Sunday, 24 May 2020

Islam is not a Political Ideology

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful

A Muslim brother, Moin Khan Chouhan, posted a link in the comment section to an article on my blog inviting me to examine another website which promotes the idea of Islam being a political religion (islamicrevolutionary.com)

On the home page of this website is an image of Ruhollah Khomeini and the following quote of his: "When anyone studies a little or pays a little attention to the rules of Islamic government, Islamic politics, Islamic society and Islamic economy he will realize that Islam is a very political religion. Anyone who will say that religion is separate from politics is a fool; he does not know Islam or politics."

In general, I agree with this quotation in the sense that Islam is indeed a very political religion, but that does not necessarily mean Islam is a political ideology or even that there is no room for political difference and dissent within the Muslim community or that Muslims, in their individual capacity, are not free to formulate their own political views independently.

But this particular website, in promoting Khomeini, the so-called "Islamic Revolution", the modern-day "Islamic" Republic of Iran (which it claims is the only Islamic country in the world today), presents an extremely warped and false image and conception of our Religion which I feel is my duty to refute.

At the outset, let me make it clear that being an orthodox Sunni Muslim, this debate on whether Islam is a political ideology or not is essentially an important aspect of the age old Sunni-Shi'i controversy regarding the nature of the Imamate and the succession to the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam). The website itself defines the Imamate as "political leadership", though this is not accurate because it is not necessary, in my view, that the Imam of the Muslims be their political leader ipso factoIn Shi'ism, on the other hand, Islam is at its very core a political message. So it is only natural for many if not most of the Shi'a to subscribe to the idea that Islam is a political ideology which requires the establishment of an Islamic state under the leadership of an Imam, or, according to Khomeini's novel wilayat al-faqih theory of Islamic governance, under the leadership of a representative of the Imam, namely, the qualified mujtahid jurist. And on another level, this discussion transcends the Sunni-Shi'i controversy because there are many non-Shi'i thinkers (most who would self-identify as Sunnis) who likewise advocate the idea that Islam is a political ideology which requires the establishment of a state - but these non-Shi'i thinkers such as Mawdudi, Sayyid Qutb, Nabahani, Dr. Israr Ahmad and others, were in fact breaking with the teachings of orthodox Sunnism and their interpretation was colored by a heavy influence and mixture of the ideas of Shi'ism and Kharijism, as well as modern, materialist, revolutionary European ideologies, most notably Marxism.

A common denominator among all political "Islamic" ideologies, movements and thinkers is the presumption, taken for granted, that colonialism and by extension neocolonialism, is a great, harmful evil. Among them is a general aversion to the British in particular, and at present, to the phenomenon of American imperialism and expansionism. The perception among them is that in order for Islam to be appropriately revived the Muslim Umma must be politically independent and powerful.

It is quite telling that the website Islamicrevolutionary.com begins its article entitled "Why Muslims Need Political Islam?" with three quotations from three respective disbelievers; Plato, Ross Perot and Donald Trump! The summary of these quotations is that it is necessary for the good to enter the field of politics for if they do not society shall be governed by the bad and the ugly.

The website claims that the reason the pagans of Mecca initially resisted the Islamic call and ministry of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was "because the call to Islam which Prophet presented was not only merely a call to change our personal selves but also a call to change our political, economic, social, military, epistemic and cultural existence." Such a claim is nothing short of blatant historical revisionism that is totally unsubstantiated and a distortion of the facts. The truth is when the Prophet (peace be upon him) put the message of his Prophesy before the pagans of Mecca, it did not even contain within it a political, economic, social, military or cultural dimension! It was purely a call to worship Allah alone and to break the idols. The pagans resisted this call because they were not willing to leave their idolatry. Overall, the actual political, economic, social, military, cultural and legal teachings of Islam were not even revealed until much later, in the Medinese phase of the Prophet's ministry. For thirteen years, the greater part of the Prophet's overall ministry, the Prophet (peace be upon him) merely called to the worship of Allah alone and some basic but profound moral teachings mainly connected to concern for the vulnerable and weak segments of society. It was a call absolutely bereft of any politically ideological element.

To be continued (in sha Allah)

Saturday, 23 May 2020

Falsehood of the Trinity

In Your Name, Allahumma

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity, apart from being thinly veiled tritheism from our Islamic and Quranic perspective, was not even held to by the early Christian community. The concept is nowhere clearly spelled out in the Christian Bible, nor is their any historical record of the Apostles of Jesus teaching this false doctrine. The earliest mention of the Trinity is by Theophilus of Antioch (d. 183 CE) in the late 2nd century CE, but even then it is not defined according to so-called "orthodox" conception. On the contrary, Theophilus writes "the Trinity, of God, and His Word [Logos], and His Wisdom [Sophia]" (Apology to Autolycus)

Furthermore, Tertullian (d. 220 CE), who did believe and promote the false doctrine of the Trinity, was forced to admit that at least in his time the majority of ordinary Christian believers (note he calls them believers) not only rejected the Trinity but held it to be worship of multiple gods: "The simple, indeed, (I will not call them unwise and unlearned) who always constitute the majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the world's plurality of gods to the one only true God; not understanding that, although He is the one only God, He must yet be believed in with His own dispensation. The numerical order and distribution of the Trinity they assume to be a division of the Unity; whereas the Unity which derives the Trinity out of its own self is so far from being destroyed, that it is actually supported by it. They are constantly throwing out against us that we are preachers of two gods and three gods, while they take to themselves preeminently the credit of being worshipers of the One God; just as if the Unity itself with irrational deductions did not produce heresy, and the Trinity rationally considered constitute the truth. We, say they, maintain the Monarchy (or, sole government of God)" (Against Praxeas, ch.III)

Monday, 18 May 2020

East vs. West

بِاسْمِكَ اللّهُمَّ
For much of history the globe has been a battlefield for two zones of influence, one in the East and one in the West. This was certainly true during the early days of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam), when there was the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines) and the Sasanian Empire in Iran. The Believers in those days  naturally preferred the Christian empire to their west to the fire-worshiping, Zoroastrian empire to their east. This is alluded to in the holy Quran:

وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ ﴿٤ بِنَصْرِ اللَّـهِ ۚ يَنصُرُ مَن يَشَاءُ ۖ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ
"That day the Believers will rejoice in the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the exalted in might, the merciful."
(Surah 30:4-5)

It is true that both the infidel powers of the East and West have frequently been a source of harm and enmity to the Muslims. But the harm and enmity to the Muslims which comes from the East is consistently worse than that which comes from the Christian West. The Crusades paled in comparison in terms of destruction wrought upon the Muslim world to the subsequent scourge of the Mongol Golden Horde under Genghis Khan and his successors. Likewise, the harm of Western European colonialism and American imperialism paled in comparison to the harm inflicted on Muslims by the Soviets and the Chinese.

