Introduction

 

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Universe. We praise Him, and we seek refuge in Him. We testify that there is nothing in existence worthy of worship except Allah. All good comes from Allah, while all evil comes from our own wrong actions. It is Allah who guides the sincere and Allah who misguides those who reject emān after the Truth has been made clear to them. We send our blessings and salutations upon the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, the one whom Allah chose to send this great blessing of Islam to humanity through. He is the role model of all of the children of Adam, the best of creation and the last of the prophets.

 

In the late 1800s, a man from the city of Qadian, India by the name of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, started a new religious movement that is still followed to this day. Guised as an Islamic reformation movement, this new religion goes against established Islamic beliefs, traditional doctrine, and accepted norms. This new religion is called Ahmadiyya. Ahmad radically reinterpreted verses of the Qur’ān and statements of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم to support his new positions.

This invention of a new sect or movement in Islam is not something new in Islamic history. Dozens of small groups have appeared in the 1,430 years after the prophethood of Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, each claiming to be the true group of Islam. From this perspective, Ahmadiyya is similar to every other group. However, Ahmadiyya qualifies as one of the few heretical groups whose deviant beliefs contrast so strongly with the fundamentals of Islam that anyone who ascribes to its doctrines has expelled himself from the fold of Islam. They are considered disbelievers and have severed all ties of spiritual brotherhood with the greater Muslim community.[1]

Ahmadis, adherents of the Ahmadiyya religion, are taught a series of standard arguments to effectively defend and propagate their deviant theology. The general strategy of Ahmadi missionary work is to convince Muslims that ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام died in India at the age of 120. Anyone who engages in a debate with them will see that they will spearhead the discussion with this topic. From the perspective of the Muslims, this seems like a relatively trivial issue. From the Ahmadi perspective, it paves the way for the Muslims to question how ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام can return, as the hadīth foretells, if he has already died. Ahmadis provide the answer to this question: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a metaphorical second coming of ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام and is a prophet of Allah.

The state of ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام is an important issue in its own right, but it is not the main problem with Ahmadiyya. Indeed, there have been Muslims in the past who have believed that ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام died, albeit not as the Ahmadis do, but they have believed it nonetheless. The purpose of these essays is not to discuss the status of ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام. Instead, the purpose of these series of essays is to refute the standard, oft-repeated Ahmadi arguments supporting the deviant belief that there can be other prophets after Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. This is the sole focus of this work, which the reader will find does not stray from this topic.

There are two intended audiences of this work, the first being the sincere Ahmadis who believe that the Ahmadi religious establishment has sufficient evidence to justify their claim that after Muhammad, صلى الله عليه و سلم there can be other prophets. The essays presented are logical and factual refutations of their deviant beliefs. Second, it is intended for those Muslims who interact with Ahmadis and are overwhelmed by their arguments. It is to serve as a set of tools to dismantle and effectively refute the Ahmadi missionaries who intend to convert Muslims out of Islam and into disbelief.

 

            This work is divided into two sections:

            The first section refutes the Ahmadi arguments in support of their position. The objective is to present their arguments in the best possible manner, then to analyze, critique, and refute their positions using factual evidence and logic. The main battleground issue of this discussion primarily revolves around the meaning of khātam al-nabīyīn and the Ahmadi insistence that this verse of the Qur’ān does not close the doors of prophethood. They have invented three alternate explanations for what khātam al-nabīyīn means: last law-bearing prophet, chief (best) of the prophets, or that future prophets will come bearing the seal of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم. This may pose as a source of confusion to the reader because their position may seem inconsistent. Whichever route they take, the ultimate objective is to prove that prophets can continue to come to this nation, thus validating the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. All of these avenues are covered in this work.

Islam is a simple religion, revealed by Allah for both the scholar and the layman. Throughout the reading of this work, the reader must try to realize the ambiguous, complex, and constructed nature of their arguments. They resort to all lengths to force their beliefs where they do not exist, whereas the Islamic positions are simple, straightforward, and appeal to the heart. In other words, truth is simple and falsehood is complicated.

            Classical scholars rarely commented on the finality of prophethood other than occasional statements without elaboration because it was a non-issue, something understood and taken for granted. Traditionally, literature focused on refuting Ahmadi beliefs by proving the finality of prophethood consisted of long lists of self-explanatory prophetic traditions, which the Ahmadis were able to reinterpret to conform to their beliefs. Therefore, the second section provides new arguments that Ahmadi missionaries may not have encountered and will not be able to respond to, thus silencing them and relegating them to a movement based on emotion and rhetoric (i.e., love for all, hatred for none) over reason.

 

            One of the tactics of Ahmadi leadership is to portray those who refute their beliefs as “mullahs”. After this, they remind their followers of the persecution they face at the hands of people like this in foreign countries, such as Pakistan. This ad hominem tactic is one of dismissal rather than rational confrontation. In anticipation of this stratagem, I openly declare that I emphatically condemn all acts of violence against any religious group, including Ahmadiyya, based purely on the religion they adopt. This work was produced by one individual and written without the aid of any organization or institution, either financially or intellectually. This precludes any attempts by Ahmadi religious leaders to portray the author as a “mullah” with irrational and ignorant views about Islam.

 

Lastly, all Ahmadis, men and women, young and old, are invited to read these essays with an open mind and an open heart. May Allah guide the Ahmadis to Islam.


Allahumma Amīn.

 

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ لاَ تُفْسِدُواْ فِي الأَرْضِ قَالُواْ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُصْلِحُونَ

أَلا إِنَّهُمْ هُمُ الْمُفْسِدُونَ وَلَكِن لاَّ يَشْعُرُونَ

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ آمِنُواْ كَمَا آمَنَ النَّاسُ قَالُواْ أَنُؤْمِنُ كَمَا آمَنَ السُّفَهَاء أَلا إِنَّهُمْ هُمُ السُّفَهَاء وَلَكِن لاَّ يَعْلَمُونَ

 

سورة البقرة

 

When it is said to them, "Do not [create] corruption on the earth", they say, "We are the reformers."

Of assurance, they are the corrupt ones, but they do not realize it.

And when it is said to them, "Believe as the people have believed", they say, "Should we believe as the fools believe?" No! They are the fools, but they do not realize it.

 

- Sūrah Al-Baqarah

 



[1]               I do not say this statement with the least bit of pleasure or satisfaction. It greatly saddens me that though these people are good in character, mild in speech, respectful, polite, and recite the same shahāda and read the same Qur’ān, they still hold such deviant beliefs. However, when considering whether Ahmadis are Muslims from the Islamic legal perspective, one must divorce his emotions from his intellect and analyze their theology independent of the content of their character.