Most Sunni organizations defending Khatam un-Nabiyyin belong to the Deobandi sect. Ironically, the founder, Qasim Nanotwi, held a position on the Seal of Prophethood similar to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS), the Ahmadi or Qadiani view. Furthermore, Deobandis elevate their own scholars to prophethood, which proves they reject the Finality of Prophethood.

Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi and His Position on Khatam an-Nabiyeen

Qasim Nanotwi did not believe Seal of Prophethood refers to the Finality of Prophethood, he held that the Seal of Prophethood means Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ reached the highest level of perfection in all the qualities and ranks of prophethood. He explained that greatness is not about coming first or last, but about reaching the most complete and perfect status. For this reason, even if another prophet were to appear after him ﷺ or at the same time elsewhere, it would not affect the Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ unique and superior position, because all others would still remain below him ﷺ.

Statement 1

The public imagine that Rasulullah (SAW) being Khaatam literally means that his time is after the time of all the previous prophets, and he is the Last Prophet of all. However, the people of understanding will be enlightened as to the fact that there is no excellence or virtue, in essence, of being either the ‘first’ or ‘last’. Then in what form is it correct to attribute a praiseworthy station of excellence in the verse “but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets” (33:40)?

[Tahzir An-Nas, pg. 14]

Statement 2

Rather, if, hypothetically, after the time of the Prophet (SAW) another Prophet is born, even then it will make no difference to the Khaatamiyyat-e-Muhammadi (Seal of Prophethood of Muhammad) – similarly if another Prophet is his contemporary in another Earth, or even on this Earth another Prophet is made.

[Tahzir An-Nas, pg. 63]

Statement 3

Therefore, the person who possesses this attribute, which is Khaatam as-Siffaat (Seal of Attributes), to a greater degree of manifestation, that is, there is no attribute above it or which has the possibility of being manifested and granted into the creation – Such a person, among the creation, is the Khaatam al-Maraatib (Seal of Stations), and that person is the master of all and the most superior of all.

[Intisar-ul-Islam, pg. 48]

Statement 4

There is no status above that of the Khaatam (Seal) of the stations of Prophethood. Whoever becomes (a Prophet) is subordinate to it.

[Mubahasa Shahjahanpur, pg. 25]

Deobandi Scholars on the Seal of Prophethood

Maulana Qari Muhammad Tayaib Qasmi

Maulana Qari Muhammad Tayaib who is called ‘Hakeem al-Islam’ by the Deobandis which means ‘The Wise scholar of Islam’ is the grandson of Qasim Nanotwi and he explains Seal of Prophethood in the same way.

Statement 1

The meaning of Khatme Nabuwat is not the termination of prophethood but rather consummation of prophethood i.e such a complete prophethood has been sent that there requires no need for anymore prophethood after that. This is like when you see numerous stars at night, you can also see the moon but its still night. The day has not come even with all their light. Everyone is shining and spreading light but it is still dark. But even a slightest ray of Sun hides the stars away. Now if the Sun says “I am Khatimun Noor. I seal the noor. I end all the noor”. It means that I have brought the most complete noor thus there is no need for the stars. Their noor will be incorporated within me.

So when Muhammad (S.A.W) claimed that “I am Khatimun Nabiyyin” so the Khatme Nabuwat does not mean “Ending of the prophethood” but the “Perfection of Prophethood”. That the Sun of the prophets brought a light so bright that the light of any star was not needed anymore. It will become dim. Light of all the stars will be incorporated with it. When the sun rises, it is not that the light of all the stars end. But rather it gets incorporated within the light of that sun. When Islam came, all the excellencies of the past religions got integrated within it. Islam is the compilation of all religions. This is why Quran describes its glory by saying that I have not come to deny all previous religions but to protect them. Whichever truth was in there, I took while discarded the teachings that nations have changed. So, all the virtues got compiled in Islam. So prophethood is the compilation of all the prophethoods while Islam is the compilation of all the laws (shariah) of the past.

[Youtube Video: Deobandis REJECT Finality of Prophethood!?!; Time Stamp: 0:00-1:59]

There are two key points being made from this passage. The first is that Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was the last of the Prophets, but only in this sense that all the qualities and attributes of prophethood found their most perfect and complete cultivation and expression in him ﷺ. That is to say that no prophet after him ﷺ could ever add anything new or higher to the status of prophethood, because its perfection was already fully manifested in him ﷺ. So, being the “last” is less about being last in time, but about completion and perfection.

The second point being made is that Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was the last of the Law bearing Prophets. This point is in harmony with the first point that is being that since the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ brought together the best qualities and teachings of all previous prophets and Islam and his ﷺ religion, integrates the truth from earlier religions while correcting the parts that were changed or corrupted by people. It means that Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ prophethood is the compilation of all earlier prophethoods while Islam is the compilation of all previous laws (shariah). Therefore, no Prophet can come after the Holy Prophet ﷺ who should abrogate his religion and not be in his Ummah.

His other statements will be presented on this matter which further reflect these same ideas:

Statement 2

And this is the status of the description of Khaatam, this attribute comes from it and returns to it. He is the Faateh (meaning first) and the Khaatam, the first one (having this attribute) and the last one. This is why we will not say that the sun is only luminous, rather it is Nur Bakshi (meaning it provides light)…we will not only say it is possessor of light but Khatam ul Anwar, as the light of all stars come from it, and in this movement of light, it goes back to it. So being Khatam ul Anwar will be the most distinguished of its qualities, and this can properly describe its particularity

[Aftab-i-Nabuwwat, pg. 80]

Statement 3

In the same way, the status of the sun of Prophethood (the Noble Messenger of Allah SAW) is not only being a Prophet, this quality is common among all Prophet. So his real particular quality is that in matters of prophetic light, he is the Murabbi of all Prophets, and the Masdar of Faydh (centre of emanation) for them, and the origin of their excellent lights. This is why he is a Prophet in real, and the other Prophets (peace be upon them) are not (Prophets) in real but became Prophets from his Faydh (emanation).

[Aftab-i-Nabuwwat, pg. 81]

Statement 4

The status of Huzur is not only being a Prophet, but also Nubuwat Bakhshi (meaning he provides Prophethood), every person who is ready for Prophethood and comes in front of him will become a Prophet. In the same manner, the light of Prophethood started from him and will return to him, and this is the description of Khatam…” For this reason, we do not simply call him (Prophet Muhammad SAW) as a Prophet but he is called Khaatam an-Nabiyyeen that all of the lights of Prophethood find their ultimate manifestation in him, making him the pinnacle of Prophethood.

[Aftab-i-Nabuwwat, pg. 82]

Shaykh Muhammad Abu Bakr Ghazipuri al-Ansari

Shaykh Muhammad Abu Bakr Ghazipuri al-Ansari defends Qasim Nanotvi statements and essentially affirms that seal of prophethood does not mean being the last in time, because being last in history has no special value on its own rather, it means he ﷺ is the one in whom prophethood reached perfection and through whom all other prophets are validated. Therefore, this perfection would not be negated if another prophet were to come after him ﷺ; rather, that prophet too would only be a prophet by bearing his stamp of approval and deriving authenticity through him.

He strove to incite people against the Imam in regards his statement that the Prophethood of Muhammad is original and the Prophethood of the other Ambiyaa stems from the effulgence of his Nubuwah. That also means that he is the Seal of the Ambiyaa, from the first of them to the last, in aspects of personality, time and place. Even if in theory there should have been a prophet after him, that would have no effect on his Finality, because his Nubüwah is vested in himself originally whilst the others stem from his effulgence. There is no doubt that that statement is correct. It is the belief of the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah. It is from Rasulullaah that the chain of Nubüwah originated. He was the Nabi from primordial times and was already then the Seal of Ambiyaa by the decree of Allaah, before even the presence of the creation, before there was time and place, before any Nabi came to the world. Sadly, the author of the booklet did not understand this subtle meaning due to his ignorance and enmity against the Deobandis. He thus spewed against ash-Shaykh an-Nänotwi what he spewed and his tongue spoke like a devil. The statement of ash-Shaykh an-Nänotwi is in fact in the same style as that Ibn Taymiyah. He presented his argument based on the Quraan and Hadith, in a style and division modern intelligence can understand. If the author of the booklet has any intelligence then he should listen very carefully to what Hujjatul Islaam wrote.

[Was Ibn Taymiah From the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah?, pg. 44]

Deobandi Prophets

Deobandi apologists such as Shaykh Usman Iqbal argue that that merely attributing exclusive prophetic qualities to an individual constitutes a violation of Khatam al-Nubuwwah:

The same thing is said by the famous Deobandi scholar Khalid Mahmud:

The belief in the finality of prophethood is not a play of words, where one merely accepts the word ‘prophet’ while continuing the reality and significance of prophethood in the name of Imamate.

Hujjat al-Hind, Hazrat Imam Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlvi, in Sharh Muwatta, writes:
“Allah’s Messenger (SAW) is the Seal of Prophethood, but the meaning of this statement is that it is not permissible for anyone to be a prophet after him. As for the meaning of prophethood—being someone sent by Allah to creation, whose obedience is obligatory, protected from sins, and free from error in what is required—this exists in the Imams after him. That person, however, would be a heretic. The majority of later scholars among the Hanafis and Shafi‘is agreed to punish anyone who follows this path.”

The conclusion of Hazrat Shah Sahib’s ruling is that anyone who holds the belief that after the Holy Prophet (SAW) there could arise in this Ummah individuals who are divinely inspired and infallible is by no means a true believer in the doctrine of the finality of prophethood, even if verbally they call the Prophet (SAW) Khatam an-Nabiyyin a thousand times.

[Abaqat, vol 1, pg. 239]

However, this is ironic, because they follow scholars who elevated themselves to such extreme levels that, by their own logic, they themselves end up defying the Finality of Prophethood.

Rashid Ahmad Gangohi: I Am Infallible

Rashid Ahmad Gangohi claimed that he was free from error:

Khan Sahib said that Hazrat Gangohi (may Allah have mercy on him) once said to Maulvi Muhammad Baiti Sahib Kandhlawi: “Look up such-and-such issue in Shami.”

The Maulvi replied, “Hazrat, that issue is not found in Shami.”

Hazrat said, “How can that be? Bring Shami.”

Shami was brought. At that time, Hazrat had already lost his eyesight. He placed two-thirds of the pages to the right and one-third to the left, and by estimation opened the book in one motion. He then said, “Look on the lower part of the page on the left.” When they looked, the issue was found exactly in that spot. Everyone was astonished.

Hazrat then said, “Allah Almighty has promised me that He will not allow anything incorrect to come out of my tongue.”

[Arwah-e-Salasa, pg. 230]

Rashid Ahmad Gangohi’s Promise of Salvation to His Followers

In this passage, it is recorded that Rashid Ahmad Gangohi reassured his followers, telling them that it had been promised to him that they would be saved and would not enter Hellfire.

A person in Gangoh used to cry a lot in the assemblies of Hazrat Gangohi (may Allah sanctify his secret), and even by nature, he was very emotional. On one occasion, Hazrat Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi asked him:

“Why do you cry so much? Why are you distressed?”

He replied:

“Hazrat! I fear Hell—how will the fire be bearable?”

Hazrat said:

“No, no! There is nothing to worry about. It has been promised to me that your people will not be sent to Hell.”

[Maslak Ulama-e-Deoband aur Hubb-e-Rasul, pg. 37]

He entered the highest echelon as a principal member, whose words, actions, and the state of his heart and limbs have been protected by Allah in every era. In matters of speech and bodily action, divine support and guidance were granted so that creation could be safeguarded from error and misguidance.

He repeatedly stated in his capacity as a preacher, through a skilled translator:

“Whatever comes from the tongue of Rashid Ahmad is indeed true. I swear, I am nothing, yet in this era, guidance and salvation depend upon following me.”

In matters where people, bound by reasoning and evidence, fell into disputes and could not fully distinguish between truth and falsehood, wandering in the deserts of doubt and confusion, Hazrat Imam Rabbani (may Allah sanctify his secret), through the light of his heart, kindled by the lamp of prophethood, clearly spoke the truth, clarified the correct path, and rendered decisions without requiring external corroboration.

[Tazkira-tur-Rasheed, vol 2, pg. 17]

The Second Founder of Islam: Rashid Ahmad Gangohi

After Gangohi died, his student , Mawlana Mahmud Hasan, who is also called Shaykh al-Hind by the Deobandis wrote a poem in praise of Gangohi. He writes:

A second founder of Islam has emerged in the world

[Marsiya Gangohi, pg. 5]

The Disciple of Gangohi: His Pen Moves Beyond the Arsh

Aashiq Ilahi Mirathi wrote this about Gangohi:

At the time when your opponents raised an uproar over the issue of imkān-e-kidhb and published a verdict of excommunication, in the gathering of Sāʾīn Tawakkul Shāh Sahib of Anbalā, a certain cleric mentioned Imām Rabbānī (may his sanctity be exalted) and said that he held the view of the possibility of falsehood being attributed to God.

Upon hearing this, Sāʾīn Tawakkul Shāh Sahib lowered his head, and after remaining in silent meditation for a short while, he raised his head and, in his Punjabi language, uttered these words:

‘People, what are you saying? I am seeing the pen of Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Sahib moving beyond the ʿArsh (the Throne).

[Tazkira-tur-Rasheed, vol 2, pg. 322]

Again, Deobandis must ask themselves: when an individual claims that Allah has promised him infallibility, that his followers will be spared from Hell and his followers shamelessly describe that same individual as the second founder of Islam and say his pen moves beyond the Arsh, does such a personality resemble a mere scholar, or does he bear the attributes of a prophet?

For the confused Deobandis, they should refer to the statement of Khalid Mahmud again.

Gangohi Invoked ‘Mercy of the Worlds’ Upon a Saint

In the Quran “Mercy to all mankind” (Rahmatullil ‘Alamin) is a title uniquely attributed to Prophet Muhammad ﷺ however, Gangohi permits the titles for scholars or saints:

The title Rahmatullil ‘Alamin is not exclusively a characteristic of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. Other saints, prophets, and pious scholars (ulama rabbaniyyin) can also be a source of mercy for the world. Although the Prophet ﷺ is the highest among them, it is permissible to attribute this phrase to others in a figurative sense.

[Fatawa-e-Rashidiya, pg. 242]

According to the Deobandis, Imdadullah Muhajir Makki is also Mercy to all Worlds (Rahmatan Lil Aalamin):

When Hazrat Gangohi (may Allah have mercy on him) received the news of Hazrat Haji Sahib’s passing, he remained profoundly distressed for several days. The shock and sorrow were so great that it was evident even outwardly that he had such deep love for him. Hazrat Gangohi (may Allah have mercy on him) repeatedly invoked rahmatullil ‘alamin (mercy of the worlds) upon him.

[Malfoozat-e-Hakeem-ul-Ummat, vol 1, pg. 138]

Rank of Prophethood Present in Gangohi

Deobandi scholar Manazir Ahsan Gilani writes:

In Maulana Muhammad Qasim Sahib, the aspect of the rank of sainthood (wilayat) was dominant, while in Maulana Gangohi, the aspect of the rank of prophethood was (dominant).