Ironically, the mainstream narrative that has taken hold of much of the Muslim world is anti-West and favorable to eastern powers like Russia and China. The truth is, both Russia and China are bent on undermining Islam as much as possible. Witness Russia's bloody history in suppressing the Muslims of the Caucasus, siding with the Serbs in their genocide of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, and recent intervention in Syria. China's persecution of the Uighurs and other Muslim ethnic groups is unspeakably horrific but virtually the entire Muslim world has remained silent, fearful of provoking the wrath of the "Dragon". The United States, on the other hand, which is presently the preeminent Western power, has, in general, been favorable to Muslims in its foreign policy, such as its material support to the Afghan Mujahidin in the 1980s, interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo during the 1990s, its liberation of Iraq from the secular, fascist, Baathist regime of Saddam, its liberation of Libya from the authoritarian, anti-Islamic regime of Gaddafi, its opposition to Syria's Baathist regime, and its speaking out in favor of Muslims persecuted in Burma and western China.
In summary, it is obvious that Muslims should prefer the Western power over the Eastern power in this world, in keeping with the guidance of the opening verses of Surat ar-Rum and because of the present geopolitical reality.

Monday, 11 May 2020

Two Nation Theory and Hindutva

بِاسْمِكَ اللّهُمَّ
In Your Name, Allahumma
The toxic atmosphere of hatred and bigotry faced by Muslims in India (the political crisis in Kashmir, the Citizenship Amendment Act, the unjust Supreme Court ruling in the Babri Mosque case, the pogrom in Delhi, and scapegoating Muslims for the spread of Covid-19) calls for a revisit of the Two Nation Theory. Undoubtedly, Muslims have never been as insecure and vulnerable to extermination in India as today. The situation for our people in that country resembles the situation of the Jews in 1930s Germany. The recent pogrom in Delhi is strikingly remnicient of Kristallnacht. Make no mistake, India is no longer a secular republic like in the days of Nehru and Indira Gandhi. According to the Two Nation Theory, the Muslims and Hindus of India, though inhabiting a common geographic land mass, are two distinct and separate nations that have two different destinies requiring two different states for them to pursue their respective destinies. This idea is actually based in the Koran, in the example of the son of Amram, Moses the Prophet, supplicating Allah to separate him from the cow-worshipers:
قَالَ رَبِّ إِنِّي لَا أَمْلِكُ إِلَّا نَفْسِي وَأَخِي ۖ فَافْرُقْ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَ الْقَوْمِ الْفَاسِقِينَ
He said: “My Lord, indeed I do not possess except myself and my brother, so part us from the defiantly disobedient people”
(Surah 5:25)
The Two Nation Theory was not opposed by Muslims and their Ulama except by the Indian nationalist faction. Being Indian nationalists they had no leg to stand on in any attempt to repudiate the Two Nation Theory from a purely religious angle. The truth is, the Indian nationalist so-called Ulama, predominantly of the Deobandi sect and remnants of the Khilafah movement, made the mistake of favoring the idol-worshiping Hindus over the foreign British White man who was nevertheless of the People of the Book. The Koran informs us that the Christians are nearest in affection to the Believers, while it is the polytheist idol-worshipers who are greatest in manifesting enmity toward us (Surah 5:82). It is certainly true that Pakistan was essentially a reward to the Muslims of India because of the loyalty they demonstrated to the Crown during the course of the Second World War under the leadership of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the Muslim League, at a time when the main Hindu political leadership of Gandhi and the Congress boycotted the war effort, and other Hindus like Subhas Chandra Bose went to the extent of materially assisting the Axis powers of Germany and Japan. The respectable Abul Kalam Azad, who throughout his life co-operated with Hindus in the Swadeshi movement and became a prominent figurehead in the Indian National Congress, recounts how he was duped by the cunning Hindu politicians like Nehru and Patel in his book India Wins Freedom. He died with a broken heart.
But it is also true that the Muslim political leadership which put forward the Two Nation Theory and led the movement to create Pakistan was dominated by the modernist school associated with the influence of Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and Aligarh University. It was this tendency which, though politically astute in countering the threat of malicious Hindu majoritarianism, nonetheless failed to provide the kind of righteous and pure leadership the Muslims are in desperate need of. Today the so-called “Islamic Republic” of Pakistan is an extremely corrupt and wicked nation. Its ruling establishment are openly antagonistic to Islam and is an agent of the Devil. Do not think I am exaggerating when I say that the majority of Pakistan’s weak and oppressed Muslim populace would actually welcome India’s takeover of their country as liberation in the same way the majority of Iraqis initially welcomed America’s liberation of their country from the fascist, totalitarian Ba’thist regime of Saddam in 2003. Despite the frightening rise of Hindutva chauvinism in India, the Muslims of that country ironically enjoy greater religious and political freedom than their co-religionists in the so-called “Islamic Republic” of Pakistan. So while the Two Nation Theory was definitely good, it remains theoretical till this day, as the Muslims who now reside in Pakistan face greater challenges than the original threat of Hindu domination they would have faced in a united India.

Everywhere in the world where we witness a worrisome rise in toxic nationalism, Muslim minorities are the primary target. This is especially true in India. The chauvinist ideology of Hindutva was crafted by V. D. Savarkar (1883-1966). According to him, Muslims of India are a potential fifth column because their very Religion is foreign and they cannot be expected to manifest the same kind of devotion to “Mother” India as the Hindu, and those who follow religions that are offshoots of Hinduism, like the Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. Nationalism in India cannot be divorced from its Hindu identity and heritage, meaning no Muslim can truly be an Indian nationalist. After all, our emotional attachment is primarily to Arabia, to the sacred sites of Mecca and Medina, and to Jerusalem in the Holy Land. We have no emotional or spiritual connection to so-called “Mother” India, nor should we.

