the second question from saeed sahab's student is: "alright, if you hold that our prophet (peace be upon him) was not the last to receive prophethood, fine. But there must have been someone who received prophethood after all other prophets. who is that muqaddas personality?" now if we are going to talk about relevant matters only then why the above question? what relevance does it have? can saeed sahab or his student kindly give us the name and back it with proofs from the nusus? even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that saeed sahab and his students are prophetologists of the highest caliber and know the exact sequence in which every nabi was given nubuwwat ('alanabiyina wa 'alayhimus salaatu was salaam), why does it matter here? [mod edit: removed bad analogy.] that's a trick question which might give a munazir an edge in a debate, provided the other side is not a seasoned debater, but not so here. that's why debating someone who is not scrupulous about what measures he uses to get a one up on his opponent is a waste of time. imagine this was a face-to-face debate and the student kept repeating, "tell me the name of that person, tell me the name, are mawlana sahab aap pehle naam to bata dein. aap baqi sab chhodein, pehle naam to bata dein ke kisko sabse aakhir me nubuwwat mili " and uses his voice to shout the other person down. that would make for a picturesque hullabaloo and seem to give an impression that the questioner has scored a valid point against his opponent. while the reality is that it is an irrelevant question.