[Sawanih Qasimi, vol 1, pg. 477]

The Prophetic Revelation of Qasim Nanotwi

Qasim Nanotwi felt as though the weight of a hundred tons of stones was weighing down upon his heart as a consequence of offering Tasbih. His pir, Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki reassured him by saying:

These are the emanations [faidan] of Prophesy on your heart. And this is that heaviness which the Prophet ﷺ used to feel at the time of Revelation. God shall take from you that service/tasks which is taken from Prophets

[Sawanih Qasimi; vol 1, pg. 259]

Ashraf Ali Thanwi: The Road to Salvation

Muhammad Aashiq Ilahi Meerthi elevates Ashraf Ali Thanwi to such a high status that he claims washing Thanwi’s feet and drinking the same water is a means of attaining salvation in the Hereafter. Deobandis again should ask themselves who are the real deniers of Khatam al-Nubuwwah?

His (Ashraf Ali Thanwi) excellence reached such a level that, by Allah the Most Great, washing the feet of Maulana Thanawi and drinking that water became a means of salvation in the Hereafter.

[Tazkira-tur-Rasheed, vol 1, pg. 113]

Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Approval of a Kalima Recited in His Name

A disciple reportedly recited “La ilaha illa Allah, Ashraf Ali Rasul Allah” and a Durud invoking blessings on Ashraf Ali Thanwi, when Thanwi heard about this, he reassured the disciple and said:

There was assurance in this incident that the one to whom you return back to [Ashraf Thanwi], with the help of Allah the Exalted, is a follower of the Sunnah.

[Risala al Imdad, pg. 35]

In this case, a disciple openly recited words attributing prophethood to Thanwi, and Thanwi approved it. While condemning others for overstepping the bounds of finality of prophethood, their own scholars venerated themselves in such ways that effectively violates the finality of prophethood.

A Refutation of Deobandi Counter Arguments

Qasim Nanotwi Affirmed Chronological Finality?

Some Deobandi apologetic articles quote statements of Qasim Nanotwi to suggest he affirmed the finality of prophethood. Their main argument is that Nanotwi distinguished two main aspects of Seal of prophethood:

• Martabah (rank) – the primary meaning, referring to the superiority and exalted status of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
• Zamānī (temporal/chronological) – the secondary, incidental meaning, referring to the Prophet ﷺ being the last in time.

Deobandi writers argue that while Nanotwi primarily argued about the rank aspect, he also affirmed the temporal finality, which differentiates him from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS), whom they claim did not accept the Zamānī aspect.

Firstly, if such was true then Nanotwi’s earlier statements would be contradicted. He explicitly said it is possible for another prophet to come without violating the Seal, and he also stated that there is no inherent virtue in Muhammad ﷺ being called the “last in time” as cited earlier.

Therefore, it would be inaccurate to claim that Nanotwi believed Allah conferred this title as a special honour especially when the verse 33:40 itself addresses the disbelievers mocking the Prophet ﷺ for having no physical progeny, affirming instead that he will have a spiritual progeny until the end of time. Thus contextually “being last in time” is not inherently meritorious just as the last caliph of the Rashidun Caliphate was not greater than the first.

Secondly, Qasim Nanotwi did not define khatamiyyat zamani as chronological finality. Rather, he defined khatamiyyat zamani to mean that Muhammad ﷺ is the last sharīʿah-bearing Prophet. In other words, Islam will not be abrogated, no new religion will be revealed, and therefore no prophet after Muhammad ﷺ can appear with a new sharīʿah or religion.

Two explicit statements from him will be presented below:

And the scholars of the People of the Sunnah (Ahle Sunnat) also explicitly state this matter, that in the era (or during the time) of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), no Prophet possessing a new law (Sharī’ah Jadīd) can appear/exist and any prophet who is contemporaneous with him saw will be follower of Mohammedan Shariah

[Tahzir An-Nas, pg. 91]

The meaning of Khatamiyyat-e-Zamaani is that after the advent of Deen-e-Muhammadiؐ , it won’t be abrogated. The knowledge of Nubuwwat has reached its apex. No other Prophet’s Religion or Knowledge is now needed for Bani Adam

[Munazarah Ajeeba, pg. 58]

Therefore, any statement in which Deobandis allege or give the impression that Qasim Nanotwi affirmed khatamiyyat zamani as chronological finality is either based on misunderstanding or deception. All such statements, when read in light of his own explicit definitions, refer to finality in the sense that Muhammad ﷺ is the last sharīʿah-bearing Prophet.

Just like Qasim Nanotwi, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) explained there are two main aspects of Khatm al-Nubuwwah:

• Martabah (rank) – All perfections of prophethood were completed in him ﷺ.
• Zamānī (temporal/chronological) – After him ﷺ, no messenger will bring a new shariah, and there is no prophet outside his community. Rather, anyone who receives divine communication now receives it through his ﷺ grace and mediation, and such a person is considered a follower of his Ummah, not an independent prophet.

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) states:

But the Holy Prophet ﷺ was given a special honor as the Seal of the Prophets: All perfections of prophethood were completed in him. After him, no messenger will bring a new shariah, and there is no prophet outside his community. Rather, anyone who receives divine communication now receives it through his grace and mediation, and such a person is considered a follower of his Ummah, not an independent prophet.

[Roohani Khazain, vol 23, Chashma Ma’rafat, pg. 380]

If both Qasim Nanotwi and Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) affirmed Khatm al-Nubuwwah in terms of both Martabah (rank/superiority) and Zamānī (temporal/chronological finality), and both defined Zamānī in identical ways, then there is effectively no difference in the core meaning of finality of prophethood between them.

Qari Muhammad Tayyab al-Deobandi: Muhammad (SAW) is NOT the Last Prophet

Misquoting Qasim Nanotwi to suggest he believed in the chronological finality of prophethood contradicts how major Deobandi scholars explained it. For example, Qari Muhammad Tayyab explicitly stated that prophethood has not ended. A transcription of his recording was cited earlier in this article, and he has also written extensively on this topic. Full details of his statements can be found in this article.

Qari Muhammad Tayyab al-Deobandi on the Seal of the Prophets and the Return of ‘Isa ﷺ

Secondly, claiming that Qasim Nanotwi defined khatamiyyat zamani as purely chronological finality contradicts how Qari Muhammad Tayyab rationalised the return of Prophet Isa (AS). He recognized that if khatamiyyat zamani meant being last in time, a contradiction would arise: Prophet Isa (AS) returning after Muhammad ﷺ would appear to challenge Muhammad ﷺ’s status as the Seal of the Prophets. Qari Muhammad Tayyab resolves this by explaining that Isa (AS) will follow the law of Muhammad ﷺ thus there is no contradiction, since the Qur’an contains all previous knowledge and the Prophet ﷺ’s character embodies the qualities of all prior prophets. This shows that Muhammad ﷺ is the ultimate perfection in prophethood, with all other prophets, including Isa (AS), subordinate to his law. Consequently, this entails that Muhammad ﷺ is the last sharīʿah-bearing prophet: no new religion will be revealed, and Islam will not be abrogated, fully aligning with Qasim Nanotwi’s and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s (AS) definition of khatamiyyat zamani.

The comprehensiveness of perfection in character that exists in the Messenger of Allah ﷺ is clearly understood from the incident wherein Siddiqah ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) was asked about the prophetic character. She responded, “His character was the Qur’an” (Ahmad). In other words, all of that which exists in the Qur’an in the form of knowledge exists in the form of character and aptitude in the Prophet ﷺ … Since the Qur’an encompasses [the knowledge of] all the previous books and is a collection of the Prophet ﷺ’s character, this establishes that his character encompasses all the characteristics of the previous prophets. This is a clear proof for the Prophet ﷺ being the finality of the perfection in character and being at the highest degree of perfection in creation. Hence, it is self-evident from this that the Blessed One ﷺ in whom all the foundations of prophethood are contained and who is superior to all, only he can then be the primary one (asl) of these foundations (prophets).

A covenant was taken from the prophets to believe, follow and aid the Prophet [Muhammad] ﷺ on the basis of him being the primary prophet as is clear from the verse of the Qur’an, “When Allah took the covenant of the prophets” )3:81). The Prophet ﷺ elucidated, in light of this verse, that the previous prophets are all under the Seal of the Prophets by saying, “If Musa (peace be upon him) was alive, he would have had no option except to follow me” (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah). The upshot of this is that Musa (peace be upon him) – the resolute messenger who was given a shari’ah – had to be obeyed [by mankind] in the absence of the Seal of the Prophets, but in the presence of the Seal of the Prophets, rather than being the one who is to be obeyed, he becomes the one who obeys [the Seal of the Prophets]. This is only possible when his rank is deemed below the Seal of the Prophets’ rank, because in reality all the control and authority of the one who is subordinate (ma taht) comes from the one above (ma fawq), i.e., it is given to him by the one who is higher in authority.

[The principle is that] in the presence of the primary authority, the authority of the secondary is nonexistent. This is exactly like the prime minister saying to his [subordinate] ministers, “In my presence, none of you has full authority. Your ability to command comes into effect only in my absence.” It can be understood from this that the authority of the one below is nonexistent in the presence of the one above him, even if the rank of the one below customarily remains intact. This principle is not just restricted to this case, but rather this is the case of every primary and secondary entity in any sphere, i.e., in the presence of the primary, the secondary has no control. In the presence of the father, for example, his own son (who has his own children) would feel shy in calling himself “father” in front of him, let alone pointing to or using his right of fatherhood. This is because his fatherhood is secondary to his father’s fatherhood, and in the presence of the primary, the status of the secondary does not remain. Furthermore, for example, one would feel shy in referring to a stream as a “river” if the ocean is right in front of him, because [the reality is that] wherever a body of water exists it is directly or indirectly fed by the ocean. This is why once all these mighty rivers reach the ocean, they flow into the ocean’s flow. Their own rate of flow does not remain intact. Also, for example, stars would feel shy to refer to themselves as radiant when the sun is shining, because their primary star is in front of them. In the presence of the primary, the secondary feels shy of its own existence, let alone becoming a claimant to its [independent] existence.

In the same manner, upon the rising of the Sun of all Guidance ﷺ, it is natural and innate for all the prophets to conform to this Seal of the Prophets rather than implement their own law, i.e., rather than ruling according to their own prophethood or commanding [others] to rule by them. This is the same reality which has been made clear in the above-mentioned hadith that if a previous prophet finds himself in the period of the Seal of the Prophets, the laws of the finality of prophethood (khatm al-nubuwwah) shall apply upon him and his nation rather than his own laws … which in reality is a clear proof for the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ being primary in perfection, and all non-final prophets being secondary in [this] perfection.

Even though the above-mentioned hadith in regards to Musa (peace be upon him) portrays a hypothetical scenario but when in the period of the Prophet ﷺ, ‘Isa (or Jesus) (peace be upon him) will be made to descend from the heavens, he will [in actuality] follow the religion of the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ. In fact, it is possible that ‘Isa (peace be upon him) was raised to the heavens alive, so that he be made to descend from the heavens to the earth in the last period to make this very reality apparent, such that in the age of strife he perform renewal (tajdid) of the Shar‘iah of the Prophet ﷺ, while obeying it, with all the powers of his prophethood. Therefore, through this, the obedience of a previous prophet to the Shari’ah of the Prophet ﷺ no longer remains a matter of creed (aqidah) only, but rather a practical example will [now] be in front of all.

This practical example also establishes that this is not just in reference to a single Israelite messenger, but rather the adherence of all the Israelite prophets is established through this because ‘Isa (peace be upon him) is the final prophet of the Banu Isra’il and the last link in the chain of the Israelite prophethood (nubuwwah). If the last link of a continuous chain is pulled in one direction, the entire chain will naturally be pulled in the same direction. The ruling of the last link in the chain will be considered the ruling of the entire chain. Therefore, there is no reason to not accept this as proof for the entire chain of [Israelite] prophets to be followers of the way of the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ, after the descent of ‘Isa (peace be upon him) as a follower of the way of the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ, as he is the last link in the chain of Banu Isra’il prophets.

Especially when this is [also] in accordance with the Torah’s clarification, as has been mentioned in hadiths, that Musa (peace be upon him) supplicated, “If the likes of the ummah of Muhammad cannot be given to me then include me in it”. Therefore, the final prophet of Musa (peace be upon him)’s chain [i.e. ‘Isa, peace be upon him] will be sent as a reviver of Islam and as a follower of the Shari’ah of the Prophet ﷺ. ‘Isa (peace be upon him) will be included in the ummah of the Prophet ﷺ to fulfill the desire of Musa (peace upon him). As ‘Isa (peace be upon him) is a prophet who is the end point of the Israelites, when he becomes a member of the ummah of the Prophet ﷺ, the entirety of Israelite prophethood from Musa to ‘Isa (peace be upon them both) becomes included in the ummah of the Prophet ﷺ as followers.

Through the connection between the first and last, i.e., through making apparent the obedience to the way of the Prophet ﷺ by the very first Israelite messenger (Musa) and the very last (‘Isa), all of the Israelite messengers – who were the most superior in the world in their respective times – are as a result proven to be followers of the Prophet ﷺ. In addition to this, all the earlier prophethoods which culminated in the station of Isra’iliyyah, due to them being the predecessors to Isra’iliyyah, are included in this following of the Prophet ﷺ [as well]. Consequently, the same ruling is derived for all the prophets (peace be upon them), i.e., their prophethoods are considered secondary to the Seal of the Prophets. Through this, it becomes evident that the Prophet ﷺ is the prophet of the prophets (nabi al-anbiya’).

From this, another issue is clarified in regards to the period of the Prophet ﷺ, which is the last period, if the prophets have no option but to practice obedience to the Prophet ﷺ, then it is an open declaration that their nations also have no option but to be obedient to the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ. In fact, salvation in the Hereafter is restricted to the religion of the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ [as the Qur’an declares]:

“If anyone seeks a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him: he will be one of the losers in the Hereafter.” (3:85)

Thus, the title of Khatam al-Nabiyyin (Seal of the Prophets) has made apparent the primary nature of the prophethood of the Seal of the Prophets ﷺ and that he is the one who is followed in the universal sense.

[Aftab-e-Nubuwwat, pg. 86-89]

Qasim Nanotwi Made an Error, and No One Is Obliged to Follow Him?

When unable to reconcile Qasim Nanotwi’s position on the Seal of Prophethood, Deobandis may claim that he simply made an error and that no one is obliged to follow him. However, according to Deobandi sources themselves, he received divine insight when explaining Khatam an-Nabiyeen. In Al-Muhannad ‘ala al-Mufannad it is written that Maulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi received kashf (revelation from Allah) when explaining Khatam an-Nabiyeen in his book titled Tahzīr An-Nās.

This puts the Deobandis and the admirers of the Deobandi sect in a predicament: either say they lied and Allah never gave them such revelation to write such statements, or say they are right and consequently agree that the Ahmadi position, which is identical, is not only right but their aqeedah is also informed by divine insight.