Corruption of the Religious Establishment and its Root Cause

In Your Name, Allahumma


A version of Simony that is present in our religious establishment, and the root of its corruption, is the providing of essential religious services like leading the congregational worship in exchange for money. The institution of prophesy is the supreme religious authority according to Islam, but even the Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) could not take monetary compensation in exchange for discharging his ministry of prophesy:

قُل لَّا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا
Say: “I ask of you for this message no payment”
(Surah 6:90)
قُلْ مَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ إِلَّا مَن شَاءَ أَن يَتَّخِذَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِ سَبِيلً
Say: “I do not ask of you for it any payment - only that whoever wills might take to his Lord a way”
(Surah 25:57)
وَمَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ ۖ إِنْ أَجْرِيَ إِلَّا عَلَىٰ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
And I do not ask you for it any payment. My payment is only from the Lord of the worlds
(Surah 26:127)

When the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) appointed Uthman bin Abi al-’As (radi Allahu anhu) an Imam upon the latter’s request, that last thing he willed for him was that he should not select a Mu’adhdhin who takes payment for calling the Adhan. Presently, our religious establishment, including Ulama, Muftis, Mashayikh (Sufi guides), Qurra, Huffaz who lead Tarawih prayers during Ramadan, Sajjada Nashins, Gaddi Nashins, etc., all earn their livelihoods from providing religious services. Many of them misguide people from the true path, thereby doubling their transgression. They have secured for themselves and their families immense fortunes and grand estates through Religion. A religious leader whose religion is connected to his livelihood cannot possibly be expected to preach the truth in all circumstances without jeopardizing that livelihood. How many preachers in our mosques are unable to preach the truth for fear of losing their positions and running the risk of earning the ire of the mosque administrations that pay their salaries? The genuine religious leadership of our time are those radicals that are on the margins, whose livelihood is in no way connected to their preaching or providing other religious services. There is no doubt our present religious establishment resemble the religious establishment of the Jews during Antiquity, i.e., the Sanhedrin, Sadducees, Pharisees, Scribes and Teachers of the Law who were sharply rebuked by John the Baptizer and the Messiah of Nazareth for their corruption and hypocrisy.

"I am not the Origin of the Apostles" (46:9)

In Your Name, Allahumma

I previously refuted the demonstrably illogical and paradoxical doctrine held by many Muslims, particularly the Barelawis, that the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) is simultaneously the first and last of the prophets in the chronological sense. Recently, however, my attention was drawn to an Ayah of the Quran which explicitly states that the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) is not the first Apostle of God, ending the debate decisively:

قُلۡ مَا کُنۡتُ بِدۡعًا مِّنَ الرُّسُلِ

Say: "I am not something original among the messengers"
(Surah 46:9 - Sahih International translation)

Why I was Arrested in Pakistan

In Your Name, Allahumma

I landed in Pakistan on 1 August, 2019 for the purpose of work. As an employee of Yellow Cabs based in Kamloops, BC (Canada), I was commissioned by the owner, Mr. Abdul Rashid, to head the dispatch office for the cab company located in Saddar, Rawalpindi. While there, I came across a poster advertising an Islamic conference on the topic of Khatm an-Nubuwwat (the finality of prophesy). I noted several of the phone numbers listed on that poster and contacted them via WhatsApp where I posed a question relating to the topic of the finality of prophesy: "Since the institution of prophesy is a divine blessing, why has this the best Umma been deprived of that divine blessing with the apparent cessation of the institution of prophesy, whereas in the previous Umma of Israel prophets were raised up among them in the hundreds if not thousands, one after the other?" One of those individuals whom I had contacted (whose phone number was listed on the poster) was a well-known mufti of the area, a certain Usman Rizvi. He also happens to be the khatib at the famous Allah Wali Mosque in nearby Tench Bhatta, Mughalabad locality, and affiliated with Manzar ul-Islam Foundation. The Mufti replied that he would not engage me on social media, but that if I was serious about discussing this issue I should meet him in person. Therefore, we made arrangements to meet at my residence which was attached to the company's office in Rizwan Arcade (Saddar, Rawalpindi). During this meeting, I gave my position in writing to the effect that prophesy has not ceased absolutely, but that a part of it remains in this Umma, namely, the Mubashshirat (true visions). We agreed to debate on this point and I was invited to do so at the Allah Wali Mosque on 19 October 2019 after the conclusion of the Isha prayer. However, when I arrived at the designated setting on the designated date, the Mufti announced to the entire congregation gathered for Isha prayer that they were invited to hear a debate on the finality of prophesy with a "Qadiani". Subsequently there was a great excitement leading up to the scheduled debate, and dozens of regular mosque-goers gathered near the room where the debate was to be held. They began shouting religious slogans, creating an atmosphere of intimidation. While seated in the room waiting to commence the debate, suddenly the Mufti's team arrived and transformed the room into a professional studio, with professional lighting and cameras to record the debate. Several other individuals were seated in the room to livestream the debate through their phones on Facebook. I did not object to any of this, though my consent was never sought for it, nor had it been mentioned in the written and verbal agreements that had been made days earlier when the Mufti and two of his students visited me at my residence. Further details of that debate, which was four and a half hours in duration, can be found here.

