Questions of an Ahamdi (2)
was reading your answer to an Ahmadi regarding the verse about Siddiq, Shuhada, Salihin and Nabiyyin (4:69). You say that it means the righteous Muslims will be in company of those people in Jannat (the paradise). But my question is that then does it also mean that a good Muslim can be only in the company of such people but can never be one of them? Does this also not mean that no one can be a Siddiq, a Shaheed, a Salih and a Nabi amongst Muslims? The fact of the matter is that there were many Salihs, Siddiqs, and of course Shaheeds amongst Muslims. Why can't there be Nabi then? Is there an exceptional clause for the category of Nabi?
Every scholar knows that Arabic and especially Qur'anic Arabic has words which can be interpreted in different ways. Why can't it be true for khatamun nabiyyin, the seal, last law-bearing prophet, and not literally the last prophet. And of course there is a hadith by Hazrat Ayesha RA about this matter also to support the view.
Sir, you are a scholar and you know very well that if there is something that one can't find totally understandable from Holy Quran, we check the ahadith, and then if still need clarification, we resort to fiqh.
I am sure you have read our literature; if not, please go to alislam.org and checkout the books by the Promised Messiah.
You seem to be an enlightened scholar but I don't know why in case of second coming of Messiah/Mehdi you and people like Ghamidi sahib have this attitude of not giving any importance to the concept while 99% of Muslims (actually, believers of every religion for that matter) are waiting for the second coming of Messiah.
The mention in Surah Nisa that believers shall join Nabi, Siddiq, Shuhada, and Salihin in the paradise does neither mean that they can attain the four categories nor does it mean that they cannot. It is simply not the subject of discussion of the verse.
Seal of prophets could only mean two things: prophet-hood has been sealed, completed, and finished or prophet, alaihissalaam, is the seal in the sense that everyone else will come with his seal, authority, and confirmation. If it is in the first sense, then there is no room for a new prophet at all. And if it is in the latter sense, then we must have statement in the Qur'an that Mirza Sahib will come. Hadith and Fiqh are subservient to the Qur'an and it is not the other way round. Hadith is an information transmitted through individuals. Can an element of faith be mentioned only verbally to be transmitted through individuals which was known only to a few --- not all -- companions of the prophet?
If you are saying that Mirza Sahib was a good scholar, then I have no interest in the discussion. But if you are claiming that he was a prophet, doesn't matter whether a law-giver or not, believing in whom is necessary, then you will need to prove through convincing arguments that he was one. It is difficult but necessary to think about religious issues objectively by staying away from emotional attachments.