Nor will you attain the honor of his comprehensive excellence and complete merit; this subtle point is Maulana’s revelation (kashf) regarding the majesty, exalted rank, and greatness of the Prophet ﷺ.

[Al-Muhannad ‘ala al-Mufannad, pg. 42]

On top of that, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri (the author of Al-Muhannad), a leading figure in the Deobandi school, explicitly defends the Nanotwi’s position in Al-Muhannad. When someone defends a position, they do not reject it; they affirm it. This defense, along with the attestation and certification of Al-Muhannad ala al-Mufannad by 24 leading Deobandi scholars including Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Mahmud ul Hassan, and others shows that the Deobandi authorities collectively accept and uphold Qasim Nanotwi’s position, leaving no room for denial. The names of the 24 scholars can be read below:

• Shaykh al-Hind, Hadhrat Mawlana Mahmud Hasan — d. 1339 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Mir Ahmad Hasan Sahib Amrohi — d. 1330 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Mufti Aziz al-Rahman ‘Uthmani — d. 1347 AH
• Hakim al-Ummah, Hadhrat Mawlana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi — d. 1362 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Shah ‘Abd al-Rahim Raipuri — d. 1337 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Hakim Muhammad Hasan (brother of Shaykh al-Hind) — d. 1345 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Qudrat Allah Muradabadi
• Hadhrat Mawlana Habib al-Rahman ‘Uthmani (brother of ‘Allamah Shabbir Ahmad ‘Uthmani) — d. 1348 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Muhammad Ahmad (son of Hadhrat Nanotwi) — d. 1347 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Ghulam Rasul, teacher at Dar al-‘Ulum Deoband — d. 1337 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Muhammad Suhail — d. 1367 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana ‘Abd al-Samad
• Hadhrat Mawlana Hakim Muhammad Ishaq Nahawri Dehlawi
• Hadhrat Mawlana Riyad al-Din, Madrasah ‘Aliyah, Meerut
• Hadhrat Mawlana Mufti Kifayat Allah Dehlawi — d. 1372 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Ziya al-Haqq Dehlawi
• Hadhrat Mawlana Muhammad Qasim Dehlawi
• Hadhrat Mawlana ‘Ashiq Ilahi Meerthi — d. 1360 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Siraj Ahmad, Sardhana, Meerut
• Mawlana Qari Muhammad Ishaq, Madrasa Islamiyyah, Meerut
• Mawlana Hakim Muhammad Mustafa Bijnori
• Hadhrat Mawlana Muhammad Mas‘ud Ahmad Gangohi (son of Hadhrat Gangohi)
• Hadhrat Mawlana Muhammad Yahya Saharanpuri — d. 1334 AH
• Hadhrat Mawlana Kifayat Allah Gangohi, teacher at Mazahir al-‘Ulum Saharanpur

[Al-Muhannad ala al-Mufannad (with Preface and Notes by Muhammad Ilyas Ghuman), pg. 8-10]

Not only that, Deobandi scholars today themselves state that there is an ijmāʿ among Deobandis upon the contents and beliefs outlined in Al-Muhannad ʿala al-Mufannad, and that the beliefs expressed in Al-Muhannad represent the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamāʿah. To such an extent, they maintain that whoever rejects even a single statement contained in Al-Muhannad can no longer be regarded as a Deobandi. For example, Deobandi scholar Ilyas Ghuman states:

Thus, this book (Al-Muhannad ‘ala al-Mufannad) represents the unanimous work of the Deobandi scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama‘ah, following the attestations of these senior scholars. Now, anyone who claims affiliation with the Deobandi scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama‘ah is required to accept all the views and beliefs contained in this book.

[Al-Muhannad ala al-Mufannad (with Preface and Notes by Muhammad Ilyas Ghuman), pg. 12]

The same thing is said by Deobandi scholar Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi who very explicitly says that four generations of Deobandi scholars all agreed to and affirmed the beliefs outlined in Al-Muhannad ʿala al-Mufannad. That means four successive generations of Deobandi scholars confirmed and upheld Qasim Nanotwi’s position and now the fifth generation of their students is continuing and upholding the same beliefs:

The elders of Deoband have passed through several generations. The first generation consisted of Hazrat Nanotwi, Hazrat Gangohi, Hazrat Mawlana Muhammad Ya‘qub Nanotwi (may Allah have mercy on them), and their contemporary senior scholars.

The second generation consisted of the students of these elders, among whom were Shaykh al-Hind, Hazrat Mawlana Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, Hazrat Hakim al-Ummah Thanwi (may Allah have mercy on them), and other senior scholars.

The third generation consisted of their students, including Hazrat Mawlana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Hazrat Mawlana Sayyid Husayn Ahmad Madani, Hazrat Mawlana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani (may Allah have mercy on them), and others.

The fourth generation consisted of their students, including Mawlana Muhammad Yusuf Banuri, Hazrat Mawlana Muhammad Shafi‘ Sahib (may Allah have mercy on them), and their contemporary senior scholars.

And now the fifth generation of their students is ongoing.

Al-Muhannad ʿala al-Mufannad bears the signatures of all the senior scholars of the second generation. These same beliefs were held by the elders of the first generation, and upon these beliefs the elders of the third and fourth generations have remained in agreement. Therefore, there is consensus (ijmāʿ) among all the senior Deobandi scholars upon the beliefs recorded in Al-Muhannad. No Deobandi has any scope to deviate from them, and whoever deviates from them is not deserving of being called a Deobandi.

[Fatawa Bayyinat, vol 1, pg. 526–527]

If Deobandis truly wish to concede that Qasim Nanotwi and all the later scholars who admired, attested to, and defended his statements were mistaken, then they must also concede something far more serious: that Nanotwi and all those scholars were not merely in error, but guilty of kufr. This is because the issue at hand is not a minor fiqh disagreement rather it is a blasphemous ‘aqīdah that has been propagated for over a century.

Deobandis must remember, this is the very same belief for which Deobandis today organise Khatm-e-Nubuwwat conferences, declaring Ahmadis to be disbelievers, apostates, and outside the fold of Islam. It is the same belief for which Ahmadis have historically been persecuted, ostracised, and even killed.

If Deobandis still insist that Nanotwi’s position was merely an error, then they should at least show one Deobandi scholar who is not bound by “delusion” and has made takfīr of Qasim Nanotwi. Other than that, they should also become Barelvis, because then they have validated Ahmad Raza Khan’s fatwas against the Deobandis, in which he accused them of violating the finality of prophethood.

Qasim Nanotwi Was Only Speaking Hypothetically, Not Claiming Another Prophet Will Come?

When referring to this statement:

Rather, if, hypothetically, after the time of the Prophet (SAW) another Prophet is born, even then it will make no difference to the Khaatamiyyat-e-Muhammadi (Seal of Prophethood of Muhammad) – similarly if another Prophet is his contemporary in another Earth, or even on this Earth another Prophet is made.

[Tahzīr An-Nās, pg. 63]

Deobandis often argue that Qasim Nanotwi’s statement about another prophet appearing was purely hypothetical, and that in reality he did not believe another prophet would come. However, this is a strawman, the issue is not on whether he actually believed another prophet will come but his definition on the seal of prophethood itself. He claimed that even if another prophet were to appear, it would not contradict the finality of prophethood. From a Sunni perspective, this is a problem. If the chronological finality of prophethood is essential element to the seal of prophethood in the way as most Sunnis understand it then saying hypothetically another prophet could appear without affecting finality shows he did not believe in the chronological finality of prophethood.

To illustrate the problem, consider this analogy: saying “if God hypothetically became a Trinity, there would be no contradiction to Tawhid” is obviously erroneous, it shows the one making the hypothetical does not actually believe in monotheism. Similarly, even speaking hypothetically, Qasim Nanotwi’s statement reveals a erroneous understanding of the finality of prophethood from the Sunni perspective.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Nanotwi stated that seal of prophethood has two aspects: rank (superiority) and a temporal aspect, meaning that Islam will not be abrogated and that the Prophet ﷺ is the last law bearing prophet. Ahmadis accept both aspects and Qasim Nanotwi did not believe in the chronological finality that is to say Muhammad ﷺ was last in time. This raises an important question for Sunnis, especially those who admire the Deobandi ulema: why are Deobandis not regarded in the same way as Ahmadis and even more so when many Deobandi scholars have been elevated to the level of prophethood?

If Ahmadis are considered rejecters of the finality of prophethood, then Deobandis must be considered rejecters as well.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (RH) (d. 241H) is one of the greatest scholars of Islamic history. He is the founder of the Hanbali school of thought and is widely known as 1 of the 4 most prominent Imams of Sunni Islam. More importantly though, Imam Ahmad (RH) is a shining example of steadfastness in faith during times of severe trials. He lived through the infamous Mihnat Khalaq al-Qur’an: a period when the ruling authorities (Abbasid Caliphate) tried to force the belief that the Qur’an was created, a clear deviation from the truth.

During this time, the majority of people, including judges, muftis, and even the caliph and his followers, sided with falsehood under pressure. Imam Ahmad (RH) stood alone, refusing to compromise on the truth, and his small group of followers remained steadfast with him.

This was the reality: Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (RH) himself was the Jama’ah, together with his small band of loyal followers, while the so-called ‘majority’ had fallen into misguidance.

The Reality of Modern Sunni Islam

Sunni muslims today claim to be part of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah, often boasting of being a large, unified community. They proudly say that because they are the majority, they are upon the Haqq. However, these Non-Ahmadis choose to live in blissful ignorance as countless sects exist within Sunni Islam – all of whom constantly accuse one another of deviation and openly declare takfir.

Where is the unity in this? There is no single Imam guiding them with authority, no central leadership, and no consensus even on core issues of faith. The Qur’an itself makes clear that the majority is not a measure of truth [Quran 6:117], and Prophet (ﷺ) prophesied that in the latter days the majority would be misguided, not guided. So how can mere numbers be used as proof of being the Jama’ah? How can this be called Jama’ah?

Scholars Affirm: Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal Alone Was the Jama’ah

Both Imam Ad-Dhahabi (RH) and Ibn al-Qayyim (RH) explicitly affirm in the following statements that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (RH) and his small band of followers were the true Jama’ah. These statements by two of the most renowned scholars in Islamic history make it clear: the Jama’ah is not determined by the majority. Being part of the true Jama’ah does not mean being part of the largest group; it means following the truth, even if only a few remain steadfast.

Imam Ad-Dhahabi (RH) (d. 748H)

“All the people deviated during the time (Mihnat Khalaq al Qur’ãn) of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal except for a small group, they were the Jammah, at that time the Judges, Muftis, the Caliph and his followers were all deviant and Imãm Ahmad alone was the Jamã’ah.”

_{[إعلام الموقعين عن رب العالمين, p. 389]}

Ibn Al-Qayyim (RH) (d. 751H)

“All the people went astray during the time of Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, except for a few individuals; thus, they were the Jamāʿah (the main body of the Muslims), while the judges, the Muftīs, the Khalīfah, and his followers were the ones who deviated and Imām Aḥmad alone was the Jamāʿah.”

_{‏[ 4/399 معلومات للذين يكتبون نيابة عن رب العالمين]}

True Jama’ah as Explained by the Sahaba

Abdullah Ibn Mas’ūd رضي الله عنهما (d. 32 AH), one of the closest and most knowledgeable companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ, repeatedly emphasized in various accounts that true Jama’ah is not determined by the majority:

Abdullah Ibn Mas’ūd رضي الله عنهما said:

“The Jamā’ah is (whatever agrees with) the Book and the Sunnah, even if you are alone.”

In another narration:

“The Jamā’ah is the people of the truth, even if you are alone.”

_{[al-Faqīh wa’l-Mutafaqqih, Dār Ibn al-Jawzī edition, p. 303]}

ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd said,

“The Jamāʿah is whoever obeys Allāh, even if they are a single person.”

_{[Aitaqad Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah, p. 181]}

Ibn al-Qayyim reported: Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said,

“The united community is that which adheres to the truth, even if you are alone.”

Nuaym ibn Hammad said,

“If the community becomes corrupted, you must adhere to its practice before it became corrupt. Even if you are alone, you by yourself would be the united community.”

_{[3/308 إعلام الموقعين عن رب العالمين]}

‘Amr ibn Maymun reported: Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said,

“Verily, the majority of groups have left the united community. The united community is only the one that conforms to the obedience of Allah, even if you are by yourself.”

_{[Sharḥ Uṣūl I’tiqād Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah 160]}

True Jama’ah in the Words of the Scholars

Ibn Al-Qayyim (RH) (d. 751H)

Ibn al-Qayyim (RH) is again on record saying that you can be upon the truth even if the entire ummah is against you or opposes you, therefore, you should not be fooled by the majority:

“Do not be deceived by the large number of this kind of people, for thousands upon thousands of them are not equal to one person of knowledge. And a single scholar is equal to the whole earth full of them. Know that consensus, proof, and the true majority is the scholar who possesses the truth—even if he is alone, even if the people of the whole world oppose him. […] Then I accompanied after him the most knowledgeable of people, ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd, and I heard him say: “Hold fast to the community (al-jamāʿah), for indeed the Hand of Allah is with the community.” […] He said: “O ʿAmr ibn Maymūn, I used to think you were among the most knowledgeable people of this village. Do you know what the community (al-jamāʿah) is?” I said: “No.” He said: “The majority of people have in fact separated from the community. The community is whatever agrees with the truth—even if you are alone.” In another wording: He struck my thigh and said: “Woe to you! The majority of people have separated from the community, and the community is that which accords with obedience to Allah, the Mighty and Majestic.” And Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād said: “If the community becomes corrupt, then hold to what the community was upon before they became corrupt—even if you are alone, for you are then the community.” Both al-Bayhaqī and others narrated this.“

_{‏[ p.396-398, معلومات للذين يكتبون نيابة عن رب العالمين]}

Muhammad Ibn Abd Al-Wahhab (RH) (d. 1206H)

Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (RH) also stated will return to being “strange,” upheld only by a few. He particularly warned against relying on the large number of people or their consensus as a proof of truth, noting that such reasoning was used by the disbelievers of the past to reject the messengers:

[…] the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and his Companions described it before it occurred, warned people against it, and informed that none would adhere to the religion except one after another, and that Islam would become strange as it began. You have known that when ‘Amr ibn ‘Abasah asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in the early days of Islam: “Who is with you in this?” He said: “A free man and a slave,” meaning Abu Bakr and Bilal. So if Islam returns as it began, how ignorant is one who argues based on the multitude of people and their consensus, and similar arguments, when faced with doubts that are great in the eyes of their adherents but insignificant before Allah and those of knowledge among His creation, as Allah says: “Rather, they say like what the former peoples said” [Al-Mu’minun: 81]. I know of no argument you use except that Allah has mentioned in His Book that the disbelievers used it to deny the messengers, such as the consensus of people, obedience to the elite, and other such things.