At the conclusion of the debate, the Mufti or the mosque administration arranged for me to be securely deposited back to my residence. Approximately twenty days later, on 10 November 2019, the police suddenly appeared at the office in the evening and ordered everyone present in the office, including myself, to accompany them to the police station. I and my colleagues were totally unaware as to why we had apparently been detained. It was only when I arrived at the police station and one of the officers began playing a recording of the debate I had participated in earlier did I realize this was some sort of religious case. I immediately requested the police to release my other colleagues as they had absolutely nothing to do with the matter. After being interrogated regarding myself, those colleagues were released. Meanwhile, some police officers interrogated me quite informally and without asking any serious or relevant questions. They then decided to formally charge me with blasphemy. In the shadows, I some some individuals with lengthy beards wearing prayer caps who were apparently there to register their statements against me. I was unable to identify them. The next day, I was taken to court to appear before the civil magistrate, Abdus Sattar Awan. I was then put in judicial remand and sent off to Adiala Jail. Upon arrival there, I was wearing a dark colored frock. Some of the jailers commented that this was the type of dress that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian used to wear. Considering me a "Qadiani", a jailer then hit me twice on the back of my neck, leaving a red mark which happily did not remain long. I was then escorted to the Special Para where all blasphemy accused and convicts were housed. There I was put in a cell with three other individuals. The next day my jail ticket was prepared and I learned that I was being charged with 295-A of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), which reads:
"Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings, of any class of citizens of Pakistan, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both."
Leaving aside for the moment whether such a law is justified or a gross violation of the basic human right of freedom of speech and expression, it is indisputable that I neither insulted nor attempted to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any class of citizens of Pakistan. On the contrary, it was my opponent in the debate, the good Mufti, Usman Rizvi, who repeatedly used insulting and demeaning language directed at the figure of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, respected by myself as a great Islamic reformer and by millions of others in Pakistan known as Ahmadis or "Qadianis". But ironically, it was I who was arrested and charged, a clear indication of the persecution and discrimination that Ahmadis/Qadianis, or in my case, alleged "Qadianis", face in the so-called Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Some time later, the police decided to tag another offence to my charge sheet, namely, 298-C of the PPC, which reads:
"Person of Quadiani group, etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith. Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves 'Ahmadis' or by any other name), who directly or indirectly, poses himself as a Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, by words, either written or spoken, or by visible representation, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine."
While 295-A is general, this latter so-called criminal offense (298-C), is clearly discriminatory and a manifest violation of the basic human right of freedom of religion. According to Articles 18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Pakistan is a signatory:

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Initially, my application for bail submitted to the Sessions Court under my first attorney, Ch. Waqar Ahmad, was rejected. It is no secret that the so-called judges in Pakistan's judiciary, who are meant to be impartial, are extremely corrupt and unjust, especially when it comes to blasphemy cases, they cave in under the threats and pressure of the bigoted Mulla. But the outbreak of Covid-19 resulted in an urgency to release as many UDP's (Under Trial Prisoners) as possible on bail. Therefore, by the grace of Allah Most High, I was finally granted bail through the High Court and under my second attorney, Mr. Usman Ali, and released on 13 April 2020, having spent a little over five months behind bars. The Canadian High Commission in Pakistan was kind enough to arrange a plane ticket for my immediate departure the following night back to Canada. While I safely arrived in Canada, and am extremely grateful first to Allah then everyone else who expended great effort to have me released, I must point out the great injustice and oppression I was subjected to and the parties that are responsible and will have to answer to Allah on Judgment Day for their inexcusable sins. Firstly, the corrupt Punjab Police for having registered such an unjust case against me without justification but simply to appease the Mulla. They also seized some of my valuable property, including tens of thousands of Rupees in cash, my laptop containing my entire library and database of texts and rare references, my cellular phone, my Canadian passport, NICOP card, and CIBC debit card. Since being released on bail, these items which are my personal property have not been returned to me. It is theft, plain and simple. Secondly, the actual complainant, a certain Amir Butt. This individual outright lied in his written and signed complaint against me. He alleged that he met me personally at my office where I proselytized to him and thereby offended his religious sentiments. The truth is I never met this individual nor was aware of him until after my arrest. Neither was he ever inside the office, at least in my presence, nor by any means did we ever engage in any kind of religious discussion. May the curse of Allah be upon he who lies!

Self-Proclaimed Reformer Dr. Nasir Ahmad Sultani

بِاسْمِكَ اللّهُمَّ
In Your Name, Allahumma

On November 10, 2019, I was arrested by the Punjab Police in Rawalpindi, Pakistan and subsequently charged with 295-A and 298-C of the Pakistan Penal Code. I was held at Adiala Jail until released on bail on April 13, 2020. I shall explain the details of this ordeal in a later blog entry, in sha Allah. During my five month incarceration, I had the opportunity to meet and engage extensively with a Dr. Nasir Ahmad Sultani, a self-proclaimed Mujaddid (divinely-appointed Reformer) of the fifteenth century after Hijra. Dr. Sultani is a homeopathic practitioner who rejects modern medicine (allopathy). He is in his mid-50s and hails from District Jhang in central Punjab province. Born to an Ahmadi Muslim family, he enrolled in and graduated from Jamia Ahmadiyya, the main Ahmadi seminary for producing religious scholars and missionaries based in Rabwah, Pakistan. For many years, he served as a salaried missionary of the main Ahmadiyya organisation during the tenure of the fourth Ahmadi caliph, Mirza Tahir Ahmad. For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, he resigned from his office of missionary and then subsequently left the main Ahmadiyya organisation in 1999, while continuing to believe in Ahmadiyya, namely, the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the movement. According to Dr. Sultani's story, he received divine inspiration from Allah in 2011 when Allah commissioned him with the divine office of Mujaddid. Dr. Sultani informed me that when Allah first inspired him to the effect that he was to be the Mujaddid of the time, he politely declined! Only after repeated inspirations did he finally accept the heavy responsibility. He started his own congregation entitled Jama'at Ahmadiyya Haqiqi, meaning the "True Ahmadiyya Congregation", implying that the rival organisations and groups which self-describe themselves as Ahmadiyya are untrue, particularly the mainstream organisation based in Rabwah that is currently led by its fifth caliph in London, Mirza Masroor Ahmad. Dr. Sultani focused his efforts of proselytism and reform toward the Ahmadiyya community, both the main Rabwah branch and the schismatic faction known as Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaate Islam, Lahore, or "Lahoris" for short. However, Dr. Sultani calls upon other Muslims, indeed all humanity, to accept him as the divinely-appointed Reformer of the fifteenth century after Hijra. Before his arrest, his activity to that end was largely based in online social media, especially Facebook. He engaged in polemics and debates with other Ahmadiyya groups and rival claimants to divine office within the Ahmadiyya community, such as Abdul Ghaffar Janba (based in Germany) and Munir Ahmad Azim (based in Mauritius). He apparently entered into a Mubahala (prayer contest) with the former, while the latter invited him to participate in a prayer contest too, though Dr. Sultani was unwilling to do so. Dr. Sultani stirred controversy not only within the Ahmadiyya community, but among the broader Muslim community in Pakistan too. Specifically, his attempt to mirror the claim of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of being a prophet in the zilli and buruzi sense naturally created a dangerous atmosphere in Pakistan for him to remain there without risking harm to his person, family and property. Consequently, Dr. Sultani sought asylum in Sri Lanka through the agency of the UN sometime in 2014. He managed to settle himself, his two wives, and his sons and daughters in that country, along with some of his most devoted followers. One such follower was Adnan Mir who belonged to the Lahori branch of the Ahmadiyya before accepting Dr. Sultani as Mujaddid. Adnan Mir was so sincere and devoted to Dr. Sultani that he left Pakistan to migrate with his Mujaddid to Sri Lanka along with his family. But when Dr. Sultani informed Adnan Mir that Allah had commanded through divine inspiration that Adnan Mir's sister be given in marriage to him, Adnan Mir strongly objected. Not only did Adnan Mir withdraw his spiritual affiliation to Dr. Sultani, he also registered a police case against him in Sri Lanka relating to Dr. Sultani's publicizing the divine inspiration that Adnan Mir's sister had no choice but to marry him in posters that were publicly displayed. Dr. Sultani considers Adnan Mir and many other individuals who withdrew their recognition of him as a Mujaddid to be "apostates", referring to them with the Arabic word murtad. Incidentally, none of Dr. Sultani's sons consider him a Mujaddid and abandoned him once they matured into adulthood.

