(جناب یحییٰ بختیار کا قومی اسمبلی میں قادیانی مسئلہ پر خطاب)
Mr. Yahya Bakhtiar: Mr. Chairman, Sir, in the first place, I express my apology for absence from the House for about a week and, therefore, I was not in a position to hear some of the speeches delivered by the honourable members. I understand that some very valid points were made and cogent reasons were given and many interesting points were brought out. I really do not know whether I would be repeating some of the speeches already delivered, but it was a call of duty which compelled me to go to Karachi.
Another thing, Sir, which I want to clarify and, I hope, the honourable members will appreciate, is my position as 2676Attorney- General. I have limitations and short comings which, I hope, the honourable members will appreciate. First of all, in this subject, my shortcomings were obvious as for the language was concerned or the languages were concerned and the subject matter itself. But I did my best according to the instructions of this House and I am grateful to the honourable members for the confidence that they have reposed in me and for the cooperation that they have extended.
Sir, I did my best, to the best of my ability. I did my duty in accordance with the wishes of the honourable members, and I think that the questions which were supplied to me were properly formulated by me.
Secondly, Sir, as far as the evidence is concerned, it will be my duty to bring it to the attention of the House as to what has come on record and to sum it up. But, as Attorney- General, I am not a member of the House and I cannot give findings as the Judges do, and I cannot express any opinion also. I feel, it is my duty to assist the honourable House in an impartial manner. We must realise and we must see that I am not here just to plead the cause of one party against another, but it will be my duty, as you are the Judges, to bring to your notice both the points of view so that nobody should feel and nobody should say that this was a one- sided show or that the Attorney- General, taking advantage of his position or abusing his position, tried to influence the decision one way or the other. So, I hope, that, with these limitations of mine in mind, the honourable members will appreciate if I also put forward the other point of view, or, in other words, both points of view.
As far as the decision is concerned, Sir, that is for the members to take, and I am sure, and I am hopeful that this is going to be a fair decision, a just decision, in accordance with the sentiments and feelings of the people of this country. We should have in mind the interests of Islam and the interests of the country, and I have not the slightest doubt that the patriotic sentiments and sentiments of love for Islam and for the love of the country are there and, therefore, I have no doubt that the members will take the right decision.
2677I had the honour and privilege of discussing this matter with the Prime Minister, who is also very anxious and is worried man, because this is going to be a very important decision. He thinks just as any other Muslim thinks, and he has the sentiments like those of any other Muslim but he is also the Prime Minister of the country, and he has got the responsibility to see that nobody is deprived of his rights and nobody is deprived of his life, liberty, honour and reputation in any manner except in accordance with law so, Sir, I hope and I understand that the leaders in this House have put thier heads together and they are trying to come to a decision which would be a fair decision and a just decision. You will recall, Sir, that in the course of the cross- examination also I tried to impress upon the leader of the Ahmadiya Jamaat, Rabwah, that this House do not want to harm anybody or hurt anybody; this House wanted to give a just and fair decision. Keeping that in mind, I will make my submission and recapitulate the circumastances very briefly which brought us to this day, to these proceedings.
Sir, before the House, there is a resolution and a motion. There is a motion, which was moved by the honourable the law Minister, which is as follows:
"I hereby give notice, under rule 205 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 1973, of my intention to make the following motion.
That this House do appoint a Special Committee comprising the whole House, including persons who have the right to speak and otherwise take part in the proceedings of the House, with the Speaker as its Chairman, performing the following functions:
1- To discuss the question of the status in Islam of persons who do not believe in the finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
2- To receive and consider proposals, suggestions, resolutions, etc. from its members within a period to be specified by the Committee.
3- to make recommendations for the determination of the above issue as a result of its deliberations, 2678examination of witnesses and perusal of documents, if any.
The quorum of the Committee shall be forty, out of which ten will be from the parties opposed to the Government in the National Assembly."
Then Sir, there is also a resolution, which was moved by thirty- seven honourable members of this House.
----------
[At this stage Mr. Chairman vacated the Chair which was occupied by (Dr. Mrs. Ashraf Khatoon Abbasi).]