_{[Al-Durar Al-Saniyyah, vol 1, pg. 41]}

Sunni Claims of Majority ≠ True Jama’ah

The above statements of scholars and Sahaba completely dismantles the claim made by many Sunnis today that “we are the majority, therefore we are the Jama’ah.” If size and numbers truly defined truth, then the corrupt Khilāfah of Imam Ahmad’s (RH) time, backed by scholars, judges, and the masses of the time, would have been the true Jama’ah. Yet history tells us the exact opposite: a single Imam and a handful of followers held the truth, while the majority was astray. Unfortunately, this is the sad reality – most reject the Imam of the age, only to recognize him when it is too late.

True Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah: The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community

The example of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (RH) shows that true Jama’ah can be small, rejected by most, and steadfastly loyal to the truth. This is exactly the reality of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community today, founded by the Promised Messiah and Imam Mahdi, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) in 1889.

A single Imam, Mirza Masroor Ahmad (ABA) – 5th successor of Messiah and Mahdi, leads the Jama’ah today. Followers remain loyal to him, despite widespread opposition around the world. Ahmadis around the world adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah, just as Imam Ahmad (RH) and his small group exemplified centuries ago during the time of a monarchial caliphate.

Hazrat Khalīfatul Masīh I, Maulānā Ḥakīm Maulwi Nūrudīn (RA ) states:

“In this age, there is no Ahlus-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah on the face of the earth except [for] the Aḥmadīyyah. The Jama’ah will only be the one with an Imām. If we were to line up our opponent Muslims in one row, would they be able to have one Imām? Absolutely Not! [However], yes, it is the unique characteristic of the Aḥmadīyyah Jama’ah that it has an Imām. Thus, at this time, except for Ahmadis no one [else] is from Ahlus-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah.“

_{[Al Hakam, Feb 21, 1910, pg. 3]}

In a forthcoming article, we will take a deeper look at how renowned scholars have defined Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah — and demonstrate, with references from scholars and Jama‘at literature, how Jama‘at Al-Ahmadiyya uniquely fulfills this title.

Conclusion

• Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (RH) and his small group of followers were the real Jama’ah, while the majority were in deviation.
• True Jama’ah is NOT determined by the majority. Sunni belief that majority equals Jama’ah has been refuted by both the Sahaba and Scholars.
• Sahaba and Scholars taught that true Jama’ah is defined by steadfastness to the truth, not numbers.
• The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community exemplifies the real Jama’ah today: faithfulness, loyalty, and guidance from a true Imam are what define Jama’ah, not size, popularity, or majority opinion.

Related Article(s)

To justify the persecution of Ahmadis, Anti-Ahmadis use an excuse that the Ahmadi Muslims consider all non-Ahmadis Kafir (non-Muslim). They use this allegation to further incite hatred and violence against the community whose members are already killed, imprisoned, their mosques destroyed and graves desecrated.

In this article, we will expose the hypocrisy of the Anti-Ahmadis and show the authentic belief of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community regarding the status of non-Ahmadi Muslims.

Implication of the Takfir of Sunnis and Shias

When the ‘Sunnis’ and Shias declare someone a Kafir, this is what it implies:

1. They have become apostates. Thus, their blood is Halal and must be killed.
2. They will burn in Hell for eternity,

The takfir of the Sunnis and Shias is a disgusting murder tool through which they have spilled the blood of hundreds and thousands. This takfir causes murder of innocents even today and the prime example for this is the murder of 100s of innocent Ahmadis in the recent decades, all across the world, especially Pakistan.

This severity of the Takfir of ‘Sunnis’ was mentioned by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) more than a century ago.

About 200 maulawis put their seals of affirmation on it and I was declared a kafir [disbeliever]. These edicts were so harsh that some of the clerics even declared that my followers and I are worse than the Jews and Christians in our kufr. In general, edicts were issued stating, ‘These people should not be buried in Muslim graveyards, nor greeted with the greeting of peace, nor should a handshake be extended to them.’ Also, they declared that since we are kafirs, it is not permissible to offer prayers behind us. Rather, we should not be allowed to enter the mosques because we are disbelievers; mosques become defiled by us and if we do enter, the mosque ought to be thoroughly washed. Moreover, it is permissible to steal our goods, and we deserve execution because we deny the coming of a murderous Mahdi and repudiate jihad [with the sword].

[Haqiqatul Wahi, pg. 142]

Ahmadi Muslims reject such filthy beliefs. These are not proven from either the Holy Quran or the words and actions of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAW). The 2nd Khalifa of Ahmadiyya Islam, Mirza Basheerudin Mahmud Ahmad (RA) clarifies that we do not hold such unislamic beliefs:

Moreover, there is a great deal of difference between our definition of Kufr and theirs. They understand by Kufr to mean the denial of Islam, which is the meaning we do not ascribe to this term when using it about the non-Ahmadis. Our view is that if a person conforms to the tenets and teachings of Islam to a given extent, he is entitled to be called a Muslim.

But when he falls below even that point then although he may be called a Muslim, he cannot be regarded a perfect Muslim. We never allege on the basis of this definition that every Kafir is doomed to hell-fire for ever. We do not call even the Jews and the Christians to be Kafirs of that description.

[Political Solidarity of Islam, pg. 9]

Who initiated Takfir first?

It was the Sunnis and Shias who first declared Takfir of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS) and his followers. In 1891, when the Promised Messiah (AS) claimed to be the Messiah and proved that Isa (AS) has died, Muhammad Hussain Batalvi travelled throughout the Indian subcontinent to gather signatures of 100s of scholars on the Fatwa of the Takfir of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS).¹

Over the next decades, these scholars also continued to publish numerous such articles and pamphlets that incited the mobs for the murder of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) and his followers. This continues till this day and these references are posted elsewhere for the brevity of this article. [Add ref]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) challenged them to prove he takfired non-Ahmadis first. He says:

Can any maulawi, or any other opponent, or any custodian of a shrine prove that we were the first to issue edicts of apostasy against them? Let them produce any document, announcement, or treatise published by me prior to their own edicts of apostasy against us, in which I had pronounced my Muslim antagonists to be kafirs; otherwise, they should consider how dishonest it is that they are the ones who declared us to be kafirs, yet accuse us of denouncing all Muslims as kafirs.

[Haqiqatul Wahi, pg. 143]

Takfir of a Muslim renders one a Kafir

So it is a hypocrisy of the Anti-Ahmadis to complain that we Takfir them when they were the ones who initiated it. For argument’s sake, even if Ahmadis did Takfir Sunnis and Shias, it would still be okay as the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) said that if a Muslim Takfirs another Muslim, he himself becomes a Kafir:

إِذَا قَالَ الرَّجُلُ لأَخِيهِ يَا كَافِرُ فَقَدْ بَاءَ بِهِ أَحَدُهُمَا

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “If a man says to his brother, O Kafir (disbeliever)!’ Then surely one of them is such (i.e., a Kafir). “

[Sahih al-Bukhari 6103]

And lastly—even if Ahmadi Muslims did declare the Sunnis and Shias as Wajib-ul-Qatl (liable to be killed) and eternally hell-bound in the same vicious manner that they do—it’s surprising to see them play the victim. We are only repeating the Fatwa of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW). But we don’t even do such a thing.

Khalifatul Masih II (RA) mentions this as well:

غیر احمدیوں نے جب احمدیوں پر فتویٰ لگایا تو انہوں نے انہیں دائمی جہنمی قرار دیا لیکن احمدیوں نے جب کسی پر فتویٰ لگایا تو ساتھ ہی یہ کہہ دیا کہ اول تو اس فتویٰ کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ اسلام کی جامع و مانع تعریف سے وہ نکل گئے ہیں۔ دوم لفظ گفر کا اگر کسی معنوں میں بھی اُن پر اطلاق ہو تو اس کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ وہ خدا تعالیٰ کے نزدیک بھی قابل مواخذہ ہیں۔ اللہ تعالیٰ کا مواخذہ محض بد نیتی اور اتمام حجت پر ہوا کرتا ہے۔ اگر اُن کی نیت نیک ہے اور اگر اُن پر اتمام حجت نہیں ہوا تو وہ کسی سزا کے مستحق نہیں۔

When non-Ahmadis issued a fatwa against Ahmadis, they declared them to be eternally destined for hell. But when Ahmadis issued a fatwa against anyone, they simultaneously stated that firstly, this fatwa does not mean that they have been expelled from the comprehensive and exclusive definition of Islam (Millat-e-Islam).

Secondly, if the word kufr applies to them in any sense, it does not mean that they are also accountable before Allah the Almighty. Allah the Almighty’s accountability is solely based on ill-intention and the completion of proof (itmam-e-hujjat). If their intention is good and if the proof has not been completed against them, then they are not deserving of any punishment.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 23, pg. 372, Masala Wahi-e-Nabuwat ke Mutaliq Islami Nazariya]

Definition of a Muslim

Before we can define who is a Kafir, and who is not, we need to look at the definition of a Muslim as per the Quran and Hadith and we need to look who has the right to call himself a Muslim? Luckily, our beloved Prophet, Muhammad (SAW) has made it extremely simple for us.

When doing a census of Medina, the Prophet (SAW) did not ask individual Muslims for their Aqeedah (belief) breakdown. All he requested was to ask people if they claim to be Muslim.

The Prophet (ﷺ) said (to us),

“List the names of those people who have announced that they are Muslims.”

So, we listed one thousand and five hundred men.

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3060]

Notice, that he did not ask each person to detail their Aqeedah. He did not ask if that person believes Allah is above the Arsh or He has 2 eyes or rejects a certain belief and so on, something that Muslims do today. Similarly, the Prophet (SAW) defines who is a Muslim in another hadith. He says:

“Whoever prays like us and faces our Qibla and eats our slaughtered animals is a Muslim and is under Allah’s and His Apostle’s protection. So do not betray Allah by betraying those who are in His protection.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari 391]

In summary, anyone who claims to be a Muslim has the full right to call himself a Muslim. Anyone who prays like a Muslim and eats the Zabiha (slaughtered meat) like a Muslim, has the full protection of a Allah and his prophet. This further refutes the unislamic and disguting belief of the ‘Sunnis’ and Shias that calls for the murder of those who are declared Kafir.

The 2nd Khalifa of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Mirza Basheerudin Mahmud Ahmad (RA) says the following after mentioning the above ahadith:

From all these references, it is proven that for inclusion in the Islamic community (Millat-e-Islam), merely reciting the Kalima (declaration of faith) is sufficient. There is no other matter that is necessary for inclusion in the Islamic community.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 23, pg. 348, Masala Wahi-e-Nabuwat ke Mutaliq Islami Nazariya]

Status of non Ahmadis in an Ahmadi state

Finally, one may ask that if Ahmadi Muslims did not initiate the Takfir of the non-Ahmadi Muslims and the Ahmadis don’t call for the murder of non-Ahmadis, then what is their status?

The answer is that anyone claims to be a Muslim will be given the rights of a Muslim. That person is far more closer to Ahmadi Muslims than anyone else. They are closer to us than the Jews and Christians. They will be given the same status within an Ahmadi Muslim state as any Ahmadi Muslim. No Jizya will be taken from them nor any other discrimination will be done to them.

This is contrary to how Ahmadi Muslims are treated in the Sunni and Shia countries. For example, in Pakistan, it is illegal for us to even say Islamic terms like Asslam-o-Alaikum, Alhmadulillah etc. Our mosques are destroyed, graves desecrated and Ahmadi Muslims murdered and jailed regularly.

Non-Ahmadi Muslims are not True Muslims

As explained in the previous sections, Ahmadi Muslims believe that anyone who calls themselves Muslim will have the right to do so. No one can take that right from them or force them to do otherwise. But just like all the sects of Muslims, we also believe that no one else is a true Muslim except us.

Honesty requires that we be truthful. It was the prophecy of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that in the latter days, Muslims will become just like the Jews and divided into numerous sects. Only 1 of them will be right while the rest would be Hell-bound. Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is that 1 Heaven-bound sect.

It was narrated from ‘Awf bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah(ﷺ) said:

“The Jews split into seventy-one sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy in Hell. The Christians split into seventy-two sects, seventy-one of which will be in Hell and one in Paradise. I swear by the One Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy-three sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy-two in Hell.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah, who are they?” He said: “The united community.”

[Sunan Ibn Majah 3992]

Moreover, we cannot dare say that those Muslims who do all of the following are true Muslims just like us:

• Istagatha (Asking Dua from the dead saints/prophets)²
• Believe that Quran has abrogated (useless) verses³
• Believe that Isa (AS) will murder innocent women/old/men for merely rejecting Islam ⁴
• Believe that Isa (AS) will abrogate many more verses of Quran when he returns⁵
• Believe that Allah has literal 2 eyes, fingers and other body parts⁶
• Reject ahadith completely (Quranists)
• Believe in Imams/Prophets/Saints who have all knowledge of unseen and control every atom of the universe⁷
• Believe that sex/sexual pleasures with pre-pubescents is allowed⁸

There are many, many more unislamic beliefs that are widespread amongst all the Muslims but for the sake of brevity, we only posted a few.

In short, Ahmadi Muslims are the only only Muslims who follow the true Islam that was followed by the Prophet (SAW) and Sahaba (RA). This is because it is only the Ahmadi Muslims that have accepted the Messiah and Mahdi of the age, whose job was to bring back Muslims to the pure Islam, as taught by the beloved Prophet, Muhammad (SAW).

The rest of the Muslims are only Muslims by name and have full rights to identify themselves as Muslim. This is the summary of the “Takfir” done by the Ahmadis.

Rejection of prophet of Allah deems one a Kafir?

Some ask that denial of any prophet of Allah deems one a Kafir. Since Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS) is the Messiah and has the status of a Prophet, then how come his denial does not render the non-Ahmadi Muslims as Kafir?

A simple answer to this is that yes, this is exactly why Ahmadi Muslims consider non-Ahmadis to be Kafir i.e they are not true Muslims (Momin) and only Muslims by name.

But again, our takfir does not imply that we kill them or declare them eternally hell-bound or that we stop them from praying Salat or jail them for merely saying “Asslam-o-Alaikum” or “Alhamdulillah”. Or that we consider them to be outside the nation of Islam (Millat-e-Islam). Khalifatul Masih II (RA) explains the same in the Munir Enquiry Commision in 1954

Question: Do you count Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib among those commissioned ones (divinely appointed figures) whose acceptance is necessary to be called a Muslim?

Answer: I have already answered this question before. A person who does not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib cannot be declared outside the circle of Islam (Millat-e-Islam).

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 24, pg. 383, Tehqiqati Adalat mein Jama’at Ahmadiyya ka bayan]

Why Takfir is important?

Another question that’s often asked is: why do even Ahmadis do Takfir in the first place? What’s the benefit of it? It’s understood that the Sunnis are calling for the murder of Ahmadis by declaring them disbelievers, and that they were the first to initiate the Takfir. But still—why can’t Ahmadis be the “bigger person” and just ignore it?

Firstly, Ahmadis only bring up the topic of Takfir when asked—either by curious individuals or hostile attackers. We don’t go around labeling people Kafir the way many non-Ahmadi Muslims do, including Sunnis and Shias. They’ve made it into a national sport. We haven’t.

