In the name of Allah(SWT) and may Peace and Blessing be upon
Rasulollah(SAW).

Naturally, I am looking for absolute Truth and an intelligent 
and coherent discussion, based on evidence.  Unfortunately, this
appears to be something Qadiani posters have been taking great 
pain to avoid.

I have had similar experience with many Christian Missionaries:
they are often needlessly rude and argumentative and avoid 
discussing issues based on evidence.  But, they never get tired
of asking questions and changing subject. This is why Allah(SWT)
has sealed their hearts and raised a veil so they realize not
what they are doing.

Mr. Aziz, it is very easy to ask questions, but never provide 
answers nor clarify one's position with evidence.  If Qadianis
do not like to take this opportunity to clarify the position of 
their founders and leaders, there is much that can be said, 
without any need for their participation, on the character of
their founders and leaders.

I hope Qadianis will be eager to share the "wisdom" of their 
leaders with everyone on this forum.  On the other hand, if 
you also believe them to have been unwise and unlearned, then
we understand why Qadianis are ashamed of presenting their 
writings and rely only on your own ideas.

As far as Maulana Nanutvi(R), he believed, like the entire ummah,
in the absolute Finality of Prophethood.  The book you are 
alleging your reference from was actually written to prove the 
Finality of Prophethood!  That alone shows, how suspicious your
claim and motives appear to every knowledgeable person.  The 
passage you are claiming to quote is one of the passages which
has stuck in my mind, because of its uniqueness.  In it, the 
Maulana was stating that prophet Muhammad(SAW) should not be seen
as Khatam-un-Nabiyeen, because he was the last.  No, he states, 
the quality of being Khatam was in him(SAW) and that is what 
caused his arrival to end Prophethood.  It is really a settled
point, one which common people may not get.

Of course, you have quoted the first part of the passage and
omitted the subsequent part where he has written how enlightened
people see that he(SAW) was last, because he had the quality of 
being Khatam (common people see it the reverse, according to the
Maulana).  

I hope everyone sees how creative Qadiani leaders have been in
providing such quotes (rather, misquotations) from the writings
of Muslims scholars to create the allusion that anyone ever had
supported their invented and false ideas about the Finality of
Prophethood.

I will await, until this weekend, for the books you have allegedly
mailed me and then I will tell you and others what you and other
Qadianis have been doing.

On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Abdul Aziz wrote:

> Yes Mr. Irshad, the Maulana very clearly states that 'khatam an nabiyyeen'
> is glorification of Prophet Muhammad (SAS). He adds,"There is no glory in
> being the last or the first. It is only unenlightened people who translate
> 'khatamannabiyyeen as the last prophet. It is not so in the eyes of
> enlightened people".He says further that if a prophet, in his life time or
> after his death does appear even then Prophet Muhammad (SAS) is khataman
> nabiyyeen. What more do you want to prove that in his opinion 'khatam an
> nabiyyeen' does not mean last in time prophet. InshaAllah you will get the
> material soon, may be by the end of this week.  
> 
> On Mon, 8 Feb 1999  irsha-@irshad.org  wrote:
> 
> > > Abdul Aziz:
> > >< pine.osf.3.96.990206180421.6909b-10000-@axe.humboldt.edu > wrote: 
> > > Original Article: http://www.egroups.com/list/qadianism/?start=55
> > > Mr. Irshad: I have referred to four books. I have in my possession the
> > > whole book by Maulana Nanautvi. I have read it many times and I am hundred
> > > percent sure that the intent of Maulana was to prove that 'khatam an
> > > nabiyyeen does mean the last prophet. Please see pages 4,5,18 and 34 of
> > > the book 'Tahzeer an Naas'. <snip>
> > 
> > So that there is no misunderstanding, did you intentionally write
> > to be 100% certain of Maulana's desire to prove Khatam an Nabiyyen
> > meaning the last Prophet?  If so, then I wonder why you had 
> > presented the argument that the Maulana did not believe in the 
> > Finality of Prophethood?!!
> > 
> > If you made a mistake and meant to say "does NOT mean", then I 
> > patiently await the copy of the literature you promised, for an
> > independent confirmation.
> > 
> > Thank you.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/qadianism