the gate.’ So they will ...” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4077, here.] Natural conclusion is that Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will perform Salah under leadership of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah). And there is no reason to assume Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) would not perform Salah. In fact Hadith establishes he would be a Ummati and lead the Muslims in accordance with Quran and Sunnah: “It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah observed: What would you do when the son of Mary would descend amongst you and would lead you as one amongst you? Ibn Abi Dhi'b on the authority of Abu Huraira narrated: Your leader amongst you. Ibn Abi Dhi'b said: Do you know what the words:" He would lead as one amongst you" mean? I said: Explain these to me. He said: He would lead you according to the Book of your Lord and the Sunnah of your Apostle.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H292, here.] And without doubt Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will himself also be embodiment of Quran and Sunnah therefore performing Salah under leadership of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) does not go against what is known from Hadith. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salah behind companions on few ocasions and Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) would not be make exception to this Sunnah.
21.0 - Prophets Between Prophet Isa And Muhammad - Qadiyani Contradicts Hadith:
In the initial questioning brother Cherub786 asked if prophet-hood was a curse or blessing. And went on to say if it was a blessing then why has it ceased: “(i) Is Prophet-hood (Nubuwwah) a blessing or curse? (ii) If it is a blessing why has it ceased.?” Built-in implication is prophet-hood is a blessing and it has not ceased therefore if it has ceased then it is curse. A part of my response contained following: “I want to ask you something: (i) Are you saying stop of Nabuwah is a curse? (ii) If that is the case then in the six hundered years between Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there was no Nabi/Rasool. During that period did Nabuwah become curse? (iii) What is your basis for your belief/understanding: (a) Stop of Nabuwah temporarily would not amounts to Nabuwah being curse/barbarity/injustice? (b) Stop of Nabuwah permanently would a amount to Nabuwah; being curse/barbarity/injustice? Bring forward your proof if you're truthful.” He should not be responding to section two but sections threeA and threeB because Qadiyani notion is temporary stoppage does not amount to but permanent end of Prophets is a curse and injustice. In my extensive response it was explained end of prophet-hood itself is a mercy/favour/blessing of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Instead brother responded saying three Prophets came after Prophet Isa (alayhis salam). Yeah! Just three for entire six hundred years and that proved prophet-hood is not curse. All ‘three’ came togather and supposing they lived 100 years. Therefore 500 years gap was not curse and injustice even though it should be in Qadiyani brother’s logic. I am getting ahead of myself here. Our Qadiyani brother is selectively responding to underlined part: (a) “First let me prove that Nubuwwah is a blessing from the Quran itself: “And when Moses said to his people, ‘O my people, call to mind Allah’s favor upon you when He appointed Prophets among you.” (Surah 5:20) So the Quran describes the appointing of Prophets among Israel as a Ni'mah. (b) The period between the Messiah and Prophet Muhammad (upon him be peace and blessings) is known as the Fatrah. Although there is a Hadith which says, "there was no prophet between me and him" according to Surat YaSin (36:13-14) there were three Messengers of Allah sent to a town (Antioch). According to majority of the exegetes they were Messengers who came after the Messiah, being from his Ummah, or from his disciples. That should be sufficient for now.”
21.1 - Prophet-Hood A Blessing/Favour Upon Bani Israeel And Mankind:
The very first question Qadiyani brother Cherub786 asked: “Is prophet-hood (Nubuwwah) a blessing or curse? If it is a blessing why has it ceased?” In other words he asked me if prophet-hood was a barakah or a curse. I responded saying: “Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) and all Prophets was/is Rahma/mercy and not a curse.” Prophet-Hood is a blessing, mercy, favour and anything else it can be but not curse. There was no need nor demand from me to establish it is a blessing but our Qadiyani brother felt urge to prove it is a blessing by proving it is a Niamat: “First let me prove that Nubuwwah is a blessing from the Quran itself: “And when Moses said to his people, ‘O my people, call to mind Allah’s favor upon you when He appointed Prophets among you.” (Surah 5:20) So the Quran describes the appointing of Prophets among Israel as a Ni'mah.” In other words he didn’t prove his position from Quran. He merely established it from deduction – i.e. it is Niamat therefore a blessing. I am just penny pinching. In reality there was no need to prove it directly or indirectly through deduction because everything good from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is a favour, mercy, blessings even in absence of clear/emphatic proof.