This can be easily confirmed by reviewing any Sunni and Shia books, websites, articles, social media posts, and videos. Each of them will declare us kafir without question. Then check the literature of the Ahmadis and you will notice that those same Sunnis and Shias have been called Muslims repeatedly.

Secondly, the Takfir of non-Ahmadis has been specifically mentioned in our literature addressed to the Lahori Ahmadis. It was never addressed to non-Ahmadi Muslims. So the term Kafir has been used in a way that both Ahmadi groups understand, i.e, it only means they are not true Muslims (Momin), but they still have the right to identify as Muslim and are part of the Millat-e-Islam.

Thirdly, the answer to the question as to why takfir is important lies in understanding the status of the Messiah. According to Sunni and Shia belief, the Messiah who appears in the latter days will hold the rank of a Prophet (Nabi), and his rejection will lead to eternal Hell. In their own theology, rejecting him is no light matter. They also declare the rejectors of that Messiah and Mahdi to be Kafir, worthy of death and eternally Hell-bound.

Ahmadis simply apply that same principle but not the same implication. The rejection of the Promised Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS), is no trivial act. When a person denies him, they’re not just disagreeing with a scholar or ignoring a random saint—they are rejecting the very Messiah and Mahdi prophesied in the Quran, Ahadith, and supported by hundreds of living signs from Allah. Rejecting him is a major sin, and everyone will be accountable before Allah based on their intellect, sincerity, and effort in seeking the truth.

And because the rank of the Messiah is so high, it becomes necessary to state the consequences of denying him. Silence in the face of that would be dishonesty.

Conclusion

The following is the summary of all the points in the article.

1. The non-Ahmadis first initiated Takfir of the Ahmadis.
2. The non-Ahmadis also have the same Takfir fatawa against each others
   • Barelvi Sunni vs Deobandi Sunni vs Salafi
   • Sunni vs Shia
   • Shia vs Shia
3. When non-Ahmadis Takfir, it means:
   • The accused has left Islam entire
   • The accused cannot legally claim to be Muslim or follow any Islamic commadments
   • The accused is Wajib-ul-Qatal (liable for death) as he is an apostate
   • The accused is eternally Hell-bound
4. When Ahmadis used the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to put a Fatwa of Kufr on the non-Ahmadis, even then they were cautious. Non-Ahmadis:
   • Are not outside the Millat-e-Islam (nation of Islam)
   • Are not eternally Hell-Bound
   • Are not Wajib-ul-Qatl (liable for death)
   • Can still identify as Muslim
   • Have all the rights of a Muslim
5. Non-Ahmadis proudly Takfir Ahmadis even today while Ahmadi Muslim literature continues to address all non-Ahmadis as Muslims.

I will end with the following summary by Khalifatul Masih II (RA):

یادر ہے کہ احمدی تمام مسلمان کہلانے والے لوگوں کو اُمتِ محمدیہ میں سمجھتے ہیں اور اگر انہوں نے کسی جگہ پر کافر کا لفظ استعمال بھی کیا ہے تو اس کے صرف یہ معنے ہیں کہ وہ مرزا صاحب کی صداقت کے منکر ہیں یہ معنے نہیں کہ رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی امت میں نہیں یا اصولِ اسلام کو نہیں مانتے۔کافر کے معنے عربی زبان میں منکر کے ہیں۔جب کوئی شخص مرزا صاحب کو نہیں مانتا تو عربی زبان اس کے لئے کافر کا لفظ ہی استعمال کیا جائے گا لیکن اگر کوئی یہ لفظ بولے تو اس کے معنے کھینچ تان کر یہ کر لیں کہ وہ اسے خدا اور رسول کا منکر کہتا ہے یہ سخت ظلم کی بات ہے۔کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمانوں کو امت محمدیہ سے خارج نہیں سمجھا۔کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمان کہلانے والوں کو کلمہ کا منکر قرار نہیں دیا، کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمانوں کو خدا اور قرآن اور محمد رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم اور حشر و نشر اور تقدیر کا منکر قرار نہیں دیا۔جب بھی کہا یہی کہا ہے کہ ان سے غلطی ہوئی ہے کہ انہوں نے ایک بڑی بھاری صداقت کا انکار کیا ہے۔یعنی حضرت مرزا صاحب کو جو خدمت دین اور اشاعت کے لئے آئے تھے نہیں مانا اور اس طرح اسلام کی ترقی میں روک بنے۔

It should be remembered that Ahmadis consider all people who call themselves Muslims to be part of the Ummah of Muhammad. And if they have used the word ‘kafir’ (disbeliever) anywhere, it only means that they are deniers of Mirza Sahib’s truthfulness – it does not mean that they are not part of the noble Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Ummah or that they do not accept the principles of Islam. The meaning of ‘kafir’ in the Arabic language is ‘denier.’ When someone does not accept Mirza Sahib, then in the Arabic language the word ‘kafir’ will be used for them. But if someone utters this word and its meaning is stretched and distorted to suggest that they are calling them deniers of God and the Prophet, this is a matter of grave injustice. Ahmadis have never considered Muslims to be outside the Ummah of Muhammad. Ahmadis have never declared those who call themselves Muslims to be deniers of the Kalima (declaration of faith). Ahmadis have never declared Muslims to be deniers of God, the Quran, Muhammad the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), resurrection, or divine decree. Whenever they have spoken, they have only said that they (non-Ahmadis) have made an error in that they have denied a great truth – namely, they have not accepted Hazrat Mirza Sahib who came for the service and propagation of the religion, and thus have become an obstacle to the progress of Islam.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 24, pg. 26, Mawlana Maudidi ke Risala “Qadiani Masala’ ka Jawab]

References

Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanwi holds the position of Hakeem-ul-Ummat, “Physician of the Ummah”, amongst the Sunni Muslims. What is utterly shocking is that Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi copied Maulvi Fazl Khan Changawi, Maulvi Noor-ud-Deen(RA), and Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS).

Maulvi Fazl Khan Changwi was an Ahmadi Scholar who wrote Asrar-e-Shariat spanning two volumes and multiple parts of it have quotes of Hazrat Hakeem-ul-Ummat Noor-ud-Deen Bhervi(RA) as well as the Promised Messiah(AS) but when these quotes are taken they are given with citation such as “(Noor)” for Noor-ud-Deen(RA). However Ashraf Ali Thanwi “Ahkam-e-Islam Aql Ki Nazar mein” is full of plagiarism of Maulvi Fazl Khan Changawi’s book as well as the books of the Promised messiah(AS). This is extremely problematic as Ashraf Ali Thanwi takfired Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(AS).

The aim of this article is to showcase several examples of Ashraf Ali Thanwi copying from Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(AS) word for word spanning multiple pages but yet giving no indication he took it from Masih-e-Maud(AS), however, there are many more instances of where Ashraf Thanwi plagiarized. The Deobandis have no choice but to admit to the greatness of the writings of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(AS) and admit that their wajib-ul-taqleed Imam plagiarized from someone they consider a nonmuslim.

The Books that Ashraf Ali Thanwi plagiarized from

Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(AS) books/texts that Thanwi plagiarized from:

1. Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam: Originally an address during a conference on December 26th, 1896, then published in 1905
2. Barakatud Dua  : Original Urdu text first published in 1893
3. Naseem e Dawat: First Urdu Edition published in 1903
4. Arya Dharam: First published in Urdu in 1895
5. Noah’s Ark: First Urdu Edition published in 1902
6. Al-Hakam January 23, 1899 – Official Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat Newspaper

Maulvi Fazal Khan Changawi, an Ahmadi Scholar, began writing his book(Asrar-e-Shariat) in 1909 and his book was published in 1910. In this book, he quoted many statements from the books of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS, Maulana Noorudeen RA, Maulawi Muhammad Ali, and more with citations.

The plagiarized filled book of Ashraf Ali Thanvi is called Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main. Written in 1334 AH (1915), and republished in the computerized format in 2009.

Thanwi’s Plagirism of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad(AS)’s writings

Plagiarism Instance # 1: The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam Page 338

Original:

اس بات کا کس کو علم نہیں کہ یہ جانور اول درجہ کا نجاست خور اور نیز بے غیرت اور دیوث ہے۔ اب اس کے حرام ہونے کی وجہ ظاہر ہے کہ قانون قدرت یہی چاہتا ہے کہ ایسے پلید اور بد جانور کے گوشت کا اثر بھی بدن اور روح پر پلید ہی ہو کیونکہ ہم ثابت کر چکے ہیں کہ غذاؤں کا بھی انسان کی روح پر ضرور اثر ہے۔ پس اس میں کیا شک ہے کہ ایسے بد کا اثر بھی بد ہی پڑے گا جیسا کہ یونانی طبیبوں نے اسلام سے پہلے ہی یہ رائے ظاہر کی ہے کہ اس جانور کا گوشت بالخاصیت حیا کی قوت کو کم کرتا ہے اور دیوئی کو بڑھاتا ہے

The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam Page 338

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

اس بات کا کس کو علم نہیں کہ یہ جانور اول درجہ کا نجاست خور اور نیز بے غیرت اور دیوث ہے۔ اب اس کے حرام ہونے کی وجہ ظاہر ہے کہ قانون قدرت یہی چاہتا ہے کہ ایسے پلید اور بد جانور کے گوشت کا اثر بھی بدن اور روح پر پلید ہی ہو کیونکہ ہم ثابت کر چکے ہیں کہ غذاؤں کا بھی انسان کی روح پر ضرور اثر ہے۔ پس اس میں کیا شک ہے کہ ایسے بد کا اثر بھی بد ہی پڑے گا جیسا کہ یونانی طبیبوں نے اسلام سے پہلے ہی یہ رائے ظاہر کی ہے کہ اس جانور کا گوشت بالخاصیت حیا کی قوت کو کم کرتا ہے اور دیوئی کو بڑھاتا ہے

Ahkam-e-Islam Aql Ki Nazar Mein pages 205-206

English translation is as follows:

Everyone knows that it eats filth and is utterly shameless. Thus the reason for the prohibition of its flesh is obvious, as by the law of nature its flesh would have a foul effect on the body and the soul of one who eats it. As we have already demonstrated food affects a person’s soul and there can be no doubt that the flesh of such a foul animal would also be foul. Even in pre-Islamic times, Greek physicians had opined that the flesh of this animal particularly damages the faculty of modesty and fosters shamelessness

.[The Philosphy and Teachings of Islam , Eng Translation 39-40]

Plagiarism Instance # 2: Barakatud Dua, Pages 7-8

Original:

اگر چہ دنیا کی کوئی خیر و شر مقدر سے خالی نہیں تا ہم قدرت نے اس کے حصول کے لئے ایسے اسباب مقرر کر رکھے ہیں جن کے صحیح اور بے اثر میں کسی خاوند کو کلام نہیں مثلا اگر چہ مقدر پر لحاظ کر کے دوا کا کرنا نہ کرنا در حقیقت ایسا ہی ہے جیسا که دعا یا ترک دعا مگر کیا سید صاحب یہ رائے ظاہر کر سکتے ہیں کہ مثلا علم طب سراسر باطل ہے اور حکیم حقیقی نے دواؤں میں کچھ بھی اثر نہیں رکھا۔

ہے کہ خدا تعالی اس بات پر تو قادر تھا کہ تربد اور سقمونیا اور سنا اور حب الملوک میں تو ایسا قومی اثر رکھے کہ ان کی پوری خوراک کھانے کے ساتھ ہی دست چھوٹ جائیں یا مثلاسم الفار اور بیش اور دوسری بلائل زہروں میں وہ غضب کی تاثیر ڈال دی کہ ان کا کامل قدر شربت چند منٹوں میں ہی اس جہان سے رخصت کر دے لیکن اپنے برگزیدوں کی توجہ اور عقد ہمت اور تضرع کی بھری ہوئی دعاؤں کو فقط مردہ کی طرح رہنے دے جن میں ایک ذرہ بھی اثر نہ ہو؟

اعلی تا شیروں پر ذاتی تجربہ نہیں رکھتے اور ان کی ایسی مثال ہے جیسے کوئی ایک مدت تک ایک پرانی اور سال خوردہ اور مسلوب القونی دوا کو استعمال کرے اور پھر اس کو بے اثر پاکر اس دوا پر عام علم نکا دے کہ اسمیں کچھ بھی تاثیر نہیں۔

Barakatud Dua  Pages 7-8

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

 چہ مقدر پر لحاظ کر کے دوا کا کرنا نہ کرنا در حقیقت ایسا ہی ہے جیسا که دعا یا ترک دعا مگر کیا سید صاحب یہ رائے ظاہر کر سکتے ہیں کہ مثلا علم طب سراسر باطل ہے اور حکیم حقیقی نے دواؤں میں کچھ بھی اثر نہیں رکھا۔

ہے کہ خدا تعالی اس بات پر تو قادر تھا کہ تربد اور سقمونیا اور سنا اور حب الملوک میں تو ایسا قومی اثر رکھے کہ ان کی پوری خوراک کھانے کے ساتھ ہی دست چھوٹ جائیں یا مثلاسم الفار اور بیش اور دوسری بلائل زہروں میں وہ غضب کی تاثیر ڈال دی کہ ان کا کامل قدر شربت چند منٹوں میں ہی اس جہان سے رخصت کر دے لیکن اپنے برگزیدوں کی توجہ اور عقد ہمت اور تضرع کی بھری ہوئی دعاؤں کو فقط مردہ کی طرح رہنے دے جن میں ایک ذرہ بھی اثر نہ ہو؟

اعلی تا شیروں پر ذاتی تجربہ نہیں رکھتے اور ان کی ایسی مثال ہے جیسے کوئی ایک مدت تک ایک پرانی اور سال خوردہ اور مسلوب القونی دوا کو استعمال کرے اور پھر اس کو بے اثر پاکر اس دوا پر عام علم نکا دے کہ اسمیں کچھ بھی تاثیر نہیں۔

Ahkam-e-Islam Aql Ki Nazar Mein page 87

Plagiarism Instance # 3: Arya Dharam Pages 37,38, and 39

Original:

کہ مسلمانوں میں نکاح ایک معاہدہ ہے جس میں مرد کی طرف سے مہر اور تعہد نان و نفقہ اور اسلام اور حسن معاشرت شرط ہے اور عورت کی طرف سے عفت اور پاکدامنی اور نیک چلنی اور فرمانبرداری شرائط ضروریہ میں سے ہے اور جیسا کہ دوسرے تمام معاہدے شرائط کے ٹوٹ جانے سے قابل فسخ ہو جاتے ہیں ایسا ہی یہ معاہدہ بھی شرطوں کے ٹوٹنے کے بعد قابل فسخ ہو جاتا ہے صرف یہ فرق ہے کہ اگر مرد کی طرف سے شرائط ٹوٹ جائیں تو عورت خود بخو دنکاح کے توڑنے کی مجاز نہیں ہے جیسا کہ وہ خود بخو د نکاح کرنے کی مجاز نہیں بلکہ حاکم وقت کے ذریعہ سے نکاح کو توڑا سکتی ہے جیسا کہ ولی کے ذریعہ سے نکاح کو کر اسکتی ہے اور یہ کمی اختیار اس کی فطرتی شتاب کاری اور نقصان عقل کی وجہ سے ہے لیکن مرد جیسا کہ اپنے اختیار سے معاہدہ نکاح کا باندھ سکتا ہے ایسا ہی عورت کی طرف سے