----------
Mr. Yahya Bakhtiar: This reads, Sir, as follows:
"We beg to move the following:
Whereas it is a fully established fact that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian clamied to be a prophet after the last Prophet MUHAMMAD (peace be upon him);
And whereas his false declaration to be a prophet, his attempts to falsify numerous Quranic texts and to abolish Jihad were treacherous to the main issues of Islam;
And whereas he was a creation of imperialism for the sole purpose of destroying Muslim solidarity and falsifying Islam;
And whereas there is a consensus of the entire Muslim Ummah that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed's followers, whether they believe in the prophethood of the said Mirza Ghulam Ahmed or consider him as their reformer or religious leader in any from whatsoever, are outside the pale of Islam;
2679And whereas his followers, by whatever name they are called, are indulging in subversive activities internally and externally by mixing with Muslims and pretending to be a sect of Islam;
And whereas in the Conference of the World Muslim Organization held in the holy city of Mecca- Al- Mukarrama between the 6th and 10th April, 1974, under the auspices of Al- Rabita Al- Alam- Al- Islami wherein delegations from one hundred and forty Muslim Organizations and institutions from all parts of the world participated, it has been unanimously held that Qadianism is a subversive movement against Islam and Muslim World which falsely and deceitfully claims to be an Islamic sect.
Now this assembly do proceed to declare that the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, by whatever name they are called, are not Muslims and that an official Bill be moved in the National Assembly to make adequate and necessary amendments in the Constitution to give effect to such declaration and to provide for the safeguard for their legitimate rights and interests as a non- Muslim minority of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan."
Sir, these are the two motions; a resolution and a motion. Apart from that, some other resolutions are also pending before the House, but they mostly deal with proposals for amending the Constitution, and I will respectfully submit that I will not say anything about them for two reasons. Firstly, only these two documents, were published in the press and on the basis of these two documents the communities affected or likely to be affected filed their written statements or memorials. On the basis of these documents they were examined. Therefore, it will not be fair to say anything with regard to the other resolutions. The Committee is authorised and competent to deal with them at any stage, but I will confine myself to these two documents and I shall make brief comments before I go into the procedure adopted for considering these documents. I hope I am not misunderstood if I am very frank in my comments on these two documents.
2680To begin with, first the motion by the honourable Law Minister, Now, Sir, here it says "to discuss the question of the status in Islam of persons who do not believe in the finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him)". Let us take the expression "To discuss the question of the status in Islam". If the House is of the view that people who do not believe in the finality of the Prophedhood of Hazrat Muhammad (peace be upon him) are not Muslims, then they have no status in Islam. They have nothing to do with Islam. The motion is a contradiction in terms. If it were said: "to discuss the question of the status in Islam or in relation to Islam", I could understand that; but to say "the status in Islam" is presuming that they are Muslims. I think, it is a contradiction which may not be of importance but it was my duty to bring it to the notice of the House. You cannot say what is their status in Islam, "in relation to Islam", yes.
Again, Sir, with all respect, the resolution moved by thirty- seven members is, in my opinion, in some parts contradictory. I will not go in great details, but the honourable members will take notice of the fact that it says in one place that whereas Mirza Ghulam Ahmad "was the creation of imperialism for the sole purpose of destroying Muslim solidarity and falsifying Islam", then it says "Whereas there is consensus of the Muslim Umma that these followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad are outside the pale of Islam." Then it further said that the followers by whatever name they are called, are indulging in subversive activities internally and externally by mixing with Muslims and pretending to be a sect of Islam. This is all very well. Then later they say: declare them as a minority, a non- Muslim religious community and amend the Constitution, provide for the safeguards subversion: Do you want to perpetuate the things which you condemn in the preamble of this resolution: This is the contradiction to which I wanted to draw your attention. On the one hand you say: declare them a minority, declare them a separate entity; and once you declare them as such, then you have to protect their rights. There is no alternative; and this is a very good part of this resolution. I appreciate it, I commend it, when they say that their legitimate rights and interests should be protected, but what are those rights? On the one hand they say they are a subversive movement, they indulge in subversion inside and outside. What is 2681that subversion: Propagating their religion, practising their religion, whatever they may be? You want to safeguard their rights and at the same time condemn them. You cannot have both. This is something which is obvious. I am not criticising. I have no right to criticise, but it is my duty do draw the attention of the honourable members of the House that if you declare a section of population as a separate religious community, then not only the Constitution but even your religion enjoins upon you to respect their right to profess and paractise their religion and to propagate it. I don't want to say anything more because I am fully conscious of the fact that there is very limited time at my disposal.
