Sh Abu Hasan, also just to add to your point that deos purposefully miss the siaq of nanotvi's statement. He says clearly: "people of understanding know that before or last in time in itself (bil dhaat) is not a praiseworthy (fadeelah)." Immediately after he states "this verse has come in the place of praise" Therefore, nanotvi is in absolute terms stating that this ayah does NOT mean that the Prophet peace be upon him is the final and last prophet, as the ayah has come for praise and being last in time is not praise therefore this ayah definitely does not mean last in time. AliyadhubiLlah. His statement is explicit and directly speaking about and proposing an explanation of the ayah. It is not a general discussion on the various meanings the word Khatam can have.
on top of the 's jahl of islamic principles, the moron just did a verbal diarrohea - following zameel the zindiq. the sentence neither makes sense nor is it logical. kalam and deoband? dev-bandi gurus like mahmud hasan devbandi and khaleel ambhetvi couldn't understand basic terminology - what do these insects who are 1000 times more jahil than their stupid masters? the entire deobandi cult has not understood the basic definitions of muhal aqli and the simple principle of kalam that Divine qudrah precludes muhalat and wajibat and concerns only mumkinat, and that kazib is naqs and naqs is muHal for Allah ta'ala. very simple principles children can understand - but the blind taqlid of devbandi elders makes deobandis tie themselves in knots. ---- whoa wait wait. where did he say that it is ONLY finality and nothing more? he acknowledged that aayat can have multiple meanings - but this meaning that it means CHRONOLOGICALLY last is a universal tafsir. its zahir meaning is mutawatir across ages. every tafsir says this and no tafsir has said that it is only the "notion of the masses not that of intellectuals." go ahead and bring me ONE tafsir that labels this as "awaam ka khayal". nanotvi became kafir for this reason as well because the zindiq/kafir thought he was smarter than RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. because this zindiq shamelessly labeled it as "awam ka khayal" - whereas it is mutawatir al-lafz and ma'ana that it INVARIABLY means, that He is the last prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam as EXPLAINED by our master, sayyiduna RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam himself. all the deobandis who have given up their minds and eeman to serve nanotvi's kufr - qabbaHahumullah - are partners in this crime. labeling RasulAllah's tafsir sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam as "awaam ka khayaal" and excluding it from "ahl e fahm" / the people of understanding thereby excluding RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam from "ahl e fahm" - al iyadhu billah! -------- this kind of pathetic understanding and the morons chide us for not knowing kalam. equivocating is not the word. let it go, you made worse mistakes. this devbandi like is shamelessly watering down the kufr of nantovi by using palatable language; he says: "common translation..." whereas nanotivi was specific and unambiguous - in fact he was UNEQUIVOCAL - and started as: "first know the meaning of "khatamu'n nabiyyin" and then dismissed the meaning that it is chronologically last as "awam kay khayal mein" ===== i will list nearly 20 hadith that say: "laa nabiyya ba'adi" and this is the FIRST, obvious and widely accepted explanation of KHATAM, without exception. let deobandis produce ONE hadith that says it is the meaning understood by common people - and people of understanding "ahl e fahm" have a different definition. only the deobandis following nanotvi - and their parasites the qadianis seek to downplay or dismiss THIS OBVIOUS meaning! sub'HanAllah. devbandis, why are you blind! fear for your aakhirah! anyway according to the principles of your cult, nanotvi will anyway not come to save you in your graves - so why sacrifice your iman for a dead man?
Just joined in nov 2025, prolly only for the post-debate comments --- Gotta give it to these guys on their tag teaming and groupieism Zaleel issued one more filibuster https://barelwism.wordpress.com/202...with-elders-of-deoband-before-issuing-takfir/
He calls himself 'ghareeb',which aptly sums up his interpretation. What the idiot can't or won't answer is that how does the temporal element remain unaffected because if it's a part of it, how does it not affect the khatamiya, if hypothetically another prophet was to come. If I remember correctly, Mufti e Azam Hind's work deals with this nonsensical reasoning.
A Deobandi posted the following "Refutation"… It is being circulated that barelwis are weak in Kalam, that's why this issue couldn't get resolved. "Shahid understands khātimiyya to be finality and nothing more, probably because he’s equivocating khātimiyya with its common translation of “finality of prophethood.” Nanotvi’s point is that while finality is a necessary accident (ʿaraḍ) of khātimiyya, it is not the dhāt of it. The answer to the absurd question then is, yes if another prophet were to be born today, it would affect the ʿaraḍ lāzim of khātimiyya, but not the essence of it through which the Messenger ﷺ is honored without temporality. Non-r*tards can understand sorry but anyone who believes qasim nanotvi would say anything to deliberately undermine the status of the prophet ﷺ is as ret*rded as someone who believes ahmad raza khan would say anything to deliberately undermine the rank of God" Originalpost:https://x.com/snaccademic/status/1990488191879852359?t=IkpwXjald0ugKn0RKaFVjQ&s=19