شرائط ٹوٹنے کے وقت طلاق دینے میں بھی خود مختار ہے سو یہ قانون فطرتی قانون سے ایسی

(۳۳)

مناسبت اور مطابقت رکھتا ہے گویا کہ اُس کی عکسی تصویر ہے کیونکہ فطرتی قانون نے اس بات کو تسلیم کر لیا ہے کہ ہر ایک معاہدہ شرائط قرار دادہ کے فوت ہونے سے قابل فسخ ہو جاتا ہے اور اگر فریق ثانی فسخ سے مانع ہو تو وہ اس فریق پر ظلم کر رہا ہے جو فقدان شرائط کی وجہ سے فسخ عہد کا حق رکھتا ہے جب ہم سوچیں کہ نکاح کیا چیز ہے تو بجز اس کے اور کوئی حقیقت معلوم نہیں ہوتی کہ ایک پاک معاہدہ کی شرائط کے نیچے دو انسانوں کا زندگی بسر کرنا ہے اور جو شخص شرائط شکنی کا مرتکب ہو وہ عدالت کی رو سے معاہدہ کے حقوق سے محروم رہنے کے لائق ہو جاتا ہے اور اسی محرومی کا نام دوسرے لفظوں میں طلاق ہے لہذا طلاق ایک ایسی پوری پوری جدائی ہے جس سے مطلقہ کی حرکات سے شخص طلاق دہندہ پر کوئی بداثر نہیں پہنچتا یا دوسرے لفظوں میں ہم یوں کہہ سکتے ہیں کہ ایک عورت کسی کی منکوحہ ہو کر نکاح کے معاہدہ کو کسی اپنی بدچلنی سے توڑ دے تو وہ اُس عضو کی طرح ہے جو گندہ ہو گیا اور سڑ گیا یا اس دانت کی طرح ہے جس کو کیڑے نے کھا لیا اور وہ اپنے شدید درد سے ہر وقت تمام بدن کو ستاتا اور دکھ دیتا ہے تو اب حقیقت میں وہ دانت دانت نہیں ہے اور نہ وہ متعفن عضو حقیقت میں عضو ہے اور سلامتی اسی میں ہے کہ اُس کو اکھیڑ دیا جائے اور کاٹ دیا جائے اور پھینک دیا جائے یہ سب کا رروائی قانون قدرت کے موافق ہے ۔ عورت کا مرد سے ایسا تعلق نہیں جیسے اپنے ہاتھ اور اپنے پیر کا لیکن تاہم اگر کسی کا ہاتھ یا پیرکسی ایسی آفت میں مبتلا ہو جائے کہ اطباء اور ڈاکٹروں کی رائے اسی پر اتفاق کرے کہ زندگی اس کی کاٹ دینے میں ہے تو بھلا تم میں سے کون ہے کہ ایک جان کے بچانے کے لئے کاٹ دینے پر راضی نہ ہو پس ایسا ہی اگر تیری منکوحہ اپنی بدچلنی اور کسی مہان پاپ سے تیرے پر وبال لا دے تو وہ ایسا عضو ہے کہ بگڑ گیا اور سڑ گیا اور اب وہ تیرا عضو نہیں ہے اس کو جلد کاٹ دے اور

گھر سے باہر پھینک دے ایسا نہ ہو کہ اس کی زہر تیرے سارے بدن میں پہنچ جائے اور تجھے بلاک کرے پھر اگر اس کائے ہوئے اور زہر یلے جسم کوکوئی پرند یا درند کھالے تو تجھے اس سے کیا کام کیونکہ وہ جسم تو اُسی وقت سے تیرا جسم نہیں رہا جبکہ تو نے اُس کو کاٹ کر پھینک دیا

Arya Dharam Pages 37,38, and 39

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

کہ مسلمانوں میں نکاح ایک معاہدہ ہے جس میں مرد کی طرف سے مہر اور تعہد نان و نفقہ اور اسلام اور حسن معاشرت شرط ہے اور عورت کی طرف سے عفت اور پاکدامنی اور نیک چلنی اور فرمانبرداری شرائط ضروریہ میں سے ہے اور جیسا کہ دوسرے تمام معاہدے شرائط کے ٹوٹ جانے سے قابل فسخ ہو جاتے ہیں ایسا ہی یہ معاہدہ بھی شرطوں کے ٹوٹنے کے بعد قابل فسخ ہو جاتا ہے صرف یہ فرق ہے کہ اگر مرد کی طرف سے شرائط ٹوٹ جائیں تو عورت خود بخو دنکاح کے توڑنے کی مجاز نہیں ہے جیسا کہ وہ خود بخو د نکاح کرنے کی مجاز نہیں بلکہ حاکم وقت کے ذریعہ سے نکاح کو توڑا سکتی ہے جیسا کہ ولی کے ذریعہ سے نکاح کو کر اسکتی ہے اور یہ کمی اختیار اس کی فطرتی شتاب کاری اور نقصان عقل کی وجہ سے ہے لیکن مرد جیسا کہ اپنے اختیار سے معاہدہ نکاح کا باندھ سکتا ہے ایسا ہی عورت کی طرف سے

شرائط ٹوٹنے کے وقت طلاق دینے میں بھی خود مختار ہے سو یہ قانون فطرتی قانون سے ایسی

(۳۳)

مناسبت اور مطابقت رکھتا ہے گویا کہ اُس کی عکسی تصویر ہے کیونکہ فطرتی قانون نے اس بات کو تسلیم کر لیا ہے کہ ہر ایک معاہدہ شرائط قرار دادہ کے فوت ہونے سے قابل فسخ ہو جاتا ہے اور اگر فریق ثانی فسخ سے مانع ہو تو وہ اس فریق پر ظلم کر رہا ہے جو فقدان شرائط کی وجہ سے فسخ عہد کا حق رکھتا ہے جب ہم سوچیں کہ نکاح کیا چیز ہے تو بجز اس کے اور کوئی حقیقت معلوم نہیں ہوتی کہ ایک پاک معاہدہ کی شرائط کے نیچے دو انسانوں کا زندگی بسر کرنا ہے اور جو شخص شرائط شکنی کا مرتکب ہو وہ عدالت کی رو سے معاہدہ کے حقوق سے محروم رہنے کے لائق ہو جاتا ہے اور اسی محرومی کا نام دوسرے لفظوں میں طلاق ہے لہذا طلاق ایک ایسی پوری پوری جدائی ہے جس سے مطلقہ کی حرکات سے شخص طلاق دہندہ پر کوئی بداثر نہیں پہنچتا یا دوسرے لفظوں میں ہم یوں کہہ سکتے ہیں کہ ایک عورت کسی کی منکوحہ ہو کر نکاح کے معاہدہ کو کسی اپنی بدچلنی سے توڑ دے تو وہ اُس عضو کی طرح ہے جو گندہ ہو گیا اور سڑ گیا یا اس دانت کی طرح ہے جس کو کیڑے نے کھا لیا اور وہ اپنے شدید درد سے ہر وقت تمام بدن کو ستاتا اور دکھ دیتا ہے تو اب حقیقت میں وہ دانت دانت نہیں ہے اور نہ وہ متعفن عضو حقیقت میں عضو ہے اور سلامتی اسی میں ہے کہ اُس کو اکھیڑ دیا جائے اور کاٹ دیا جائے اور پھینک دیا جائے یہ سب کا رروائی قانون قدرت کے موافق ہے ۔ عورت کا مرد سے ایسا تعلق نہیں جیسے اپنے ہاتھ اور اپنے پیر کا لیکن تاہم اگر کسی کا ہاتھ یا پیرکسی ایسی آفت میں مبتلا ہو جائے کہ اطباء اور ڈاکٹروں کی رائے اسی پر اتفاق کرے کہ زندگی اس کی کاٹ دینے میں ہے تو بھلا تم میں سے کون ہے کہ ایک جان کے بچانے کے لئے کاٹ دینے پر راضی نہ ہو پس ایسا ہی اگر تیری منکوحہ اپنی بدچلنی اور کسی مہان پاپ سے تیرے پر وبال لا دے تو وہ ایسا عضو ہے کہ بگڑ گیا اور سڑ گیا اور اب وہ تیرا عضو نہیں ہے اس کو جلد کاٹ دے اور

گھر سے باہر پھینک دے ایسا نہ ہو کہ اس کی زہر تیرے سارے بدن میں پہنچ جائے اور تجھے بلاک کرے پھر اگر اس کائے ہوئے اور زہر یلے جسم کوکوئی پرند یا درند کھالے تو تجھے اس سے کیا کام کیونکہ وہ جسم تو اُسی وقت سے تیرا جسم نہیں رہا جبکہ تو نے اُس کو کاٹ کر پھینک دیا

Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main, Pages 161-162

Plagiarism Instance # 4: Barakatud Dua, Pages 11-12

Original:

یہی حال دواؤں کا بھی ہے ۔ کیا دواؤں نے موت کا دروازہ بند کر دیا ہے؟

یا اُن کا خطا جانا غیر ممکن ہے ؟ مگر کیا با وجود اس بات کے کوئی اُن کی تاثیر سے انکار کر سکتا ہے؟ یہ بیچ ہے کہ ہر ایک امر پر تقدیر محیط ہو رہی ہے ۔ مگر تقدیر نے علوم کو ضائع اور بے حرمت نہیں کیا اور نہ اسباب کو بے اعتبار کر کے دکھلایا ۔ بلکہ اگر غور کر کے دیکھو تو یہ جسمانی اور روحانی اسباب بھی تقدیر سے باہر نہیں ہیں ۔ مثلاً اگر ایک بیمار کی تقدیر نیک ہو تو اسباب علاج پورے طور میسر آ جاتے ہیں اور جسم کی حالت بھی ایسے درجہ پر ہوتی ہے کہ وہ ان سے نفع اٹھانے کے لئے مستعد ہوتا ہے ۔ تب دوا نشانہ کی طرح جا کر اثر کرتی ہے۔ یہی قاعدہ دعا کا بھی ہے۔ یعنی دعا کے لئے بھی تمام اسباب وشرائط قبولیت اُسی جگہ جمع ہوتے ہیں جہاں ارادہ الہی اُس کے قبول کرنے کا ہے

Barakatud Dua, Pages 11-12

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

یہی حال دواؤں کا بھی ہے ۔ کیا دواؤں نے موت کا دروازہ بند کر دیا ہے

یا اُن کا خطا جانا غیر ممکن ہے ؟ مگر کیا با وجود اس بات کے کوئی اُن کی تاثیر سے انکار کر سکتا ہے؟ یہ بیچ ہے کہ ہر ایک امر پر تقدیر محیط ہو رہی ہے ۔ مگر تقدیر نے علوم کو ضائع اور بے حرمت نہیں کیا اور نہ اسباب کو بے اعتبار کر کے دکھلایا ۔ بلکہ اگر غور کر کے دیکھو تو یہ جسمانی اور روحانی اسباب بھی تقدیر سے باہر نہیں ہیں ۔ مثلاً اگر ایک بیمار کی تقدیر نیک ہو تو اسباب علاج پورے طور میسر آ جاتے ہیں اور جسم کی حالت بھی ایسے درجہ پر ہوتی ہے کہ وہ ان سے نفع اٹھانے کے لئے مستعد ہوتا ہے ۔ تب دوا نشانہ کی طرح جا کر اثر کرتی ہے۔ یہی قاعدہ دعا کا بھی ہے۔ یعنی دعا کے لئے بھی تمام اسباب وشرائط قبولیت اُسی جگہ جمع ہوتے ہیں جہاں ارادہ الہی اُس کے قبول کرنے کا ہے

Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main, Page 88

English Translation

Have medicines closed the door of death, or is it impossible for them to fail in their purpose? And yet can anyone deny their effect? It is true that Predestination comprehends everything, but it has neither rendered the sciences useless nor has it shown the means to be unreliable. If you reflect deeply enough, you will see that the physical and spiritual means are not outside the sphere of Predestination. For instance, if a sick person’s destiny is favourable, all the means for the proper remedy become available and his physical condition happens to be such that it is ready to derive full benefit from the remedy, and the medicine also finds its mark accurately. The same principle applies to prayer. All the means and conditions for the acceptance of a prayer only become available when God wills to accept it.

[Barkatud Dua – English translation : The Blessings of Prayer page 18]

Plagiarism Instance # 5: Arya Dharam Pages 22-23

Original:

[yellow highlight]

پر ہیز گار رہنے کی غرض سے نکاح کرو اور اولاد صالح طلب کرنے کے لئے دعا کرو جیسا کہ وہ اپنی پاک کلام میں فرماتا ب مُحْصِينَ غَيْرَ مُسْفِحِينَ، الجز نمبر ۵ ۔ یعنی چاہئے کہ تمہارا نکاح اس نیت سے ہو کہ تا تم تقویٰ اور پرہیز گاری کے قلعہ میں داخل ہو جاؤ ۔ ایسا نہ ہو کہ حیوانات کی طرح محض نطفہ نکالنا ہی تمہارا مطلب ہو ۔

[blue highlight]

اور پھر ایک اور جگہ فرماتا ہے وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّى يَغْنِيَهُمُ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ ” الجز و نمبر ۱۸ سورۃ النور ۔ یعنی جو لوگ نکاح کی طاقت نہ رکھیں جو پرہیز گار رہنے کا اصل ذریعہ ہے تو اُن کو چاہئے کہ اور تدبیروں سے طلب عفت کریں چنانچہ بخاری اور مسلم کی حدیث میں آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم فرماتے ہیں کہ جو نکاح کرنے پر قادر نہ ہو اُس کے لئے پر ہیز گار رہنے کے لئے یہ تدبیر ہے کہ وہ روزے رکھا کرے اور حدیث یہ ہے یا معشر الشباب من استطاع منكم الباءة فليتزوج فانه اغض للبصر وأحصن للفرج ومن لم يستطع فعليه بالصوم فانه له وجاء صحیح مسلم و بخاری یعنے اے جوانوں کے گروہ جو کوئی تم میں سے نکاح کی قدرت رکھتا ہو تو چاہیے۔ کہ وہ نکاح کرے کیونکہ نکاح آنکھوں کو خوب نیچا کر دیتا ہے اور شرم کے اعضاء کو زنا وغیرہ سے بچاتا ہے ورنہ روزہ رکھو کہ وہ خضی کر دیتا ہے۔

Arya Dharam Pages 22-23

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

[yellow highlight]

پر ہیز گار رہنے کی غرض سے نکاح کرو اور اولاد صالح طلب کرنے کے لئے دعا کرو جیسا کہ وہ اپنی پاک کلام میں فرماتا ب مُحْصِينَ غَيْرَ مُسْفِحِينَ، الجز نمبر ۵ ۔ یعنی چاہئے کہ تمہارا نکاح اس نیت سے ہو کہ تا تم تقویٰ اور پرہیز گاری کے قلعہ میں داخل ہو جاؤ ۔ ایسا نہ ہو کہ حیوانات کی طرح محض نطفہ نکالنا ہی تمہارا مطلب ہو ۔