21.2 - Asnwered, Is Prophet-Hood Curse, But Still Remains UnAnswered:
Qadiyanis priestly class is promoting notion end of prophet-hood makes prophet-hood a curse. And I refuted and demanded evidence for this notion. And my refutation consisted following question: "If that is the case then in the six hundered years between Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there was no Nabi/Rasool. During that period did the Nabuwah become curse?" Brother Cherub786 your response in a nut-shell is: Three Messengers were sent after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “The period between the Messiah and Prophet Muhammad (upon him be peace and blessings) is known as the Fatrah. Although there is a Hadith which says, "there was no prophet between me and him" according to Surat YaSin (36:13-14) there were three Messengers of Allah sent to a town (Antioch). According to majority of the exegetes they were Messengers who came after the Messiah, being from his Ummah, or from his disciples. That should be sufficient for now.” If my common sense, logic, and intellect is still intact. You in a round about way you said, it is not curse because Messengers were sent to city of Antioch. There are three issues that need responding to: (i) Temporary or permanent stoppage of Prophets curse or not? (ii) What do these verses mean? (iii) Were there any Prophets/Messengers after ascension of Prophet Is (alayhis salam) and before anouncement of Prophets Muhammad’s prophet-hood?
21.3 - Many Faces Of Temporary Stoppage Of Prophet-Hood Is Curse Or Not:
Is stoppage of prophet-hood curse? (i) Unfortunately you’re not really thinking things through. You said three Messengers were sent to city of Antioch. I say: These verses say three Messengers were sent to Antakya in one go. If these Messengers were sent one hundred years after, or two, or three, or four, or five hundred years after, or any figure in between this period. Surely these Messengers did not live for entire six hundred years. From after death of these three Messengers to the proclaimation of Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) prophet-hood was Nabuwah a curse? With slight variation in wording the question still stands and stands unanswered. I also recall asking for evidence on which you Qadiyanis have based the philosophy of prophet-hood becoming curse if prophet-hood comes to an end. Which you so conviniently ignored. I know why you ignored because there is none, zilch, zero number of evidences proving this halluciation of Qadiyanism. (ii) Taking my question line a step further. You believe Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be a Prophet and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani to be a Prophet. Agree or no? Mirza claimed prophet-hood roughly hundred-forty to hundred-fifty years ago. Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to Mirz Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani suppose the gap is of one thousand fifty years. Question to you is: Was prophet-hood curse during this period? (iii) Accept the reality and acknowledge that stoppage of prophet-hood is not curse. And I myself, and the Qadiyani priests are wrong to hold to view that end of prophet-hood is a curse. Three Messengers were sent to Antioch; what about the rest of mankind? Does prophet-hood become a curse for Chinese, Indians, Europeans, Aztecs because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sent no Prophets/Messengers to them when residents of Antioch were denying their Messengers? Who is the Prophet at this moment, and where is he, and to whom he was sent? If there is none, and you will agree there is none then is prophet-hood a curse? Please wake up for your own sake. Permanent or temporary end of prophet-hood does not mean prophet-hood turns into a curse, injustice, barbarity, or whatever else you think it is. You cannot escape the damning implications of my questions on your belief. If we believe Qadiyani hallucinations then prophet-hood was curse from day one to present because it being favour/Niamat for Bani Israeel does not mean it was also so for people of subcontinent, Chinese, Aztecs etc. Niamat for one nation and curse for other mankind? Stop before it is too late and return to Islam.
21.4 - No Prophet After Prophet Isa And Before Prophet Muhammad:
Hadith records period of gap between Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was around of six hundred years: "Narrated Salman: The interval between Jesus and Muhammad was six hundred years." [Ref: Bukhari, B58, H284, here.] Ahadith establish there is no Prophet between Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “… ‘I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H651, here.] “… I am most akin to the son of Mary among the whole of mankind and the Prophets are of different mothers, but of one religion, and no Prophet was raised between me and him.” [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5834, here.] “… There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus. He will descent (to the earth). When you ...” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B38, H4310, here.] There are more Ahadith but I just cherry picked one from each collection. This Hadith has reached degree of Tawatur and is deemed Mutawatur – which is degree above Sahih/authentic. So you cannot question and challenge it without sounding illiterate.