In 2017, after evaluating his asylum application, the UN determined Dr. Sultani did not qualify and subsequently he was deported by the Sri Lankan government along with his immediate family back to Pakistan. Once in Pakistan, he again made plans to flee the country, this time to Nepal. He reached the international airport in Islamabad and was moments away from succeeding in leaving the country with his luggage already loaded onto the plane when he was intercepted by Pakistan's FIA (Federal Investigation Agency). Dr. Sultani was subsequently charged with a host of criminal offences, including the most serious blasphemy charges (295-C and 295-B) and perhaps even more worrisome, several terrorism offences. He had been nominated to an FIR that included three other co-accused (Abdul Waheed alias "Allama Ayaz Nizami", Professor Anwar Ahmad, and Rana Numan Rafaqat - all of whom I had the opportunity to spend extensive time with during my five month incarceration at Rawalpindi Central Jail). As of March 2020, Dr. Sultani along with these three other co-accused have been languishing in severely restrictive conditions at Adiala Jail for over three years while their trial is ongoing in the Anti-Terrorism Court.

Ironically, those whom Dr. Sultani considers as adversarial to him such as the main Ahmadiyya organisation, have actually condemned his arrest, terming it religious persecution. For example, the Rabwah Times, a digital news publication run by members of the main Ahmadiyya organisation in Rabwah, published this article terming those who considered his claims to be blasphemous "far right Muslims".

Similarly, another major adversary and rival of Dr. Sultani, namely Munir Ahmad Azim of Mauritius, founder and leader of another splinter group of Ahmadiyya known as Jama'at-ul-Sahih al-Islam, condemned his arrest and called for his immediate release in a Friday sermon delivered on 11 May 2018.

I, Mohammed Abdul Khader, who likewise hails from an Ahmadiyya background, with many members of my family being ardent members of the main organisation, particularly my father, also condemn Dr. Sultani's arrest and this absurd case against him, despite the fact that I passionately disagree with Dr. Sultani's claims and beliefs and have opposed him academically both to his face, and am now writing this expose on him here on my personal blog. In sha Allah, I shall detail my views on the necessity of religious liberty in the near future.

Returning to my thoughts on Dr. Sultani, specifically his claim to being a divinely-appointed Reformer, here I shall reproduce something I wrote while in jail:

Dr. Nasir Ahmad Sultani, my fellow neighbor and prisoner here in Adiala Jail, is a homeopathic "doctor" who proclaims himself the divinely-appointed Mujaddid of the 15th century After Hijra. Apparently he was commissioned with this divine office in 2011, that corresponds to 1432 After Hijra. But the blessed Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) explained that Allah shall raise and commission a Mujaddid at the head of every century, meaning its beginning.
إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَبْعَثُ لِهَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ عَلَى رَأْسِ كُلِّ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مَنْ يُجَدِّدُ لَهَا دِينَهَا
Verily, Allah shall raise up for this Umma at the head of every century one who will renovate for it its Religion
(Sunan Abi Dawud)

According to this prophecy the true Mujaddid of the 15th century AH is someone who began the activity of Tajdid sometime in the 1980s. At any rate, Dr. Sultani does not qualify as a candidate for Mujaddid of the 15th century AH because he did not manifest this divine office at the head of the century as required by the prophecy. I have also come to realize that Dr. Sultani's "Tajdid" of Islam is limited to arguing about the veracity of his self-professed claim. Apart from that, he has virtually nothing to contribute to the revival of Islam itself (which kind of defeats the purpose of being a Mujaddid). Presently, Dr. Sultani is secure behind bars. He was arrested over three years ago on charges of terrorism and blasphemy. I don't care to speculate on the veracity of the federal indictment against him. But I will say that given the serious nature of these charges, and that if he is found guilty of even some of them by the Anti-Terrorism Court in Islamabad, he is looking at several decades behind bars. But if Dr. Sultani really is the divinely-appointed Reformer of this century, we can surely expect Allah to arrange for his speedy release, for otherwise how can he carry out the necessary functions of the Mujaddid? The good doctor himself acknowledges this, and has accordingly informed his fellow prisoners quite frequently for the past three years that they should expect his release "very, very soon" on the basis of repeated divine inspiration he allegedly experiences. I personally will be quite amazed if Dr. Sultani released within the next couple of months and would find it hard to deny such a thing to be nothing short of a miracle, a heavenly Sign in his favor. But I reiterate, that is quite improbable given the apparent circumstances of his case. The good doctor asserts he regularly converses with Allah and receives news of the unseen in abundance. But these prophecies tend to be quite vague and ambiguous. For example, God allegedly told him the day he will be released is the 28th, but God allegedly neglected to mention the month and year. I've personally requested Dr. Sultani to cite any clear, unambiguous prophecy of his that was verifiably fulfilled, but to date he has been unable to cite even a single such prophecy.