[blue highlight]

اور پھر ایک اور جگہ فرماتا ہے وَلْيَسْتَعْفِفِ الَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ نِكَاحًا حَتَّى يَغْنِيَهُمُ اللهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ ” الجز و نمبر ۱۸ سورۃ النور ۔ یعنی جو لوگ نکاح کی طاقت نہ رکھیں جو پرہیز گار رہنے کا اصل ذریعہ ہے تو اُن کو چاہئے کہ اور تدبیروں سے طلب عفت کریں چنانچہ بخاری اور مسلم کی حدیث میں آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم فرماتے ہیں کہ جو نکاح کرنے پر قادر نہ ہو اُس کے لئے پر ہیز گار رہنے کے لئے یہ تدبیر ہے کہ وہ روزے رکھا کرے اور حدیث یہ ہے یا معشر الشباب من استطاع منكم الباءة فليتزوج فانه اغض للبصر وأحصن للفرج ومن لم يستطع فعليه بالصوم فانه له وجاء صحیح مسلم و بخاری یعنے اے جوانوں کے گروہ جو کوئی تم میں سے نکاح کی قدرت رکھتا ہو تو چاہیے۔ کہ وہ نکاح کرے کیونکہ نکاح آنکھوں کو خوب نیچا کر دیتا ہے اور شرم کے اعضاء کو زنا وغیرہ سے بچاتا ہے ورنہ روزہ رکھو کہ وہ خضی کر دیتا ہے۔

Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main, Pages 140-141

Plagiarism Instance # 6: Kishti-e-Nuh, Pages 69-70

Original:

[yellow highlight]

کے لئے اُن کا وارد ہونا ضروری ہے۔ (۱) پہلے جب کہ تم مطلع کئے جاتے ہو کہ تم پر ایک بلا آنے والی ہے مثلاً جیسے تمہارے نام عدالت سے ایک وارنٹ جاری ہوا یہ پہلی حالت ہے جس نے تمہاری تسلی اور خوشحالی میں خلل ڈالا سو یہ حالت زوال کے وقت سے مشابہ ہے کیونکہ اس سے تمہاری خوشحالی میں زوال آنا شروع ہوا اس کے مقابل پر نماز ظہر متعین ہوئی جس کا وقت زوال آفتاب سے شروع ہوتا ہے۔

[blue highlight]

(۲) دوسرا تغیر اس وقت تم پر آتا ہے جب کہ تم بلا کے محل سے بہت نزدیک کئے جاتے ہو مثلاً

جب کہ تم بذریعہ وارنٹ گرفتار ہو کر حاکم کے سامنے پیش ہوتے ہو یہ وہ وقت ہے کہ جب تمہارا خوف سے خون خشک ہو جاتا ہے اور تسلی کا نور تم سے رخصت ہونے کو ہوتا ہے سو یہ حالت تمہاری اُس

وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ آفتاب سے نور کم ہو جاتا ہے اور نظر اُس پر جم سکتی ہے اور صریح نظر آتا ہے کہ اب اس کا غروب نزدیک ہے۔ اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز عصر مقرر ہوئی۔

(۳) تیسر اتغیر تم پر اس وقت آتا ہے جو اس بلا سے رہائی پانے کی بنگلی امید منقطع ہو جاتی

ہے مثلاً جیسے تمہارے نام فرد قرار داد جرم لکھی جاتی ہے اور مخالفانہ گواہ تمہاری ہلاکت کے لئے گزر جاتے ہیں یہ وہ وقت ہے کہ جب تمہارے حواس خطا ہو جاتے ہیں اور تم اپنے تئیں ایک قیدی سمجھنے لگتے ہو ۔ سو یہ حالت اس وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ آفتاب غروب ہو جاتا ہے اور تمام امیدیں دن کی روشنی کی ختم ہو جاتی ہیں اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز مغرب مقرر ہے۔

[red highlight]

(۴) چوتھا تغیر اس وقت تم پر آتا ہے کہ جب بلا تم پر وارد ہی ہو جاتی ہے اور اس کی سخت تاریخی تم پر احاطہ کر لیتی ہے مثلاً جب کہ فرد قرار داد جرم اور شہادتوں کے بعد ھم سزا تم کو سنایا جاتا

ہے اور قید کے لئے ایک پولس مین کے تم حوالہ کئے جاتے ہوسو یہ حالت اس وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ رات پڑ جاتی ہے اور ایک سخت اندھیرا پڑ جاتا ہے اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز

عشاء مقرر ہے۔

[orange highlight]

(۵) پھر جب کہ تم ایک مدت تک اس مصیبت کی تاریکی میں بسر کرتے ہو تو پھر آخر خدا کا رم تم پر جوش مارتا ہے اور تمہیں اس تاریخی سے نجات دیتا ہے مثلا جیسے تاریکی کے بعد پھر آخر کار صبح نکلتی ہے اور پھر وہی روشنی دن کی اپنی چمک کے ساتھ ظاہر ہو جاتی ہے سو اس روحانی حالت کے

مقابل پر نماز فجر مقرر ہے اور خدا نے تمہارے فطرتی تغیرات میں پانچ حالتیں دیکھ کر پانچ نمازیں تمہارے لئے مقرر کیں اس سے تم سمجھ سکتے ہو کہ یہ نمازیں خاص تمہارے نفس کے فائدہ کے لئے ہین

Kishti-e-Nuh, Pages 69-70

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

[yellow highlight]

کے لئے اُن کا وارد ہونا ضروری ہے۔ (۱) پہلے جب کہ تم مطلع کئے جاتے ہو کہ تم پر ایک بلا آنے والی ہے مثلاً جیسے تمہارے نام عدالت سے ایک وارنٹ جاری ہوا یہ پہلی حالت ہے جس نے تمہاری تسلی اور خوشحالی میں خلل ڈالا سو یہ حالت زوال کے وقت سے مشابہ ہے کیونکہ اس سے تمہاری خوشحالی میں زوال آنا شروع ہوا اس کے مقابل پر نماز ظہر متعین ہوئی جس کا وقت زوال آفتاب سے شروع ہوتا ہے۔

[blue highlight]

(۲) دوسرا تغیر اس وقت تم پر آتا ہے جب کہ تم بلا کے محل سے بہت نزدیک کئے جاتے ہو مثلاً

جب کہ تم بذریعہ وارنٹ گرفتار ہو کر حاکم کے سامنے پیش ہوتے ہو یہ وہ وقت ہے کہ جب تمہارا خوف سے خون خشک ہو جاتا ہے اور تسلی کا نور تم سے رخصت ہونے کو ہوتا ہے سو یہ حالت تمہاری اُس

وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ آفتاب سے نور کم ہو جاتا ہے اور نظر اُس پر جم سکتی ہے اور صریح نظر آتا ہے کہ اب اس کا غروب نزدیک ہے۔ اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز عصر مقرر ہوئی۔

(۳) تیسر اتغیر تم پر اس وقت آتا ہے جو اس بلا سے رہائی پانے کی بنگلی امید منقطع ہو جاتی

ہے مثلاً جیسے تمہارے نام فرد قرار داد جرم لکھی جاتی ہے اور مخالفانہ گواہ تمہاری ہلاکت کے لئے گزر جاتے ہیں یہ وہ وقت ہے کہ جب تمہارے حواس خطا ہو جاتے ہیں اور تم اپنے تئیں ایک قیدی سمجھنے لگتے ہو ۔ سو یہ حالت اس وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ آفتاب غروب ہو جاتا ہے اور تمام امیدیں دن کی روشنی کی ختم ہو جاتی ہیں اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز مغرب مقرر ہے۔

[red highlight]

(۴) چوتھا تغیر اس وقت تم پر آتا ہے کہ جب بلا تم پر وارد ہی ہو جاتی ہے اور اس کی سخت تاریخی تم پر احاطہ کر لیتی ہے مثلاً جب کہ فرد قرار داد جرم اور شہادتوں کے بعد ھم سزا تم کو سنایا جاتا

ہے اور قید کے لئے ایک پولس مین کے تم حوالہ کئے جاتے ہوسو یہ حالت اس وقت سے مشابہ ہے جب کہ رات پڑ جاتی ہے اور ایک سخت اندھیرا پڑ جاتا ہے اس روحانی حالت کے مقابل پر نماز

عشاء مقرر ہے۔

[orange highlight]

(۵) پھر جب کہ تم ایک مدت تک اس مصیبت کی تاریکی میں بسر کرتے ہو تو پھر آخر خدا کا رم تم پر جوش مارتا ہے اور تمہیں اس تاریخی سے نجات دیتا ہے مثلا جیسے تاریکی کے بعد پھر آخر کار صبح نکلتی ہے اور پھر وہی روشنی دن کی اپنی چمک کے ساتھ ظاہر ہو جاتی ہے سو اس روحانی حالت کے

مقابل پر نماز فجر مقرر ہے اور خدا نے تمہارے فطرتی تغیرات میں پانچ حالتیں دیکھ کر پانچ نمازیں تمہارے لئے مقرر کیں اس سے تم سمجھ سکتے ہو کہ یہ نمازیں خاص تمہارے نفس کے فائدہ کے لئے ہین

Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main, Pages 50, 51, and 52

Plagiarism Instance # 7: Naseem e Dawat Pages 437-438

Original:

Naseem e Dawat Pages 436-438

Thanwi’s Plagiarism:

Ahkam-e-Islam Aqal Ki Nazar Main, Pages 224-226

Plagiarism Instance #8 – Al-Hakam January 23, 1899 pages 2-3

Original of Masih Maud(AS)

Al-Hakam January 23, 1899 pages 2-3

Ashraf Ali Thanwi took this passage and stuck into his book, gave it the title of ‘Qaboor se Taluq-e-Arwaeh’

Ahkam-e-Islam Aql ki Nazar mein pages 262-265

In the above highlights the red underline represents words that Masih Maud used such as Sadaqat and Thanwi just changed the meaning to a synonym such as Haqiaq, Haqeeqat, Amr Waqai. Another example is when Masih Maud(AS) says ‘Tarah Tarah’ in one line and Thanwi changes it to Muktalif. So what happens is after pages and pages of plagirism is might change one word to a synonym. This is an abhorent and emptyheaded way to cover up his plagirism.

Plagiarism Instance #9 – Islami Usool ki Philopshy

Islami Usool ki Philopshy page 47

Thanwi’s plagiarism:

There can be no doubt that unrestrained looks become a source of danger. If we place soft bread before a hungry dog, it would be vain to hope that the dog should pay no attention to it. Thus God Almighty desired that human faculties should not be provided with any occasion for secret functioning and should not be confronted with anything that might incite dangerous tendencies.

The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam page 48

Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Plagiarism of Hakim-ul-Ummah Maulvi Nuruddin Bhairawi RA

We have written a full article on this. You can read it here.

Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Plagiarism of Maulvi Muhammad Ali(RA)’s statement from Asrar-e-Shariaat

As mentioned above Ahkam-e-Islam Aql ki Nazar Mein is mostly a plagiarism of Asrar-e-Shariat. One such case is where Ashraf Ali Thanwi plagiarized from Asrar-e-Shariat Volume 2 specifically in the Kitab al Raq titled ‘Islami Ghulami ki Falsafee’

Asrar-e-Shariat Volume 2 Baab Kitab ar-raq page 265

Ahkam-e-Islam Aql Mein Nazar Main pg 187-188

Here you can see side by side texs, of how the passages are exactly the same! This book is a compilation of plagiarism in Urdu Literature and they pointed out how Ashraf Ali Thanwi word for word copied from Asrar-e-Shariat

l the basis of the ahkam nor are they exhaustive [of all benefits]…

(Ahkam-i-Islam Aqal ki Nazar Main, pp14-15)

Refutation of Weak Deobandi Responses

Claim 1: Thanwi admitted to his plagiarism in his book

Yes, you heard this right. Deobandis seriously use this as proof. Him acknowledging that he took from a scholar but not mentioning the name of the scholar or the book or what pages he took, means he did not do plagiarism. This is of course, half-witted. Hinting Towards Plagiarism confirms the Plagiarism, it doesn’t disprove it.

Just now I saw a book [on the topic of the rational benefits of religious ahkam (injunctions)] written by someone proficient with the pen but because of shortcomings in knowledge and deeds, he filled it with all kinds of reliable and unreliable matters…It occurred to me that seeing such books is harmful to the public…

Hence, I felt the need to prepare a separate collection of these topics, free of these wrongs, for such people [who have an interest in this subject], so that if someone has such a passion they can read it. Even if it doesn’t bring them benefit, it will stop them from the harms [of books like the one mentioned above].

However, a person who will lose the awe of divine rules from learning their rational benefits; or will start to think these rational benefits to be the pivot of these rules such that they believe the rules to be negated when the benefits are missing; or they imagine the benefits to be objectives in themselves and assign other methods to achieve them instead of establishing the [religious] ahkam…I don’t grant permission for people of such outlooks to read it.

Anyhow, this is the collection that is in your hands. The lowly one [i.e. Mawlana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanawi], proceeding from utmost impartiality, has selected in this [book] many discussions from the abovementioned book that have the quality of being sound. Some rational benefits of the famous ahkam (religious injunctions) will be mentioned in this [book] that align with the principles of Shari‘ah and are easy to understand. However, neither are all these rational benefits explicitly stated [in scriptural sources] nor are they al

Claim 2: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad took from another scholar?

1) Summary of this article:https://barelwism.wordpress.com/2023/09/07/barelwi-alleges-mawlana-ashraf-ali-thanawi-plagiarised-from-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-qadiyani/
Thanwi states he is extracting from another book, therefore it isn’t plagiarism
Thanwi is copied another book (Asrar-i-Shari’at) not by Ghulam Ahmad
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani copied from Asrar-i-Shari’at

2) Refutation:

It’s plagiarism. All he did was hint towards his plagiarism which isn’t the same as citing your sources.
Asrar-i-Shari’at cites the Promised Messiah AS and other Ahmadi scholars.
Asrar-e-Shariat was written after Hazrat Ahmad death so how could he copy it

Ahkam-e-Shariat by Maulvi Fazal Khan Changhawi was written after the Death of the Promised Messiah AS

Maulvi Fazal Khan Changawi published his book in 1910(1328 AH), and he himself states it took him 6 months to write it, which means the earliest date possible is 1909. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS had passed away in May, 1908

Maulvi Fazal Khan Changhawi was Ahmadi himself

Secondly, some Deobandis claim that Changwi was not an Ahmadi when he wrote Asrar-e-Shariat. However, he compiled Fatawah Ahmadiyya, which contains rulings of the Promised Messiah AS and Maulana Nuruddin RA.

