Indos
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2013
- Messages
- 23,466
- Reaction score
- 24
- Country
- Location
That hadith is talking about revivors, not Rasul. I do not want to discuss religion, just a historic aspect of Sufism. But what you said is the basic idea behind Ahmadies. it is the fundamental belief of Muslims that Prophet Muhammad is the last Nabi, which means he is the Last Rasul. Because a Nabi is a Rasul. There is no Rasul after him.
Well brother.....In my definition the name of Nabi means " Rasul that brings shariah law", and Rasul in general is a messenger who is send by ALLAH to do what He said (I believe the messenger words in English has quite different meaning in Arabic if it is converted into Verb that makes my definition is more fit). So in short, all Nabi is Rasul, but not all Rasul is Nabi.
As we know another possibility of next Nabi arrival has been eliminated by surah Al-Maidah, so in my definition, Ahmadiyah people cannot win their argument either even though Rasul is still coming on after Prophet Muhamad passed away ( to revive Islam as we saw many of them have already came). I think we are arguing some thing that is still disputable brother, and Ahmadiyah is something that has so weak religious and rational backing.
Furthermore, I don't buy your opinion that Ibnu Taymiyah is not a Sunni so he cannot be compared with Al-Ghazali. In my view, as long as his teaching fits with Quran and Hadist, I dont have any reason not to put him here brother.... But as I mentioned earlier...I am the one who is in the middle path between those two since Ibnu Taymiyah is quite conservative person and, in some part, I think Al-Ghazali is too excessive either in his teaching regarding some issue. My recommended Sufi is some ones that I will bring into this thread (I have brought At-Tirmidzi and Ibnu Qayim, there will be more later, inshaALLAH)
Last edited: