When was RasulAllah ﷺ granted nubuwwah?

but why are they lying?

this is a blatant lie.

the first lie is, they [mawlana saeed and his students] say that: the belief, RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam was given nubuwwat first [and indeed sent last] is somehow new - no one held it before.

second lie is attributing the opposite to shah abdu'l haq muhaddith dihlawi - sub'HanAllah. disagree if you want to, but do not lie or make false attributions.

shah abdu'l Haq sahib has said talwiHan in ashi'atu'l lam'at and taSriHan in madarij al-nubuwwah that RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam was actually a prophet [bi'l fiyl] in the realm of souls; and then was sent as the last prophet in this world. these are original farsi clips:





translation by mawlana ghulam muyinuddin:




in ashiyat al-lam'at, he answers the objection (which implies his own position expressly stated in madarij)




---
i got a chance to listen to clip#2 until 33 minutes; and i found mawlana saeed sahib selectively quoting (whether deliberately or ignorance, can't tell) and attributing positions to ulama, pathetic reasoning (that is when i told noori bhai that i was surprised that he is called a great munazir; you can disagree with me, but i find his reasoning pathetic - at least in these clips.) in fact i can quote sharh al-shifa that disproves saeed sahib's claim. [starting from 13:20 in clip#2, where he talks of karramiyyah and by that implication imam subki and shah abdul haqq are all karramiyyah! ma'azAllah]

i will examine the second clip fully, in sha'Allah, but from the SAME sharh of shifa, here is a clip to ponder:

 

open challenge to saeed asad:

Prove that Hazrat Muhammed Mustafa is not Nabiyy ul Anbiyaa.

 

open challenge to saeed asad:

Prove that Hazrat Muhammed Mustafa was not the first to be granted Nubuwwah.

 

fine, i won't post any responses further. however, this won't apply to sidi Abu Hasan, main responses are from him, i'm doing translation except those posts that i have written in response to sultani sahab (if he is the main guy responding)

no worries.

 

okay, so why don't you tell us in clear words that you consider imam abd'ul wahab al sha'rani a kafir because he said that;



if you ask that whether anyone other than Muhammed sallAllahu alaihi wasallam was given prophethootd at that time (i.e. in alam al arwah) when Adam alaihi al salaam was still between water and clay? the answer to it is that such a hadith has not reached to us that anyone else was given prophethood, rest of the prophets were made prophet in their respective time of appearance.

if you ask that why rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem said that I was prophet at the time when Adam alihi al salam was still between water and clay? why did he sallalahu alahi waslam not say that i was human or i was physically present? the answer to it is that rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wasallam specially mentioned prophethood to indicate that he was given prophethood before all other prophets, because the prophethood is established when the knowledge of shari'ah ordained from Allah subhanu wa ta'la is attained.

and what would be the ruling on molana ghulam jilani mirithi who clearly has written


instead of nubuwwah we said appearance (or sending forth) because the first revelation in the cave of hira was the advent of the prophethood, otherwise prophethood had already been given in alam al arwah before this event (of cave hira), at that time even hazrat Adam alihi al salam had not born yet.

and would you call mufti Ahmed Yaar Khan nai'mi a supporter of qadyanis and qasim nanotive who categorically has said;



there is no information since when he sallallahu alaihi wasallam has been a prophet, we only know this much that when hazrat Adam alaihi al salam was between water and clay, he sallallahu alaihi wasallam was still a prophet, as it is reported in hadith sharif.... so his birth, migration (to madinah), his being makki and madani, his demise, these are the names of his arrival and departure, otherwise he sallallahu alaihi waslam is prophet before birht and will remain nabi forever.

oh! by the way, i have found molana sahab's favorite clause 'sarfaraz farmaya gaya' in seerat e rasul e arabi by Allamah Noor Bakhsh Tawakkali, it is used at least in two places, i present both of them here for you to issue a fatwa on allmah sahab as well

at page 45 molana sahab writes under the heading 'ibtida e wahi' (the beginning of revelation) that

جب آپ کی عمر مبارک چالیس سال کی ھوئی تو اللہ تعالی نے آپ کو منصب نبوت سے سرفراز فرمایا، وحی کی ابتداء رویاء صادقہ سے ھوئی، جو کچھ آپ رات کو خواب میں دیکھتے بعینہی وہی ظہور میں آتا - چھ ماہ اسی حالت میں گزر گیے کہ ایک روز آپ حسب معمول غار حراء میں مراقب تھے کہ فرشتہ (جبرئیل) آپ کے پاس آیا

when he reached the age of 40 Allah ta'ala elevated him with the rank of prophethood. the beginning of revelation started with true dreams, whatever he dreamed at night became exactly how he saw it. 6 months passed in this very condition, one day as usual he was in the state of meditation in the cave that the angel Gabriel came to him...

you must be jumping that I have given you an evidence for your claim, but not so fast - you start from the cave of hira, while allamah sahab in this statement starts at least 6 months before that event. where is ummah then? Now this is your trick, you guys are hunting for such references and ignoring other clear statements of the very same ulama, and this is dishonesty. let me present the other quote

on page 354 under the heading 'Khasais sayed'ul mursaleen' (merits of the leader of the prophets), he writes

2. عالم ارواح میں آپ کو نبوت سے سرفراز فرمایا گیا اور اسی عالم میں دیگر انبیاء کرام علی نبیینا و علیھم الصلوة والسلام کی روحوں نےآپ کے روح انور سے استفاضة کیا

in the realm of souls he was given prophethood and in that very world the souls of other prophets alaih al salam benefited from his blessed soul.

 

Brother Noori
I won't post anymore until the pdf is ready. I am not 100% sure whether these responses I am posting are from Allama Sahib or from his student. I hope they will make a video response to the pdf.
I am aware that your questions are in English. The main point I made was that I am here to learn. I have heard one side. once I hear a response from Allama Saeed Asad I will be able to make an informed choice on what is right. I will then answer.
Is that OK?

 

my questions to you are in english, not in urdu

molana sahab or his student (if response is not originally from molana sahab) says

i.e. by supporting (the creed of) qadyanis and qasim nanotvi you have rejected the meaning of the last prophet, think over it carefully, are you speaking in the language of ahlussunah or ahl'ul bid'ah.

so, first he is hinting that we have rejected the meaning of kahtam'un nabiyeen; and secondly, it is weired that he has included qadyanis and qasim nanotvi among deviants (bad mazhab), while we consider them kafir.

then he issues a fatwa

those who are denying that rasulAllah is the last prophet should repent, renew their iman and marriage

first of all where did we deny that rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem is kahatam'un nabiyyen?

so, it is quite evident that to them all the ulama and all the muslims who believe that;

i) Rasulullah alaihi salat wat-tasleem was given nubuwwah in alam al-arwah
ii) He was sent forth as last prophet to the mankind
iii) whoever claims that after rasulullah alaihi afdalus salat wat-tasleem anyone was given prophethood is liar and kafir

they are (or have become) kafir and they need to renew their iman and marriage. al'i'yadhu billahi

 

Brother Noori
The reason why I haven't responded is because my response has no value. I am here to learn and not to teach. I can't even fully understand the urdu I have posted. That is why I have avoided answering the questions.
What is it in urdu that suggests they are creating a new group

 

Isaac you too have not answered my two questions below, rather you have come up with a new response from molana sai'eed as'ad ir his student. Kindly do respond to the below qustions.

 

Issac, we are not interested to debate with molana sahab's ignorant student, he perhaps cannot read. Before anything else these guys should tell us what is the ruling on the ulama above we have quoted.

 

عن ابى ذرقال قلت یارسول اللہ ای الانبیاء کان اول قال آدم قلت یارسول اللہ و نبی کان قال نعم نبی مکلم الخ۔مشکوة شرکت صفحہ نمبر511حدیث صحیح

آپ نےقادیانیوں اورقاسم نانوتوى كى تائیدكرتےھوئےخاتم النبیین کا معنی آخری نبی کرنے سے انکارکیاھے اس پرٹھنڈےدل سے غورکیجیےگا کہ آپ اھلسنت کی بولی بول رھےھیں یابدمذھبوں کی؟نوٹ۔۔استادمحترم کانام نامی اسم گرامی محمدسعیداحمداسعد ھےجوکہ سب سنیوں کے محسن ھیں اگریہ نہ ھوتےتونہ جانےکتنےلوگ بدمذھب ھوچکےھوتے۔آج تک کسی عالم دین کہلانےوالےکوتوفیق تونہیں ھوئی کہ ان سےپوچھ لیتا کہ حضرت یہ وجبت،کامعنی نامزدگی کس کس نےکیاھے توتسلی ھوجاتی۔یہ بھی اللہ کاشکرھے کہ استادمحترم کونہ زبان دراز بنایاھےاورنہ ھی عقیدہ اھلسنت سےانحراف کرنےوالا۔بلکہ وہ تواسی عقیدہ اھلسنت پرکاربندھیں جوحضرت شاہ عبدالحق محدث دھلوی۔سیدی اعلی حضرت،حضورمحدث اعظم پاکستان،اورعلامہ سیدسعیداحمدشاہ کاظمی کاھے یقین نہ ھوتو ان سےکوئی دوست گفتگوکرنےکےلیے تیارھوجائےتوھم بھی استادمحترم سے گزارش کرینگے کہ وہ بھی ضروران سےگفتگو فرمائیں ۔ضروری نوٹ:سیدعالم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کےآخری نبی ھونےکاانکارکرنے والےتوبہ کریں تجدیدایمان وتجدیدنکاح کریں ھماراکام سمجھادیناھےآگےآپ کی مرضی۔اگرھوسکےتوخاتم النبیین کامعنی لکھکرھمیں بھیج دیں۔نوٹ:اب تمھارےساتھ وجبت،نبی،بعثت،اورخاتم النبیین کےمعنی پربات ھوگی

