Take the 2-minute tour ×
Islam Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for Muslims, experts in Islam, and those interested in learning more about Islam. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I was wondering how it is acceptable for the Ahmadiyya movement with not considering Prophet Muhammad the last prophet when that seems to be so central to Islam? I thought the belief that Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet was one of the five pillars?

I am looking for scripture references from the Ahmadiyya movement that helps me understand how they justify it. Did the question never come up? I am not looking for answers that indicate why the Ahmadiyya movement is blasphemous, incorrect, or non-Islamic.

share|improve this question
add comment

3 Answers 3

up vote 4 down vote accepted

As far as I know, Ahmadiyyas do believe that Prophet Mohammad was the last prophet. However, they believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (whom they are named after) is the promised Mahdi. As such, Ahmaddiyas believe that he is more of a reformer commissioned by Allah and not a prophet. You can read more about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claim in this article.

share|improve this answer
2  
Oh. Then why are they not considered Muslims? What tenant of Islam do they violate?! –  user83 Jun 20 '12 at 20:24
    
@Swati - Basically, the rest of the Muslims believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's claims are false, and that he is a false claimant to prophethood (no matter what he says). See this link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya#Comparison –  System Down Jun 20 '12 at 20:30
    
So Ahmadiyya's believe that he was not a prophet, but other Muslims believe that he is claiming to be a prophet? Did I get that right? –  user83 Jun 20 '12 at 20:36
    
@Swati - In a nutshell, yes. –  System Down Jun 20 '12 at 20:39
add comment

All people who claim to be prophets after prophet Mohammad (pbuh) have used the same technique to make people follow them, Almahdi technique!

Since after Mohammad's (pbuh) death up to now, There were many cases where people claim to be Almahdi to make the people follow them and some of these actually somehow succeeded.

The question now is why do people who claim to be prophets always claim to be Almahdi? simply because Muslims know for granted that Mohammad (pbuh) is the last prophet which was clear in Quran and the only person with (prophety) attributes still to come is Almahdi beside Messiah (Jesus) who we as Muslims believe will come at the end of time. This was mentioned in a lot of Hadiths said by Mohammad (pbuh).

The leader of Ahmadiyya (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) claimed to be both Almahdi and Messiah and he used this to convince people to follow him and he actually made some followers!

Regarding him being a messenger/prophet, He claimed that Ahmad was mentioned in Quran and God meant him. While Ahmad is a known name for prophet Mohammad who has another names also:

وَإِذْ قَالَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِلَيْكُم مُّصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيَّ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَمُبَشِّرًا بِرَسُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ قَالُوا هَذَا سِحْرٌ مُّبِي
And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."[61:6]

Conclusion

Ahmadiyya followers believe that their leader is Almahdi and the Messiah and the Messenger who was mentioned literally in Quran. Other Muslims believe in Almahdi and Messiah but just not Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. There are Hadiths describe Almahdi and Mirza does not fit the description. Any way the time was not clearly mentioned. The prophet (bpuh) said it will be at the End Of Time which we do not know when exactly.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I can't say on behalf of the Ahamadiyya movement as i'm not associating myself with any particular movement. But just commenting on the justification that most 7adeeth based madhahib have on the lastness of the prophet is basing on the khatam word in 33:40 AFAIK.

and then there is this khitaamuhu misk.(83:25-26) it would be awkward to say that the seal of the wine is a fragrance, but it's most likely more that it had a certain signature to the wine and that signature is the scent of musk.

it's rather hasty to say that khatam to mean the seal. and then does the seal also always means the end/last? khatam could also mean the signature as in the usage above. and so this is just like treading on a shaky foundation, and is looking for trouble if using it to justify killing.(3:7) which in the quran there is no proof even for a justifiable reason to kill because of declaring kufr. one might be a mu'mim then a kafir then a mu'mim then a kafir again and it could happen (4:137)

also analogously the term awwalul mu'mineen to not mean the first mu'min but rather the prime example of a mu'min.(7:143) would just show that in principle there is a possibility of khatam to have a usage pattern that is similar to awwal.

wallahua3lam

just fyi: http://www.muslim.org/sa-case/evidence/s03.htm

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.