Now let's move on to some of Dr. Sultani's views and teachings and judge for yourself if they accord with the letter and spirit of Islam. While Dr. Sultani was here in jail, one of his daughters contracted a marriage with a non-Muslim man from Australia. I am not privy to whether or not the good doctor initially opposed such a union [*edit: he did not], but at present he certainly blesses this marriage and insists it is valid. On the other hand, the general concensus (Ijma) of all Muslims, including different schools of thought and experts of the Shari'a, is that a Muslim lady's marriage to a non-Muslim man is invalid and totally unacceptable. According to the Shari'a, the children of such a union have the same status as children born out of wedlock. In short, Islam does not recognize a "marriage" between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man just as it doesn't recognize "same-sex marriage" between two men or two women, or polyandry in which a woman has more than one husband simultaneously. I assume the good doctor agrees same-sex and polyandrous marriages are invalid in our Shari'a (despite not being explicitly stated as such in the Holy Qur'an), therefore it is inconsistent for him to assert marriage between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man as valid. Nevertheless, it is understandable why Dr. Sultani justifies his daughter's marriage to a non-Muslim foreigner. In our society, such a thing as family honor exists in which all members of a family have to bear the shame of the scandalous behavior of one of their close relatives, especially if that relative is a girl. Perhaps because Dr. Sultani cannot bear such a dishonor he prefers to justify what his daughter did. After all, what kind of Mujaddid is he who is sent to morally reform the entire Umma but whose own children violate the most basic imperatives of the Shari'a? And speaking of Dr. Sultani's children, it should be noted that most if not all of them do not consider him the Mujaddid of the 15th century AH or even an ordinary recipient of divine inspiration for that matter. As a matter of fact, some of Dr. Sultani's closest followers eventually abandoned him, for example, a certain Adnan Mir. This individual was so sincere and committed to Dr. Sultani that he dropped everything and emigrated to Sri Lanka to be with the self-professed Mujaddid of the 15th century. One expects a man of such sincerity to be steadfast all his life to that cause for which he sacrificed so much. So I truly wander what was it that forced Adnan Mir to so dramatically break ranks with the good doctor. And after Adnan Mir's "apostasy" who is Dr. Sultani's most sincere and committed follower? As far as I can tell there isn't a single such person, which is odd for someone who claims Allah is helping him, rather he is the most beloved person to Allah on the face of the Earth. Jesus of Nazareth had twelve close disciples. Only one, Judas Iscariot, betrayed him and turned apostate (but even Judas knew he was wrong and eventually committed suicide out of guilt for his betrayal). But as for Dr. Sultani, why does almost every one of his followers eventually become a Judas? I myself can testify that apart from Dr. Sultani's two wives, no one ever visits him in jail or even bothers to write to him, though he claims to have literally dozens of sincere followers. Another peculiar teaching of Dr. Sultani is that every state should allow brothels, casinos and liqor shops to operate without hindrance. The Holy Quran, which the good doctor zealously claims to uphold, explicitly forbids prostitution, gambling and hard drink. I once asked Dr. Sultani if any previous Mujaddid had preceded him in sharing this view, but as expected he could not answer. At any rate, one would think the function of a religious reformer and saint is to morally reform the Umma and preach strongly against such vices and corruption. On the contrary, Dr. Sultani says that not even the government should prevent social evils like prostitution. I wander if Dr. Sultani would be consistent and declare that the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) was wrong (God forbid) to outlaw prostitution, gambling and wine in the state he ruled over in 7th century Arabia. The truth is Dr. Sultani hastily invents principles without properly and comprehensively considering their implications, and consequently ends up entangled having to iron out the wrinkles in his self-contradictory propositions. Once, Dr. Sultani told me he considers it good for Muslims to extend good wishes to non-Muslims on their religious festivals, for example, by wishing them "Christmas mubarak", "Easter mubarak", "Divali mubarak", "Holi mubarak", etc. I pointed out that the meaning of 'mubarak' is to wish for blessing and increase; how can a Muslim wish for a festival that is idolatrous, dedicated to the worship of false 'gods' to be blessed? When Dr. Sultani realized this dilemma he quickly changed his story right there and then, claiming that when we wish a Christian "Christmas mubarak" or a Hindu "Divali mubarak" we intend thereby that God should bless them to abandon the celebration of such idolatrous festivals! What astounds me more than the speed of this U-turn is that the good doctor, who at least seems to be an intelligent man, doesn't realize how absurd he must sound to an ordinary person when he contradicts himself so nakedly, often within the very same sentence.

Now let us consider some of Dr. Sultani's alleged divine inspirations and judge for yourself if these are serious messages from the Lord God or the wishful desires of a mind suffering from psychological disorders, or else outright fabrications: The self-professed Mujaddid of the 15th century AH says Allah Most High instructed him to play chess frequently, to subscribe to the Express Tribune (a newspaper), and to color his beard black. At various time, Allah allegedly told Dr. Sultani to keep a long beard, then a short beard, then to shave his beard completely, then again to grow a beard, then to wear European style clothing; to keep long hair, then short hair, and so on and so forth. One genuinely wanders why Allah is so obsessed with Dr. Sultani's outer appearance but doesn't reveal to him any useful information. Instead, Dr. Sultani must constantly change his appearance like a chameleon changes color. Now compare these comical "inspirations" with the profound, beautiful revelations to the true Prophets (peace be upon them) which we read in Scriptures like the Quran. Incidentally, Dr. Sultani boasts that Allah Most High informed him that he is superior to four ancient Prophets (God forbid), another example of a hollow claim that isn't backed up with anything of substance. So while Dr. Sultani asserts that God told him to subscribe to Express Tribune, he was forced to admit that the same God did not reveal to him beforehand about the outbreak of the coronavirus, a lethal pandemic that has locked down half the world. Again, witness the good doctor's contradictory reasoning; he says that while God did not tell him beforehand about the outbreak of this pandemic, nevertheless, the object of the pandemic is to warn the world that it ought to accept him as the Mujaddid of the 15th century AH. How is it that the Creator of the Universe told His alleged Mujaddid to play chess but allegedly forgot to tell him that soon the greatest pandemic since the Spanish Flu is about to break out and it is meant to warn the world that it should accept you. At any rate, it is quite evident that the good doctor may imagine God speaks to him, but the truth is God doesn't speak to him. Allah says in the Holy Quran, words to the effect, "Who is more unjust than he who lies upon Allah and says it was sent down to me while Allah sent down nothing to him."
وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّـهِ كَذِبًا أَوْ قَالَ أُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ وَلَمْ يُوحَ إِلَيْهِ شَيْءٌ وَمَن قَالَ سَأُنزِلُ مِثْلَ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ
And who is more unjust than one who fabricates upon Allah a lie or says 'it was inspired to me' while nothing was inspired to him, and one who says 'I shall send down the like of that which Allah sent down'
(Sura 6:93)

