Reply to a Mockery — Page 19
Response to the booklet entitled Ilh a m i Girgit 19 There is no basis for the so-called hadith ْ ل َ وَحْی َ بَعْد َ مَوْتِی [there will be no revelation after my death], but there is a hadith ْ ل َ نَبِی َّ بَعْدِي [There is no Prophet after me]. People who are endowed with knowledge understand it to mean that there can be no Prophet after the Holy Prophet s as who would abrogate the Shariah. ( Iqtir a bus-S a ‘ah, by N u rul- H asan Kh a n , p. 162, Ma t ba‘ Muf i d ‘Ām Tab‘, 1301 AH) Respected readers! Maulaw i Sahib tried to make a truth out of a lie by referring to the so-called consensus. But where does this ‘consensus’ exist. The divines of Ahl-e-Tashayyu‘, Ahl-e-Sunnat, Ahl-e-Hadith, and the Barelvis, as quoted above, have expressed the belief that the door is certainly open for prophethood without a new law. Thus his tall talk stands uprooted. Now let us examine the ideology of the divine whom Maulaw i Abul Bashir follows, i. e. Maulana Muhammad Q a sim Nan o taw i , founder of the Madrasah Deoband. Maulana Muhammad (died 1880 CE, 1297 AH) writes: According to lay people, the Messenger of Allah, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, being kh a tam means that his era came after the era of the past Prophets and that he is the last Prophet. But it is apparent to those endowed with insight that coming in a particular sequence holds no honour in itself. How then can the verse 1 َ وَلٰـكِن ْ رَّسُوْل َ هللا ِ وَخَاتَم َ النَّبِيِّيْن 1. ‘. . . but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets’ ( S u rah al-A h z a b , 33:41).