This argument stems from Invitation to Ahmadiyyat by Mirza Bashir-ud-din Mahmud Ahmad in the section titled “Meaning of Khatam al-Nabiyyin.”
Ahmadi Argument:
Below is a statement from A’isha رضي الله عنها in which she clearly draws the distinction between the statement seal of the prophets and no prophets after him.
وأخرج ابن
أبي شيبة عن
عائشة رضي
الله عنها قالت:
قولوا خاتم
النبيين، ولا
تقولوا لا نبي بعده
It is reported by Ibn Abi
Shaybah that A’isha, may
Allah be pleased with her, said, “Say [he is] the seal of the prophets, but do
not say no prophet after him.”
In no ambiguous terms, this shows that even A’isha رضي الله عنها, the most knowledgeable of the wives of the Prophet عليه صلاة الله, knew that his blessed status of being the seal of the prophets does not mean that there will be no prophets after him. Therefore, the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad does not contradict the Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه و سلم status as the seal of the prophets, because there can be others prophets after Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام.
Muslim Response:
The approach to this argument is of two-fold: Its real meaning based on surrounding context and the evident association of khātam al-nabīyīn and lā nabī ba’dahu.
The hadīth
immediately below
The Ahmadis quote the narration that seems to support their beliefs and creates a divide between khātam al-nabīyīn and lā nabī ba’dahu. However, what they conveniently fail to report is the hadīth immediately below[1] the hadīth of A’isha رضي الله عنها in Al-Dūr Al-Manthūr, which explains the narration of Aisha رضي الله عنها. It is as follows:
وأخرج
ابن أبي شيبة
عن الشعبي رضي
الله عنه قال:
قال رجل عند
المغيرة بن
أبي شعبة صلى
الله على محمد
خاتم
الأنبياء لا
نبي بعده فقال
المغيرة: حسبك
إذا قلت خاتم
الأنبياء،
فإنا كنا نحدث
أن عيسى عليه
السلام خارج،
فإن هو خرج
فقد كان قبله
وبعده
Ibn
Abi Shaybah reported that
Al-Sha’abī said, “A man at [the company of] Al-Mughīrah ibn Abī Shu'ubah said, ‘May
Allah bless Muhammad, the seal of the prophets; there is no prophet after him.’
So Al-Mughīrah said, ‘It is enough for you to
say ‘the seal of the prophets’, for we were being told that ‘Esā will be appearing. So, when he appears, he [‘Esā] would be before him and after him’.”
Seal of the prophets and no prophets after him have the same fundamental meaning. However, Al-Mughīrah رضي الله عنه preferred seal of the prophets over no prophets after him because the latter may create the impression that not even ‘Esā bin Marīam will return.
Al-Mughīrah said, “So, when he appears, he [‘Esā] would be before him and after him.” ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه السلام is before Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم in the sense that he was made a prophet before him, and he is after him in the sense that he returns after the Prophet Muhammad. Both are correct statements, but Al-Mughīrah preferred seal of the prophets, because no prophets after him may create the impression that ‘Esā bin Marīam will not return. The same analysis is expanded to the statement of A’isha bint Abū Bakr رضي الله عنها. Lā nabī ba’dahu and khātam al-nabīyīn are both correct statements in their own right, but A’isha رضي الله عنها and al-Mughīrah رضي الله عنه both preferred one over the other to express the finality of prophethood.
'Esā bin Marīam عليه
اسلام was a prophet from before. When he
returns, he is not re-made a prophet. Muhammad عليه
الصلاة
والسلام was the last to be made a prophet. After him, there are no others. But,
‘Esā bin Marīam's
عليه
السلام status as being a prophet from before
allows him to return without contradicting the finality of prophethood.
This argument is covered in more detail in the chapter: The Return of ‘Esā bin Marīam عليه
السلام.
The Ahmadis intentionally fail to report the second statement to construct their desired theological position. In reality, A’isha رضي الله عنها and the other companions accepted that Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام was the last prophet.
Finally, one must take note that the narrator for both ahadīth is Ibn Abī Shaybah. Therefore, he possessed a greater insight into the context of the statements of A’isha رضي الله عنها, over the incorrect extractions of Mirza Bashir-ud-din Mahmud Ahmad.
Combination of the Two Statements
Next, consider that A’isha رضي الله عنها placed these two statements together. According to the Ahmadis, seal of the prophets really means best of the prophets and no prophets after him actually means no prophets after him who will negate or append to the laws that he brought. The Ahmadi interpretations of these two statements have no correlations between them. If these are the true meanings of the quotes of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم, then A’isha رضي الله عنها, who was known for her eloquence in speech, would have no reason to combine two unrelated statements together. Even if one accepts the erroneous interpretation of seal of the prophets and no prophets after me, it does not make sense that A'isha رضي الله عنها would place two unrelated statements together in such a disjointed manner.
Actually, this shows that these are related statements. A’isha رضي الله عنها preferred the verse of the Qur’ān over the contextual statement of her husband عليه الصلاة والسلام, which might create confusion if not understood properly. But ultimately, they have the same meaning: there are no prophets after Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام.
Questions to ask the Murabbis
1. If the true meaning of seal of the prophets and no prophet after him are completely unrelated to each other, why would A’isha رضي الله عنها compare such statements together?
2. Does the hadīth of Al-Mughīrah رضي الله عنه prove that Muhammad عليه و صلاة و سلام is the last one to be made to be a prophet?
[1] Not in the following chapter or the following page, but literally the next hadīth immediately below in Al-Dur Al-Manthoor under Chapter 33, verse 40.