Now, in view of these two documents, the motion as well as the resolution, the honourable House has to determine certain points or issues. I shall formulate and read these out:
1- Whether Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadiyan claimed to be a prophet?
2- What is the effect of such a claim of prophethood in Islam or in relation to Islam? I had to mention both "in Islam" and "in relation to Islam".
3- What is the meaning of the concept of Khatam-i- Nabuwwat; when we say "Khatim-un- Nabieen" what does it mean?
4- Whether there is a consensus of the Muslim world that followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadiyan, who consider him as a prophet or promised Massiha, or both, are outside the pale of Islam?
5- Whether Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his followers consider Muslims who deny his claim to be a prophet or the promised Massiha as Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam?
6- Whether Mirza Ghulam Ahmad founded a separate religious community outside the pale of Islam or he merely started a new sect within its fold?
7- If he founded a seperate religious community, what would be its status in relation to Islam and what rights it will have under the Constitution of Pakistan?
2682Next, I will very briefly recapitulate some of the circumstances from the day the motion and the resolution were moved. These were moved on the 30th June, 1974. After they were published, two memorials were filed by the two Groups who follow Mirza Ghulam Ahmed. Then represntatives of both the Groups were invited to read, on oath, their statements and memorials, and I understand that they expressed a desire to be heard, so that they might further clarify and elaborate their points of view. In these documents which they filed, they refuted all the allegations made against them in the resolution.
It was decided by the House Committee to appoint a Steering Committee to receive questions and to examine them. For that prupose the Committee directed that I should be here in Islamabad with efect from 25th july, 1974. In compliance with that direction I was here on 21st july. The Steering Committee took about a week to scrutinise these questions which came in hundreds.
The delegation of Ahmadiya Community of Rabwa headed by their Imam or leader, Mirza Nasir Ahmad, was examined from 5th to 10th August and then there was a break of ten days. He was again examined from 20th August to 24th August. In all, the examination lasted for 11 days. Thereafter the other section of this Community, headed by Maulana Sadruddin, who spoke through Mian Abdul Mannan Omar because he is an old man and cannot hear properly, was examined. They were examined for two days. The reason was not that the House was discriminating between the two or attached more importance to one and not to the other, but for the simple reason that most of the facts about, and documents and writings of, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had come on the record through the first Group and there was no need to go further into these details as far as the second Group was concerned.
As for the first issue whether Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be a prophet, I think it will be appropriate to say somthing briefly about his life and works and the Ahmadyia Movement. While dealing with this, I will be, in a way, dealing with the first issue itself. Mirza Nasir Ahmad has filed a brief biodata of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. It is as follows:
2683’’آپ ۱۳؍فروری ۱۸۳۵ء کو قادیان میں پیدا ہوئے۱؎۔ آپ کے والد صاحب کا نام مرزاغلام مرتضیٰ صاحب تھا۔
آپ کی ابتدائی تعلیم چند استادوں کے ذریعے سے گھر پر ہی ہوئی۔ آپ کے اساتذہ کے نام فضل الٰہی، فضل احمد اور گل محمد تھے۔ جن سے آپ نے فارسی، عربی اور دینیات کی ابتدائی تعلیم حاصل کی اور علم طب اپنے والد صاحب سے پڑھا۔ آپ شروع سے ہی اسلام کا درد رکھتے تھے اور دنیا سے کنارہ کش تھے۔ آپ کا ایک شعر ہے ؎
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
۱؎ یہاں قادیانیوں کی مہیا کردہ مرزا کی تاریخ پیدائش بیان ہوئی جو غلط اور دجل ہے۔ خود مرزاقادیانی نے کتاب البریہ اور دیگر کتابوں میں بیسیوں جگہ لکھا ہے کہ میری پیدائش ۱۸۳۹ئ، ۱۸۴۰ء میں ہوئی۔
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
دگر استاد را نامے ندانم
کہ خواندم در دبستان محمدؐ
آپ نے عیسائیوں اور آریوں کے ساتھ ۱۸۷۶ء کے قریب اسلام کی طرف سے مناظرے اور مباحثے بھی کئے اور ۱۸۸۴ء میں اپنی شہرہ آفاق کتاب ’’براہین احمدیہ‘‘ کی اشاعت کی جو قرآن کریم، آنحضرت ﷺ اور اسلام کی تائید میں ایک بے نظیر کتاب مانی گئی ہے۔ ۱۸۸۹ء میں آپ نے باذن الٰہی سلسلہ بیعت کا آغاز کیا اور ۱۸۹۱ء میں خداتعالیٰ سے الہام پاکر مسیح موعود ہونے کا دعویٰ کیا۔
آپ کی تمام عمر اسلام کی خدمت میں گزری اور آپ نے ۸۰ کے قریب کتابیں تصنیف فرمائیں جو عربی، فارسی اور اردو تینوں زبانوں میں ہیں اور ان تینوں زبانوں میں آپ کا منظوم کلام بھی ملتا ہے۔