21.5 - Some Important Principles To Adhere By:
Please bear in mind following. When authentic Ahadith reveal something and a commentator says x, y, z about verse of Quran which you think goes against Hadith. Then you misunderstood Quranic verse, or you misunderstood Hadith, or you didn’t understand commentator what wrote. In this case you didn’t understand verse and didn’t understand the commentators. Another thing, when a Hadith is authentic, and a commentator says something which you think goes against the Hadith. You leave the commentator and not the Hadith. Why? Because guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is better then Mufassirs understanding of a verse. There is no contradiction between what Quran teaches and what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught. Therefore fault the Mufassir and even better blame your own third class intellect. I always do. Make Dua for guidance and try again.
21.6 - Chapter YaSin (36) Verses 13/14 Three Messengers Sent To Antakya:
(i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And present to them an example: the people of the city, when the messengers came to it - When We sent to them two but they denied them, so We strengthened them with a third, and they said: ‘Indeed, we are messengers to you.’" [Ref: 36:13/14] There are two opinions about these verses: (a) The Messengers mentioned were indeed Prophets. And town Antakya is not Antioch but a town whose where abouts is not known. This is the strongest and natural understanding of these verses. (b) These were Ummatis of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam). And they were sent by Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) sent as his messengers to guide the Jews of Antioch. This is a weak interpretation. (ii) Despite difference of opinion between commentators of Quran both parties hold to understandings which do not contradict prophetic teaching mentioned in Ahadith because: (a) Those who said they were Prophets/Messengers in technical sense. Out of them not a single commentator said they were Prophets/Messengers sent after Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and sent before Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Every single one of them said they were Prophets/Messengers of ancient times even before the time of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam). (b) Commentators who said these were messengers sent to city of Antioch they made it clear that these messengers were not Messengers in techincal sense but in linguistic sense of emissaries. (iii) In other words none of the commentators negated/contradicted the text of following Hadith: “… There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus. He will descent (to the earth). When you ...” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B38, H4310, here.] Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) mentions position of both parties and explains in detail how/why each party held their position, here.
21.7 – Logical Deduced Meaning Of Chapter YaSin Verses 13/14 :
(i) In this part we suppose the verses were about disciples of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: “And present to them an example: the people of the city, when the messengers came to it - When We sent to them two but they denied them, so We strengthened them with a third, and they said: ‘Indeed, we are messengers to you.’" [Ref: 36:13/14] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said in numerous Ahadith which have reached to level of Tawatur that there was no Nabi before him and after Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “… ‘I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H651, here.] “… I am most akin to the son of Mary among the whole of mankind and the Prophets are of different mothers, but of one religion, and no Prophet was raised between me and him.” [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5834, here.] “… There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus. He will descent (to the earth). When you ...” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B38, H4310, here.] Ulamah have said that every Messenger is a Prophet but not every Prophet is a Messenger because every Messenger is sent with a message, a book to convey to his people. Non-Messenger Prophet recieves Wahi but no message. Such a Prophet is to guard, guide, and explain scripture of another Messenger-Prophet. A example would be Prophet Haroon (alayhis salam). (ii) When we hold to both Quran/Hadith only viable option remaining is these messengers were disciples of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) referrenced as messengers. And whom Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) sent as his own messengers to Jews of Antioch/Antakya. Otherwise if the three mentioned messengers were Messengers in technical sense then they would also have been Prophets. This would go against prophetic teaching that were no prophets between me and him: “… and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H651, here.] Only viable solution is they were sent as messengers by Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) to Jews of Antakya and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) addressed them as messengers linguistically and not technically.