 

that sly question has been answered so many times but in a way that avoids the trick; so they keep repeating "mein na manoo" (I don't agree), unless they listen to what they want to listen.

if a qadiyani or any other rascal asks the same question to us, we would ask HIM to first prove that his leader is a nabiyy, and that he (the follower) is a Muslim. that's what we have been taught. other discussions will automatically end there.

 

since this is your question, and i have given a very simple answer which we all know since our childhood, i would also like to ask you a couple of questions, it is not for molana sahab or his students.

1- RasulAllah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem himself said that there is no prophet after me (laa nabi ba'di), so why did he say that i am the first among all the prophet with respect to creation, did he not know that this is against khatam'un nubuwwah?

Note that here this interpretation cannot be presented that Rasulullah was first in creation, and he will be given nubuwwah after all other propehts, because;
(a) He is first of creation not only with respect to all other prophets but any other creation, so awwal'un nabiyyen is to make a distinction (takhsis)
(b) rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem said this to explain the meaning of the verse 7 of surah al-ahzab (وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِنَ النَّبِيِّينَ مِيثَاقَهُمْ وَمِنكَ وَمِن نُّوحٍ وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَأَخَذْنَا مِنْهُم مِّيثَاقًا غَلِيظًا), so there is no room for such intrepretation

2 - Do you think that our elder scholars did not know that Rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem is khatam'un nabiyeen and there can be no propeht after him? why did they say then that Rasulullah was given nubbuwah in a'alam al arwah before all prophets. Were they all clueless , while they wrote books against qadyanis, like pir mehr ali shah, ala hazrat, allamah sai'eed ahmed kazmi and other alihim'ur rahmah wa riDwan?

 

it is very simple - that Rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem was created before all creations, Allah subhanu wa ta'ala made him prophet at that time to be the leader of all prophets and that he will be sent forth after all of them, so our prophet alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem was the last prophet sent. anybody who claims prophethood after rasulullah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem or believes in such a person is a liar and kafir.

 

Brother Noori
Thank you for ammending things. I don't think Allama Saeed Asad would look for a way out of a discussion. It would just make the process a bit more awkward. I think it best we just wait for the pdf.
I'm not demanding an answer here, however if a Qadiani approached yourselves and asked this same question that is being asked how would you answer? would you refuse to answer?

 

I was really angry at the repeated question which we need not to answer, this is what molana sahab has to prove because it is his point of view. we are obliged to prove only our stance, not molana sahab's stance. In a fit of anger i have passed those harsh remarks in urdu and english both, and it may give molana sahab an excuse to not respond to our answers. however, now i have deleted and edited my posts, either forward the new updated post with an excuse or wait for the pdf.

 

i agree with brother isaac. allamah saeed sahib is mistaken in this issue and making wrong statements, but to accuse him of attempting a new sect is certainly unfair, and a bit of a stretch. however, this could lead to a splinter among sunnis - for no major reason. nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah. and brother noori, i think is a bit carried away with that thought.

no need to worry brother. as you are new here, you may feel that we'll ban you if you criticise us. in sha'Allah, that won't be the case.

wa's salam.

 

Ok, point taken and posts removed, but kindly ask molana sahab and his students not to play munazranah tactics and reply to our plain questions in plain language with proper references

 

I was responding to where Brother Noori had said that Allama Saeed Asad is making a new group. People who are reading this could probably just accept and be done with this before a discussion has happened. I don't think that is a good thing. I was asking Brother Noori to reserve these judgements until Allama Saeed Asad has chance to respond to the pdf.
It's like if there has been a crime committed and the police already show the world who the guilty person is before giving a fair trial.
That's all I'm saying.

 

and what is that supposed to mean?