2684آپ کا اور آپ کی جماعت کا واحد مقصد دنیا میں اسلام کی اشاعت وتبلیغ تھا اور ہے۔ ۲۶؍مئی ۱۹۰۸ء کو آپ کی وفات ہوئی اور ملک کے اخباروں رسالوں نے آپ کی اسلامی خدمات کا پرزور الفاظ میں اعتراف کیا۔
آپ کی وفات کے وقت آپ کے چار بیٹے اور دو بیٹیاں تھیں اور اس وقت آپ کے خاندان کے افراد کی تعداد دو سو کے قریب ہے۔‘‘
Now, Madam, I have some more details of Mirza's life wich I could collect from the material placed at my disposal. I shall relate these details.
He belonged to an important and respectful Mughal family of the Punjab which had migrated from Samerkand to India at the time of Mughal Emperor Baber. The first ancestor of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to come to India was Mirza Hadi Beg. Laquel Griffin, in his book "The Punjab Chiefs" says as follows, and I quote:
"Mirza Hadi Beg was appointed Qazi or Magistrate over seventy villages in the neighbourhood of Qadian, which town he is said to have founded and named it 'Islampuwr Qazi- Qazi', from which Qadian by natural change has arisen. For several generations the family hold offices under the Imperial Government and it was only when the Sikhs became powerful that it fell into poverty."
Thereafter, I will read a portion from the Enquiry Committee- Court of Enquiry- presided over by Mr. Justice Mohammad Munir in 1953-54. About Mirza Ghulam Ahmad the Court says, and I quote:
The grand son of Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, who was a General in the Sikh Durbar; he learnt Persian and Arabic languages at home but does not appear to have received any Western education. In 1864 he got some employment in the District Court, Sialkot, where he served for four years. On his father's death he devoted himself whole- heartedly to study religious literature and between 1880-84 wrote his famous 'Baraheen-i-Ahmadiya' in four volumes and later 2685wrote some more books. Acute religious countroversies were going on in those days. There were repeated attacks on Islam, not only by Christian missionaries but also preachers of Arya Samaj a liberal Hindu movement, which was becoming very popular.
Here I believe Mr. Justice Munir is not correct in describing Mirza Sahib as grandson of Mirza Ghulam Murtaza because Mirza Nasir Ahmad in his paper says that, that was his father's name.
According to the statement of Mirza Nasir Ahmad before the House, between the years 1860-1880, the British brought with them, what he called, an army of Padris- about 70 in number, as he mentioned and fierce religious controversies started, as these Padris, according to him, had declared that they would convert Muslims in India to Christianity. And Mirza Nasir Ahmad said with regard to these padris and their attack on Islam and on Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) that-
حکومت کے بل بوتے پہ انہوں نے یہ کیا اور کر رہے تھے۔
At that stage, according to Mirza Nasir Ahmad, some Ulema and other leaders of Muslims religious thought came forward to reply to these Christian attacks and to repulse these attacks, and these included Nawab Sadiq Hasan Khan, Maulvi Aley Hasan, Maulvi Rahmatullah Mohajir Delhvi, Ahmad Raza Sahib and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and he said- I do not know about all of them- but I believe about all of them and not just Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: ’’اﷲ نے فراست دی تھی اور اسلام کا پیار دیا تھا۔‘‘
And that was the reason why they came forward to repulse these attaks on Islam and the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him). These controversies, these Munazeras, naturally made all those Muslims, including Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, very popular amongst Muslims. They became their heroes and it seems that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was leading them in popularity among Muslims for repulsing these attacks on Islam, although, as it has become apparent from the record, that some of the methods adopted by him and may be by others in repulsing these attacks, were not desirable and were rather 2686objectionable- the way Jesus Christ was attacked or insulted, is not only objectionable today but even at that time Muslims had objected to that. Even at that time Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had to come out with explanation after explanation. But I will not go into that detail. Because of this popularity and because they were Muslims who treated him as hero, in 1889 we find that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed decided at the age of 54 that he should accept the oath of discipleship from his followers or those who respected him or who were willing to accept him as their religious leader. Now here we find that in Baraheen-i-Ahmadiya he had already mentioned that he received some divine messages or was in communication with Allah; that was known; but in 