21.8 - Use of Word Rasool/Rusul In Linguistic Sense In Ahadith:
In following Ahadith word messengers has been used for ordinary companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): "The Prophet told his companions of what had happened (to those ten spies) on the same day they were martyred. Some Quraish people, being informed of `Asim bin Thabit's death, sent some messengers to bring a part of his body so that his death might be known for certain, ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H325] "I stayed in (Mecca) till Islam spread in it (i.e. Mecca). Then I left for Taif, and when the people (of Taif) sent their messengers to Allah's Messenger, I was told that the Prophet did not harm the messengers; So I too went out with them till I reached Allah's Messenger. When he saw me, he said, 'Are you Wahshi?' I said, 'Yes.' He said, …" [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H399] This indicates every usage of word messenger/messengers is not always used in technical sense. In this light word Mursaloon/messengers can easily be interpreted in linguistic sense meaning messengers/emissaries.
21.8 – Misleading Claim About What Is Found In Tafasirs Of Quran:
You wrote: “Although there is a Hadith which says, "there was no prophet between me and him" according to Surat YaSin (36:13-14) there were three Messengers of Allah sent to a town (Antioch). According to majority of the exegetes they were Messengers who came after the Messiah, being from his Ummah, or from his disciples. That should be sufficient for now.” I understand that you’re conveying meanings that Ummatis of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) were sent as Prophet-Messengers. In other words you’ve stated that commentators said three disciples, or three Ummatis of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) were sent as Prophet-Messengers after him. You’re completely misrepresenting what the commentators stated. And I don’t think your representation is willful distortion but bought on by incfluence of Qadiyanism and due to lack of proper understanding of Quran/Sunnah. I challenge you to quote me a single Mufassir who said they were sent as Prophets/Messengers after Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and before Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Or said the Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said, there is no Prophet between him and me, are wrong because Prophets/Messengers came between two last Prophets. Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is last Prophet from Bani Israeel and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is last/end of all Prophets – thus the phrase two last Prophets. Anyhow it is absolutely clear Mufassireen who said messengers were sent to Antioch after Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) they clearly indicated use of messengers is in linguistic sense and not technical Shar’ri sense of Messenger. Don’t read what Mufassireen wrote through pinhole of Qadiyanism but through teaching of Quran/Sunnah and through lense of what writers themselves believed then you won’t misunderstand them.
Wama Alayna Ilal Balagh ul-Mubeen.
Muhammed Ali al-Qadiri, al-Razavi.
MuhammedAli
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2015
- Messages
- 318
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
My comprehensive refutation of Qadiyani brother's, Cherub786, beliefs can be read here:
Refuting Qadiyani, Prophet-Hood End Is Curse, And Descension At Odds With Khatamiyyah.
If anyone has any questions in this regard or confusions - you're more then welcome to ask.
Refuting Qadiyani, Prophet-Hood End Is Curse, And Descension At Odds With Khatamiyyah.
If anyone has any questions in this regard or confusions - you're more then welcome to ask.
Sheikh Rauf
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2014
- Messages
- 5,732
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
exactily the way muslim latino black indian feel oppressed in USA.. Pakistan is much better than alot of countries but we are not thankful.No one is "oppressed" in Pakistan
MuhammedAli
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2015
- Messages
- 318
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
Salam. Bro i am waiting for your response, feedback.
Mods/Admins if you have banned him then unban him. Before his discussion with me he was free to spread Qadyanism and misguidance but soon as Noor of Islamic teaching reached him you guys banned him.
Kia aap ko khatra par gaya thah kay musalman ho jahay ga? Fikr nah keren agar ho jata toh aap kay pockets say pound dollar nahin nikaal sakta thah aur nah aap ko apni thaali aur plate say ussay roti salan dena parta. Agar dena bi parta toh mein aap kay badlay deh deta aur deh doon. Ussay Islam ki taraf raghib honay denh. Agar Islam wasteh kuvh nahin kar saktay toh tableegh deen mein tang arrana bi chor denh. Ussay un-ban keren.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Imran Khan vs Pakistan: Protest of Treachery - Casualty Report
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
No Strings Attached: Discover Local Ladies in Your Town- Latest: rana.aamir2990
-
-
Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts
-
Imran Khan vs Pakistan: Protest of Treachery - Casualty Report
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
-
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