Deobandis in their scramble for an answer contradict each other

Difaee’ Ahlus Sunnat – A Deobandi Account on Twitter with 1.5k wrote:

If anyone of you thinks the Maulvi Fazl Khan was a qadiani just read the first ten page of the book. You’ll know the qadiani deception again.

https://web.archive.org/save/https://twitter.com/Ahnaaf_Services/status/1684606891606069250

Note: Their scan of Asrar-e-Shariat does not prove that he was not an Ahmadi.

While Barelwism.org writes:

The author, Muhammad Fazal Khan, initially belonged to the Ahl-i-Hadith, then became a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani and in later life, left Qadiyanism.

https://barelwism.wordpress.com/2023/09/07/barelwi-alleges-mawlana-ashraf-ali-thanawi-plagiarised-from-mirza-ghulam-ahmad-qadiyani/

This shows how Deobandis will say anything and even lie and speak out both sides of its mouth in order to lie

Barelwism.org Article is Fundamentally Wrong as it refutes itself

3) Just an additional point to solidify how low IQ the article is. The article mentioned how Thanwi was extracting from Asrar-i-Shari’at even in the case where he copied from Nur al-Din. But the scan the article posted again shows Fazal Changwi citing Nur al-Din as it clearly says نور. Fazal Khan Changhawi is quoting Noorudeen and puts (NOOR).

Quick Recap of Dates:

1904 – Eid Khutba of Nur al-Din

1910 – Fazl Khan Changhawi quotes Nur-ad-Deen RA with (NOOR) citation

1915 – Thanwi Plagiarizes and cuts out Noor citation

Their article refutes itself as they show the scan of 1910 Ahkam e Shariat with Noor Citation and the Thanwi passage without Noor Citation (HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW)

The following Images are from Barelvism.Org:

Effect of our Article and Twitter Thread

One of the major effects of our article and twitter thread is that it went viral on twitter and we got to see the stages of Deobandi Grief. We are building off of research that Maulana Dost Shahid RH conducted on this topic.

1st Stage of Grief of Deobandis

Deobandi Cope 1: The scans you have shown of Masih Maud AS books are computerized not the original: https://twitter.com/ahnaaf_services/status/163814119452508160

Ahmadi Reply: Ahmadi Muslims responded With Original Scans: https://twitter.com/discordislam/status/1638540918042300424

Cope 2: Pretend that Plagiarism did not happen to deceive Arabs and Non Urdu Speakers

True Islam Discord Team showed Non Ahmadi Sunni Scholars admitting that Thanwi plagiarized:

a)

For example, the famous “Sunni” scholar, Maulana Irshad ul Haq Asari, pointed out that Thanwi’s plagiarism from The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam is exactly the same. He asks his readers: “Is copying word for word and veiling the book and author robbery?

b)

Additionally, Mahinama Na’imat Lahore, which is intimately connected to the Deoband movement has written a whole article on Thanwi’s copying of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS. It also clarifies that the original editions of His AS’s work are found in libraries

c)

Similarly, in another publication called ‘Mushaheer Ilm o Adab ke Sarqon ka Muhasaba’ shows that Thanwi plagiarized from a companion of the Promised Messiah, Maulvi Muhammad Ali, by putting quotes side by side

d)

“Sunni” Mua’alim, Abu Nu’man Raza, compiles instances of Thanwi’s plagiarism of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad AS and conveniently puts the computerized Urdu Text, side by side, making it easy to read. You can read the article at this link: https://t.co/XDKxUq5rgs /15

Many ignorant Sunnis allege that the Muallaq narrations in Sahih Bukhari are weak which is a false claim. In this article, we show the references of Muhaddthin and Sunni scholars agreeing that Muallaq narrations are indeed authentic if in affirmative or definitive form like qala (said) or rawā (narrated). This is the case with the narration of Ibn Abbas (R.A) in Sahih Bukhari as it says “Qala Ibn Abbas”:

وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ: {مُتَوَفِّيكَ} مُمِيتُكَ

Ibn Abbas (R.A) said, “Mutawaffika (مُتَوَفِّيكَ) means death.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari p.634]

Below is the list of sources that clearly tells us that the above narration is Sahih.

1) Umadat Al-Qari

أكثر البخاري من أحاديث وأقوال الصحابة وغيرهم بغير إسناد فإن كان بصيغة جزم كقال وروى ونحوهما فهو حكم منه بصحته

Most of Al-Bukhari’s hadiths and sayings of the Companions and others without chain of narrators. If it is in the form of assertiveness, such as what Qala (he said), Rawa (he narrated), and the like, then it is a judgment of it, is sahih.

[Umdat al-Qari, Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari by Imam Al Ayni (d. 855), pg 32]

2) Muqaddimah Fi Usool Al-Hadith

“Muallaq ahadith in Sahih Al-Bukhari fall into two categories:

1) Those that he narrated with a definitive form, for example: when he says so-and-so said such-and-such or mentioned such-and-such. This method of narrating Mu’allaq Hadeeths is considered a judgment by Al-Bukhari that these Hadeeths are authentically attributed to the person they are attributed to: it is therefore considered an authentic narration (this is because he would never have definitively attributed something to a certain narrator unless he had verified the authenticity of that attribution to that narrator).

2) Those with a less definitive form and in passive tense: for example, when he says, it was said or it was narrated on the authority of so and so, indicate that there is a doubt concerning its authenticity.”

[MUQADDIMAH Fi Usool Al-Hadith, A PRIMER TO USOOL AL-HADITH BY SHEIKH ABDUL HAQ MOHADITH DAHELVI p 17-18]

3) An Introduction to the science of hadith

There is doubt about some of the “suspended” hadith (musallaq); that is, the hadith with an isnad from the beginning of which one transmitter or more is omitted. The majority of these are in the book of Bukhari; there are very few in the book of Muslim.

We should say: These and similar hadith which contain an expression decisively and conclusively indicating their ascription to the person from whom they are “suspended” – for example, “The Messenger of God (Peace be upon him) said (qala) such and such,” “Ibn ‘Abbas said such and such,” “Mujahid” said such and such,” “Affan” said such and such,” “Qa’nabi” said such and such,” “Abu Hurayra” related (rawa) such and such,” and similar expressions – are judged to be established as actually coming from that person.

On the basis of all of these expressions, it is determined that the person to whom Bukhari ascribed the hadith spoke and related [the text that follows]. Bukhari would not have deemed it permissible to state this [that is, to use these unequivocal expressions] without qualification unless it was established in his view that the hadith came from the person to whom it à ascribed. If the transmitter from whom the hadith is suspended is not a Companion, the judgment regarding the soundness of the hadith depends on the cohesiveness of the isnäd between that person and the Companion.

[An Introduction to the science of hadith by Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ al-Shahrazūrī, pg 13]

4) Ibn Hajar’s Hadi al Sari

As for the mawqüfs, he uses the form [implying] certainty with those which are valid in his mind, although they may not meet his formal requirements of validity. He uses the form limplying uncertainty, however, with reports in whose Isnăd there is weakness or interruption, except in those places where the report’s weakness is strengthened by its existence by way of a different route or because of its fame from the one who transmit ted it. He cites the legal opinions of the Companions and the Followers, as well as their opinions in many matters of exegesis of Qur’anic verses, for the purpose of gaining comfort in them, and to strengthen his preferred opinion on those questions in which there are differences among the Imams.

Therefore, it should be said that everything which is cited in the book is either that for which titles were written, or that by which titles were written” The purpose of this work, essentially, is the valid hathths which are musnad, and this is that for which be wrote titles. As for mawqüfs, ta’liqs, and, yes, verses from the Qur’an, these are mentioned only secondarily. Thus, all of these are used to write the titles. When they are considered together, however, and when they are also considered in relation to the hadiths, they explain one another, some explaining (mufassir) and others being ex plained (mufassar). Thus, under this consideration, some of these are also that for which he wrote titles. His primary purpose, however, is fadith, so understand that, for it is a proper explanation by which many objections to the author’s citation of this type terial can be explained, and God grants success.

[Ibn Hajar’s Hady al-Sari: A Medieval Interpretation of the Structure of Bukhari’s al-Jami’ al-Sahih: Introduction and Translation]

5) Usool Al-Hadeeth: The Methodology of Hadith

“Such hadeeths are generally considered authentic if the hadeeth is narrated using verbs in the active voice, like rawaa (he narrated); qaala (he said);  thakara (he mentioned). On the other hand, if they are narrated using the passive voice, like ruwiya (it was narrated);  qeela (it was said); thukira (it was mentioned), their status is uncertain. Some of them may be  saheeh, others hasan and yet others da‘eef.  However, the weak narrations are not excessively weak due to their presence in these books in which the authors sought to compile only authentic hadeeths.”

[Usool Al-Hadeeth: The Methodology of Hadith Evaluation by Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips]

6) Shaykh Uthaymeen (Salafi/Wahhabi) scholar:

However, whatever al-Bukhari recorded as mu’allaq and he was certain about it, it is considered as sahih according to him even if it was not according to his conditions. And we say that it is sabib according to al-Bukhári because he recorded it as mu’allaq and used it as a valid evidence to infer the rulings. Evidently it is not possible that he would conclude any of Allah’s rulings except by deriving from the sound narration rations he possessed. However the narration did not meet al-Bukhari’s criteria, and if it had, he would have mentioned its sanad so that it is known, with the fact that he reported the badith as mu’allaq in a chapter but muttasil in another.

[A Commentary on the Poem al-Bayquniyyah Paperback by Muhammad ibn Salih al-Uthaymeen, p117-118]

7) A Textbook of Hadith Studies Authenticity, Compilation, Classification, and Criticism

“According to the rules that the ulama’ of hadith have generally upheld, the Mu’allaq aḥadīth of al-Bukhārī are considered as Sahih if the suspension is made in decisive words, such as qala (said), fa’ala (did), amara (commanded), nahā (prohibited), dhakara (mentioned), rawā (narrated) and so on. Suspension (ta liq) would not convey validity and soundness (şihha) if it occurs in a defective form or expression (sighat al-tamrid) such as “it is narrated from so and so” (yurma an kadha wa kadha), “it is said of him” (yuqalu ‘anhu), “it is mentioned, or narrated” (yudhkaru, yuḥkā) and the like, which are in any case usually not employed in the typical cases of ta’liq.”

[A Textbook of Hadith Studies Authenticity, Compilation, Classification and Criticism of Hadith by Mohammad Hashim Kamali, p163]

8) Science of Hadith by Qari Fazl Ullah

“Otherwise, Imam Bukhari relates Muallaq as well, but all his Muallaq are saheeh. Regarding a Muallaq we are bound to find its sanad and then its status could be determined. Imam Bukhari has quoted Muallaq, but he has related the same as muttasil in another chapter except for 160 Hadith. Hafiz Ibn Hajar has written a book “At Taufeeq” where he has related all these Ahadith as muttasil, and Imam Muslim has brought very few Muallaq in his book. Sometimes, Imam Bukhari relates the same with a word ascertains that this is saheeh, meaning he used for the narration an active form of verb but he did not mention its sanad either to make it brief or for the topic concerned he has another saheeh Hadith, or he has not taken it from his teacher, or he has a little doubt in the taking of this Hadith, or it was quoted in a talk. So this type we call it as attached to the condition of Bukhari, or that is saheeh according to others.”

[Science of Hadith by Qari Fazl Ullah, p 112]

9) Ibn Bazz (Salafi/Wahhabi) scholar:

“Senior Hadith scholars agree that the Hadiths related by Al-Bukhari as Mu’allaq in affirmative formulae of ascription to the shaykh are authentic to such shaykh. Again, if the Mu allaq Hadith is related as Muttasil (a Hadith with a continuous chain of narration to a Companion of the Prophet or Follower; the generation after the Prophet’s Companions) by some trustworthy narrators, doubt is lifted. That is why I gave due importance and compiled a book on this issue called “Ta’liq Al Ta’liq” …. The knowledgeable scholar Ibn Al-Qayyim (may Allah be merciful with him) said in Al-Ighatha when he mentioned that Hadith: “This is a sahih Hadith related by Al-Bukhari in his Sahih Book of Hadith where he quoted it as evidence and in the form of affirmative Mu allaq………………Al-Bukhari is far from being accused of Tadlis (misrepresentation resulting from a Hadith narrator who provides misleading information about his shaykh or the chain of narration). Third: he included the Hadith in his Sahih Book of Hadith stressing its authenticity; otherwise, he would never have done that…………..Fourth: he related it as affirmative Mu’allaq without any indication of its weakness, for if he stopped during narration or the Hadith was not according to his condition, he would say: It was related or mentioned that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said …. Yet, if he said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said…, then he confirmed the authenticity of the Hadith and attributed it to the Prophet (peace be upon him).”

[English Translations of Majmoo’al-Fatawa of late Scholar Ibn Bazz (Part No. 21; Page No. 131) p 129-131]

10) TUHFATUD DURAR by Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias

“The Hukm (law) of a Mu’allaq Hadeeth: If the Muhadditheen who are particular in gathering only Saheeh Ahaadeeth, like Bukhaari and Muslim, narrate a Mu’allaq Hadeeth with a ‘Seegha of Jazm’ (a tense of certainty) e.g. Qaala or Dhakara, then the Riwaayah in question will be said to be Saheeh according to them, but if they narrate with a ‘Seegha of Tamreedh’ (a tense indicating uncertainty) e.g. Qeela or Yudhkaru, then the Riwaayah will not be accepted as is but it will be necessary to make Tahqeeq (research) regarding it. The Mu’allaq Ahaadeeth of those Muhadditheen who gather all types of Ahaadeeth will not be accepted without Tahqeeq.”

[TUHFATU DURAR – Commentary On Nukhbatul Fikr by Mufti Saeed Ahmad Palanpuri (Author), Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias (Translator) p 41]

11) Islamweb (Sunni/Salafi):

Mu‘allaq Hadeeths in Saheeh Al-Bukhari falls into two categories:

1.     Those that he narrated with a definitive form, for example: when he says so-and-so said such-and-such or mentioned such-and-such… This method of narrating Mu‘allaq Hadeeths is considered a judgment by Al-Bukhari that these Hadeeths are authentically attributed to the person they are attributed to. This is because he would never have definitively attributed something to a certain narrator unless he had verified the authenticity of that attribution to that narrator.

2.     Those with a less definitive form, for example, when he says, it was said or it was narrated on the authority of so and so…  Hadeeths in this form are not necessarily authentic because this form of narration may be also used with Dha‘eef (weak) Hadeeths.

[Islamweb Fatwa (Sunni website)]

12) IslamQA (Sunni/Salafi):

From what the scholars have said about the methodology of Imam al-Bukhaari in narrating mu’allaq reports, we can divide his mu’allaq reports (of which there are one hundred and sixty) into two categories: 

1- Those which were narrated in a decisive form, such as saying “He narrated…” and so on.

The ruling on these mu’allaq reports is that they are saheeh or hasan, because it is not possible for him to state that in a decisive form unless it was saheeh in his view. Rather there are some reports which meet his conditions but he reported them in mu’allaq form. 

The scholars made an exception from this principle in the case of just one hadeeth, which is reported in mu’allaq form in the Book of Zakaah (2/525).

[IslamQA Answer (Sunni Website)]