1889, actually in December 1889, according to his son, Second Khalifa of Ahmadiya Jamaat, Rabwah or Qadian, he actually founded this movement in March 1889, and the foundation of the movement does not refer to his claim to prophethood or of Massih-e- Mauood but to the effect that he started receiving oath of descipleship from his followers. There is no doubt that at that stage he got followers because the writings which we have seen leave no doubt that he had a very forceful pen, very eloquent pen, and he was undoubtedly a very capable person. He wrote eloquently in Arabic, Persian and Urdu. But one fact must be kept in Mind that, in 1889, and there is some confusion on the point- in one place I read that in December 1889, he received a message that he was Messih-e- Mauood, but he did not announce it and did not proclaim it. He only went to Ludhiana from Qadian to receive the oath of discipleship. Why? Why he did not announce it there in Qadian is for you to judge. But I find from the book of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood Ahmad, the book called "Ahmadiyat or True Islam", that he went to Ludhiana to receive it, this oath of discipleship, and his other book, a small biography. In some other literature I read that according to Muslim religious literature, the Messiah was to come in a place, not come in a place but announce and proclaim his being Messiah in a place called 'Lud'. Probably keeping this in view he thought it appropriate to go to Ludhiana for the purpose or to receive oath of discipleship. He did not begin it in Qadian. This is what I want to point out. I shall go in greater detail about these controversies with Christians at a later stage.
Here it is also my duty to bring to the notice of the House that it was seriously alleged that his prophethood and Ahmadi movement were inspired and nurtured by the British Imperialism. This is not only mentioned in the resolution but also in a lot of 2687other literature that it was done at a time when the call for Jehad was raised against these foreign imparialists, from Sudan to Samatra. It was felt, they say by the British, to stop this call for Jehad, and for that purpose they utilised Mirza Sahib's services. This is an aspect also to which I draw your attention. It is also alleged that the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, because of the oath of discipleship, which contained a caluse, or that was part of his faith, should be loyal to the British Government, or that loyalty to the British Government was made an article of faith- a very servious factor- which was very much resented by the Muslims who wanted to get rid of the foreign imperialists who had usurped their Government and their authority in this sub- continent. In this way, it is alleged that because of that faith or part of that faith- loyalty to the British Government. The Ahmadi's or the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad provided very good and excellent spies to the British Government. We find a reference that in 1925 there was one Mulla Abdul Hakim and another Mulla Noor Ali; two Ahmadis who in Afghanistan were declared 'Murtad' and Killed, not because they were Murtad, not only for that reason, but according to the statements of those days, and I understand 'Al-Fazil' of 3rd March, 1925 also, confirmed this fact that they were found in possession of some documents indication that they were agents of the British Government and that they wanted to overthrow the Government. I have to bring it to the notice of the House that these are the facts which have been mentioned. I do not say they are correct.
As regards Mirza Sahib's interpretation of, or his approach to, the Holy Quran, as far as I understand, his approach was similar to that of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, except for a few Ayyats which according to him concern Messiah or his own Prophethood. He had a rationalistic interpretation of the Holy Quran. The most spectacular weapon that he used to overcome and over- awe Muslims and others was his prophesies, I should say his reckless prodictions about the persons who opposed him that they would come to sad end within a limited period or suffer miserably.
Madam, in 1891, Mirza Sahib claimed to be the Promised Messiah and later on he also claimed to be a prophet. I will deal with as to what kind of prophet he claimed he was, later on. According to his son, Mirza Bashir -ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, and I quote from his book "Ahmadiyyat or the True Islam".
2688"His task was to sift all errors and mis interpretations which may have crept into an existing religious system owing to lapse of time; but he had a much higher mission to perform. He had to discover in it new and limitless treasures or eternal truths and hidden powers.
