Hadīth of ‘Ali رضي الله
عنه and Lā Nabī Ba’adī
This argument was taken from “A Misunderstanding Removed - Ahmadis Do Believe in the Holy Prophet (saw) As Khataman nabīyyīn,” under the section titled “The Traditions.”
“You are to me as
Aaron was to Moses, except La nabi ba’di”
(Abū Dawood, Tirmidhi, Mishkat)
Ahmadi Argument:
The Muslims argue that the statement by the Prophet Muhammad mentioned above proves that there can be no prophets after Muhammad because lā nabī ba’adī literally means no prophets after me. To understand why this is not the case, one must understand the context in which this statement was said.
This statement was said by the Prophet Muhammad prior to the Battle of Tabūk while the Muslim army was departing. ‘Ali was told to remain behind and administer over Madinah, but being the brave soldier that he was, he wanted to participate in the fighting. The Prophet commanded him to stay behind and reassured ‘Ali that his position was like the position of Harūn with respect to Mūsā.
In this usage, the word ba’ad does not mean after. According to Lane’s Lexicon, page 225, the word ba’ad also means behind. Based on the usage of the Prophet, one can see that the actual meaning of this statement is no prophet behind me in the sense that the Prophet Muhammad was departing to Tabūk and was not leaving behind a prophet, as Mūsā did when he left Harūn behind.
Therefore, the meaning of lā nabī ba’adī is not no prophet after me. Rather, it is no prophet behind me, meaning that ‘Ali was not a prophet.
Muslim Response:
This is an example of the Ahmadis playing with words to construct the meaning they desire rather than accepting the actual meaning of the statement, which clearly negates the possibility of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as being a prophet of Allah. In reality, this statement is one of the many clear proofs that there are no prophets after Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم.
First, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم said lā nabī ba’adī many times, not only in this one isolated instance. If the Ahmadis believe lā nabī ba’adī means no prophets behind me, then they have the dubious task of explaining the dozens of other instances in which the prophet or the companions said that there are no more prophets and reinterpret those instances to conform to their theology.[1]
Second,
the Ahmadis refer to Lane’s Lexicon
to prove their argument. However, their own reference
primarily defines ba’ad as after.
Behind is only a secondary contextual
understanding. On page 225, Lane’s
Lexicon says, “According to some of
the grammarians, as an adv. N. of place signifying after, or behind”
indicating that only some grammarians define it as such. However, the primary
meaning of the word is listed as “adv. N
of time, signifying after or afterwards.”
Above, the original meaning is underlined in red, while the secondary contextual definition is underlined in green.
Lane’s Lexicon continues by listing the antonym as قَبْلُ, which means before (in time). This confirms the primary meaning of ba’ad as after (in time).
Even in the official Ahmadi dictionary, Dictionary of the Holy Qur’ān by Malik Ghulam Farid, on page 78, ba’ad is primarily defined as after, while behind is a secondary definition. When understood with this clear definition, one can easily translate the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه و سلم words to mean that there will be no prophet after him. This statement has nothing to do with physically leaving behind a non-prophet.
Finally, it is important to consider the context of the statement. Mūsā عليه السلام was a prophet. After he became a prophet, Harūn عليه السلام was given the prophethood by Allah. Harūn عليه السلام was commanded to guard over Bani Isra’īl while Mūsā عليه السلام went atop the mountain to speak to Allah for forty days. Similar to this situation, when the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم went to the battle of Tabūk, he appointed ‘Ali رضي الله عنه as the guard over the Muslims. ‘Ali رضي الله عنه was exactly like Harūn عليه السلام in that they were both guardians over their people in the absence of the “master” prophet, except, unlike Harūn عليه السلام who later became a prophet, there were no prophets after Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام, so ‘Ali رضي الله عنه was not destined to become a prophet.
Below is an illustration of the parallels between the Prophet Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام and ‘Ali رضي الله عنه and Mūsā عليه السلام and Harūn عليه السلام:
Muhammad
صلى الله
عليه و سلم / Mūsā عليه السلام
· Both were Prophets, one over the Muslims and the other over Bani Isra’īl
·
Both departed from their
respective people, one for Tabūk and the other for
·
Both appointed deputies, one ‘Ali رضي الله
عنه and the other Harūn عليه
السلام
‘Ali
رضي الله
عنه/
Harūn عليه السلام
·
Both were appointed as deputies,
one by Muhammad صلى
الله عليه و
سلم and the other by Mūsā عليه السلام
· Both ruled according to the law of their respective prophet
· However, unlike Harūn عليه
السلام who was given prophethood after
Mūsā عليه
السلام, ‘Ali رضي الله
عنه
was not to become a Prophet. This is because of the fact that after the Prophet Muhammad عليه
الصلاة
والسلام, there are no prophets.
Hence his statement lā nabī
ba’dee, meaning no prophets after me
The Ahmadi methodology in interpreting this clear hadīth is to refer to secondary, contextual meanings of words to conform to their theology and deflect the finality of prophethood. The Islamic approach is to understand the statement as-is, as was clearly stated by the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم without lengthy reinterpretation. Based on evident context and simple language, this narration clearly states that there are no prophets after Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام.
Questions to ask the Murabbis
1. If the primary definition of ba’ad is after, why are we referring to a secondary contextual definition of behind?
2. If the Prophet Muhammad صلى
الله عليه و
سلم
was
really saying that he did not leave ‘Ali كرم
الله وجه behind, why did he phrase it in such a
strange way, especially since it seems to suggest that there is no prophet
after Muhammad عليه
الصلاة
والسلام?