So I invite Dr. Sultani sir to think long and hard about this game he is playing for attention. If he doesn't repent from lying upon Allah he will burn in Hell, wailing and gnashing his teeth for ages upon ages. This isn't a joke or a game. Fear Allah and save yourself from falling into the Pit. I myself have observed that Dr. Sultani cannot bear hardship. Even in prison he requires relative luxury and ease. Once when the jailers placed hand cuffs on both his wrists instead of just one he raised a great hue and cry. If he can't handle a bit of inconvenience in this world how will he fare in the blazing inferno of Jahannum?

As for me, when I first met Dr. Sultani here in Adiala Jail, and he told me he was the Mujaddid and regularly converses with Allah, I had no reason to deny it then and so out of 'husn adh-dhann' (benefit of the doubt) I decided to engage him in discussions and hopefully benefit from him spiritually and acquire some knowledge. But as I probed the good doctor's beliefs and teachings, I began to notice this man invents principles and frames arguments on extremely flimsy premises. He does not understand or appreciate basic logic. Nor does he know what a logical fallacy is, such as a circular argument. When I ask him a simple and straightforward question, he tends to ramble on, telling long, drawn-out, and quite frankly, boring stories. He mentions things that are irrelevant and immaterial, when all that is required is to answer "to the point". Out of regard for the fact he is almost twice my age, and not wanting to come across as rude, I politely listen to his time-consuming speeches. But in the real world those who challenge the good doctor intellectually, who are more educated than myself, won't be so generous. They will eat him for breakfast. Though he may not realize it, I'm doing the doctor a bit of a favor by asking him some tough questions though he is obviously annoyed by them. He definitely needs to refine his arguments if he wants to seriously engage others on an intellectual and academic level.

One of the more disturbing beliefs of Dr. Sultani is that, in general, the saints of this Umma are superior to the Prophets with the exception of the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam). I've already mentioned that Dr. Sultani claims Allah told him he is superior to four ancient Prophets. I am an orthodox Muslim who belongs to Ahl us-Sunnati wal-Jama'a. It is our fundamental belief that the rank of prophesy is the highest spiritual rank, that Prophets are, without exception, superior to non-prophets, and that even the smallest of the Prophets is superior to the greatest saintly non-prophet. Dr. Sultani, despite claiming affiliation to Sunni Islam, agrees in principle with the heresy of the Imamiya Shi'a sect. The latter hold their twelve Imams to be superior to all the Prophets from Adam to Jesus (peace be upon them). During a lengthy discussion on this topic, I managed to extract several confessions from the doctor: (1) denial of a Prophet is kufr (unbelief) but denial of a saint is not, (2) a Prophet's revelation is not in need of confirmation but a saint's inspiration requires repeated confirmation, (3) all Prophets possess legislative authority while saints are bound to obey the Shari'a of a Prophet. To this let me add that dozens of Prophets have the distinction and honor of being mentioned by name in the Quran, though not a single saint of this Umma is mentioned by name in the Quran with the sole exception of Zaid bin Haritha (radi Allahu anhu). According to the Quran (Sura 4:69) the highest spiritual rank is prophesy followed by the rank of the Siddiq, then the martyr, then the righteous. Dr. Sultani himself acknowledges this order, but argues that the saints of this Umma who achieve the maqam (rank) of prophesy without actually being prophets technically, are superior, in general, to the ancient Prophets. To illustrate the absurdity of this argument, let me give the example of a prize that is named after its greatest winner, but is subsequently won by others while it retains the name of the winner who is necessarily the greatest in achievement deserving that prize. If someone later achieves even higher than him, it would be logical to not only award him the prize but rename the prize after him.

Several years ago, Dr. Sultani applied for asylum in Sri Lanka through the UN. After three years and having evaluated the merits of his application, the UN determined he was ineligible and subsequently the authorities in Sri Lanka had him deported. Naturally, the UN has to be selective about who they find worthy of asylum - only serious cases. But Dr. Sultani is furious with the UN and blames them for his present predicament. Because the UN supposedly represents the globe, Dr. Sultani believes the pandemic is a result of the UN's "unfair decision" to refuse him eligibility for asylum in Sri Lanka. Psychologically Dr. Sultani suffers from delusions of grandeur and self-importance. He exhibits the classic symptoms of narcissism. I believe the reason for this is that Dr. Sultani was a neglected child. He is the youngest of many siblings. His father died when he was still a little boy and so he lacked a strong male influence or father figure in his life. Because Dr. Sultani is extremely short and in appearance is unimpressive to say the least, it is quite possible he was bullied, made fun of, and underestimated throughout his life. To compensate for the emotional trauma, and having developed an inferiority complex it is likely he has made such grandiose claims about himself being a Mujaddid etc. in order to earn desperately needed attention. 