By pointing out this miracle of the Holy Quran, the Promised Messiah has effected a revolution in spiritual matters. The Muslims certainly believed that the Holy Quran was perfect, but during the last thirteen hundred yerars nobody had imagined that not only was it perfect but that it was an inexhaustible store house in which the needs of all future ages had been provided for, and that on investigation and research it would yield far richer treasures of spiritual knowledge than the material treasures which nature is capable of yielding. The Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has, by presenting to the world this miraculous aspect of the Holy Quran, thrown open the door to a far wider field of discovery and research in spiritual matters, than any scientific discovery has ever done in the realm of physical science. He not only purified Islam of all extraneous errors and presented it to the world but also presented the Holy Quran to the world in a light which served at once to satisfy all the intellectual needs of mankind which the rapidly changing conditions of the world had brought into existence and to furnish a key to the solution of all future difficulties."
Now, Madam, I shall briefly say one or two things on this point, namely, that he discovered hidden treasures in the Holy Quran which for thirteen hundred years no other Muslim had been able to discover. Nobody doubts that the Holy Quran has a wealth or treasure that mankind will discover; nobody can deny that. it is full of wisdom. As man progresses, as we go deep into it, we find new meanings and new discoveries. But when I pointedly asked Mirza Nasir Ahmad as to what the discoveries were which except Mirza Sahib no Muslim knew before, apart from his interpretation of 'Khatim-un- Nabiyyeen', or about the life of Hazrat Essa whether he is alive or not, he pointed out that there was his commentary on "Surah Fateha" in which 70 percent of his interpretation and commentary was new. That is for the learned Ulama of the House to judge and comment on. I have nothing to 2689say; but I know of only Allama Iqbal's opinion about his discoveries in the Holy Quran, namely:
عصر من پیغمبرے ہم آفرید
آن کہ در قرآں بجز از خود ندید
(Our age has also produced a porphet, who in the Quran could see nothing but himself.)
And I think it is a very fair assessment. As far as we could understand, Mirza Sahib interpreted or re- interpreted those provisions which interested him.
Now, Madam, while dealing with his life and religious career, I will draw the attention of the House to three different stages in his life, and in this career, as already mentioned, the first stage was when he was a religious leader like other Muslim religious leaders having the same faith, the same views, the same notions, and he crossed swords with Christians and Arya Samajes. To indicate his view at this stage, say from 1875-76 to 1888-1889, I will first read a quotation. It is a translation from Arabic from 'Roohani Khazain', volume:7, page:220, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Quadiani, Here he says:
’’کیا تو نہیں جانتا کہ پروردگار رحیم وصاحب فضل نے ہمارے نبی ﷺ کا بغیر کسی استثناء کے خاتم النّبیین نام رکھا اور ہمارے نبی نے اہل طلب کے لئے اس کی تفسیر اپنے قول لانبی بعدی میں واضح طور پر فرمادی اور اگر ہم اپنے نبی کے بغیر کسی نبی کا ظہور جائز قرار دیں تو گویا ہم باب وحی بند ہوجانے کے بعد اس کا کھلنا جائز قرار دیں گے اور یہ صحیح نہیں۔ جیسا کہ مسلمانوں پر ظاہر ہے اور ہمارے رسول اﷲ ﷺ کے بعد نبی کیونکر آسکتا ہے۔ درآں حالیکہ آپ کی وفات کے بعد وحی منقطع ہوگئی اور اﷲتعالیٰ نے آپ پر نبیوں کا خاتمہ فرمادیا۔‘‘
This was in clear terms. He expressed his views on the subject of "Khatim-un- Nabiyyeen". Then he further said:
2690’’آنحضرت ﷺ نے باربار فرمایا کہ میرے بعد کوئی نبی نہیں آئے گا اور حدیث ’’لانبی بعدی‘‘ ایسی مشہور تھی کہ کسی کو اس کی صحت پر کلام نہ تھا اور قرآن شریف کا ہر لفظ قطعی ہے۔ اپنی آیات ’’
ولکن رسول اﷲ وخاتم النّبیین
‘‘ اس بات کی تصدیق کرتا تھا کہ ہمارے نبی ﷺ پر نبوت ختم ہوچکی ہے۔‘‘
(جاری ہے)![ختم نبوت فورم[Khatmenbuwat Forum]](/styles/default/xenforo/khatmnbuwat_logo.jpg){kind=logo}