Dr. Sultani says he is a Mujaddid because Allah told him so. Now the Quran commands us to verify the news reported by a fasiq (wicked sinner). How do we verify Dr. Sultani, who openly commits sins like bribing prison authorities, shaving his beard, backbiting, etc., is true in his claim that Allah appointed him the Mujaddid of the 15th century AH? This is the question I posed to him, which visibly irked him. He first said that the proof of his truthfulness is the transpiration of predictions of the unseen Allah Most High acquaints him with. I naturally asked for an example. What he presented was, if I may be so bold to say so, absolutely hilarious and stupid. The good doctor says Allah informed him he will be exonerated. But Allah did not tell him exactly when or even give a timetable, nor does he know if he shall be exonerated by the Anti-Terrorism Court or an apex court, or the Supreme Court. Now I asked him for a proof which I could verify at present, not for something that one will have to wait and see. This so-called "proof" is useless even more given the good doctor's confession that he can't even guarantee I will be around to know about it when it happens! This is the kind of useless, vague and laughable proof Dr. Sultani expects me and others to take as the basis for his truthfulness. Next, Dr. Sultani says the mere fact that he says Allah has appointed him Mujaddid is proof itself. That he cannot see the self-evident logical fallacy and absurdity of this argument proves the man is shamelessly dishonest or otherwise severely mentally handicapped. His third "proof" is that we are living in a time in which the Umma is in need of a reformer therefore he must be that divinely-appointed reformer. Of course, at present there are dozens, if not hundreds and even thousands of individuals who claim Allah has sent them to rectify the affairs of the Umma. Tahir ul-Qadiri is perhaps the most well-known Mujaddid-claimant at present. Whether he really is a Mujaddid is another story, but at least he fulfills the condition of the prophecy that the Mujaddid is sent at the head of the century (which Dr. Sultani certainly doesn't fulfill). In fact, Dr. Sultani was forced to admit the foundation of his claim to being Mujaddid is not the Hadith in Sunan Abi Dawud but alleged divine inspiration he enjoys. Now quite simply, in my view, the basic criterion to judge whether someone is a Mujaddid is whether they are actually doing the work of Tajdid, just as a Prophet is necessarily one who prophesies, a king is someone who rules a kingdom, etc. Merely claiming to be a Mujaddid is surely not sufficient. What has Dr. Sultani practically done, what service has he offered for the revival of this Religion which would justify calling him a Mujaddid? As I've already pointed out, 99% of Dr. Sultani's activity is dedicated to simply struggling to prove he is a Mujaddid. When it comes to any actual work of Tajdid sadly the poor doctor comes up empty-handed. The parable of Dr. Sultani is that of a schizophrenic who roams the streets pronouncing himself king, though he doesn't even possess ownership of a house let alone an entire kingdom. Dr. Sultani would be as harmless and amusing as the schizophrenic in my parable were it not for the fact he claims Allah reveals things to him, that people are sinful and liable to divine chastisement if they dismiss him, and that he is superior to four Prophets (God forbid). Thus it becomes necessary to expose and strip naked this lying fraud so the world can see him for what he really is, a misguided attention seeker who is firmly in the clutches of some devil.

Dr. Sultani falsely claims to be the divine reformer of the century, a saint who is in regular communion with Allah and superior to four Israelite Prophets (God forbid). But the purpose of a divinely-appointed Reformer is to revive the Sunna, not belittle its importance. I have observed that an average Muslim is more stringently following the Sunna, in terms of worship, habits, appearance, dealings and lifestyle, than the shameless Dr. Sultani who openly lies upon Allah without the least bit of fear. A few days ago I beheld Dr. Sultani in a dream. There was the unmistakable expression of fear and anxiety on his face. These days his face appears particularly ugly, darkened and pitiful. It is definitely not the face of a truthful Believer let alone a saint of this great Umma. Since we are a community who proclaim ourselves Ahl us-Sunna - people of the Sunna - it is necessary we fulfill the meaning of that descriptive name and try our level best to emulate the Prophet's Sunna as much as possible. Today there are numerous sects each propagating a different interpretation of the Quran. But the sect which is safe and represents the message of Islam faithfully is that sect which takes its understanding of the Quran from the Prophet's Sunna and the collective understanding of his disciples and companions (may Allah be pleased with them). They are the Jama'a, that is the original church of Islam that was blessed and aided by Allah Azza wa Jall. The deviated sects, groups and individuals all share in common the turning away from the Sunna in one matter or another. But we emphasize the Sunna in all affairs big and small, from praying two raka'at before Fajr to drinking while seated.

Sunday, 10 May 2020

Abrogation of Prophesy and its Substitution

In Your Name, Allahumma

He, Holy and Exalted is He, says:

 مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا ۗ أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّـهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ

We do not abrogate a Sign or cause it to be forgotten (except) that We bring forth one better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent
(Sura 2:106)

This is the Quranic answer to the dilemma that we have been struggling with for a while, namely, why did Allah terminate the institution of Prophesy after the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa-aalihi wasallam) so that there is no prophet to come after him for this Umma, whereas in the previous nations, particularly the children of Israel, Allah sent among them a multitude of prophets after their chief prophet Moses (peace be upon him). After all, Allah Most High declares that we are the best Umma (Sura 3:110). How is it logically possible that this "best Umma" be deprived of a great blessing - the institution of Prophesy - which persisted for centuries in Israel, an Umma that is inferior to ours?
So the basic reply to this problem is that the institution of Prophesy has ceased only in the formal sense, to illustrate the completion and perfection of the Muhammadan Shari'a (Sura 5:3), but Allah has promised that in compensation for the termination of the institution of Prophesy, He has brought forth in its place something that is similar to it (there cannot be any institution that is superior to that of Prophesy). That institution which is a substitution for the cessation of Prophesy in its formal sense is the institution of Wilaya (Sainthood) and Khilafa (Caliphate or Succession to the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him which is upon the pattern of his prophesy and his way). So the one who is a true Muslim saint and successor of the Prophet may be termed a "para-prophet" (meaning one like a prophet without actually being a prophet), in addition to "semi-prophet" (meaning one that is partially and not fully a prophet).

Sayyidatuna Aishah (RA): Say He is Seal of Prophets But Don't Say 'No Prophet After Him'

  باسمك اللهم اللهم صلى على سيدنا محمد The Mother of Believers, sayyidatuna A’ishah سلام الله عليها reportedly said: قُولُوا خَاتَمُ الن...