Thursday, 6 October 2011

Universality of Resalat, Ummah and Qadyaniat

Many scholars opine that all Messengers coming before Muhammad (saw) were sent to a particular nation, and no messenger’s ‘resalat’ was universally applicable. Let us analyze this believe in the light of Quran and Sunnah. Thereafter, we would throw light on concept of Ummah and tenability of Qadyani claim of Prophethood in the backdrop of concept of 'Resalat' and Ummah.
Quran mentions about Hazrat Noah’s (as) pray as “And Noah said, "My Lord, do not leave upon the earth from among the disbelievers an inhabitant (Nuh-26). It shows that Hazrat Noah’s ‘resalat’ was universal. Hazrat Noah (as) could not pray for destruction of disbelivers on the whole earth, if his ‘resalat’ had not applied to whole earth.
About Hazrat Musa (as) Quran states “Go to Pharaoh. Indeed, he has transgressed. And say to him, 'Would you [be willing to] purify yourself. And let me guide you to your Lord so you would fear [Him] (al-naziat-17-19)?
“And We had already tried before them the people of Pharaoh, and there came to them a noble messenger, [Saying], "Render to me the servants of Allah. Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger," (al-dukhan-17,18).
It is clear from these verses that Hazrat Musa was a messenger to people of Pharaoh, and he was commanded to preach Pharaoh; we know that people of Pharaoh were non-Israeli; it means Hazrat Musa’s ‘resalat’ applied to non-israelis as well. In other words, the idea that hazrat Musa’s ‘resalat’ applied only to Israelis is not correct.
Regarding Hazrat Isa (as) Quran states “And when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say…..” (al-maidah-116).
“I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness” (al-maidah-117).
In verse 116, Allah is asking Hazrat Isa (as) about the whole mankind whether he commanded them to take him and his mother as deities.
In verse 117, Hazrat Isa (as) is replying about the whole mankind that he commanded them to worship Allah.
It transpires that Hazrat Isa’s (as) ‘resalat’ was universal; if it had not been the case, Hazrat Isa (as) would not be questioned about the whole mankind.

In the above lines we have seen that Hazrat Noah,Hazrat Musa and hazrat Isa (as) all had ‘resalat’ universally applied to mankind; but it does not mean that all Messengers had universal ‘resalat’. Many a messengers like hazrat Saleh, hazrat Hud, Hazrat Shuaib, Hazrat Younus (as) did not have universal ‘resalat’; their resalat was applicable to only their respective nation ( and may be also applicable to the nation among whom they settled down after their own nation was destroyed).

In the Quran, at many places mention has been made about sending a Mesenger (rasool) to an ‘ummah’(al-nahl-36; al-muminoon-44,52; ghafir-5); nowhere mention has been made about sending a ‘Nabi’ to an ummah. This fact reflects that constitution of ummah is related to Messengers (rasool); it is not related to ‘Nabis’. In other words, a Messenger (rasool) constitutes an ummah, but a ‘Nabi’(if he is not a Rasool also) does not.However a Nabi is sent to a nation; the difference between a nation and an ummah is related to the title of prophet who is sent to the people;ummah (which may consist of more than one nations) is relating to a prophet who is a 'Rasool', and a Nabi is sent to a nation only. In other words, a 'Rasool' is sent to an ummah which may consist of more than one nations, whereas a 'Nabi' (if he is not a rasool too) is sent to a nation only.

A Rasool may be sent in ummah of a previous Rasool, but when he reveals his resalat and constitutes a new ummah, he no longer remains an 'ummati'; because an 'ummati' has to follow all aspects of 'resalat' of his Rasool, but a Rasool having his own different resalat can't follow all aspects of another Rasool's resalat. Therefore every Rasool ceases to be ummati of another Rasool. This fact contradicts Qadyani claim that mirza is an 'ummati Rasool'

There are other differences as well between 'Rasool' and 'Nabi'. The last prophet has to be a Messenger (rasool); the last prophet can not be a 'Nabi' only ( but a Nabi who is also a Rasool can be the last prophet); because after Nabi(s), it is compulsory that a 'rasool' is sent. Al-imran-81 states that " And when Allah took the covenant of the 'Nabis', [saying], "Whatever I give you of Book and wisdom, afterward there will come to you a messenger (Rasool) confirming what is with you, you [must] believe in him and support him...".

From this above quoted verse(al-Imran-81) , a few points are evident: i. whenever one or more Nabis (as) are sent to a nation, a 'Rasool' is essentially sent after such 'Nabis'; ii. it means that the last prophet has to be a 'Rasool' or a Rasool and Nabi combined; but the last prophet can not be a Nabi only; the Nabis are given only a part of the Book which is given completely to the 'Rasool' of whose ummah such Nabis belong to (that is why the Rasool testifies that is revealed to all preceding Nabis individually and belonging to his ummah); after coming of the 'Rasool', Nabis belonging to his ummah start commanding people according to the Book revealed to the 'Rasool'. The Quran states "Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The 'Nabis' who submitted [to Allah] judged by it for the Jews..." (al-maidah-44).

Another implication of the fact that the last prophet has to be a 'Rasool', is that Qadyani belief about Mirza Qadyani's Nabuwwat is proved to be false and contradictory to Quran- Qadyanis claim that mirza is a last 'Nabi'(Aik Ghalti ka azala, p-10 by mirza Qadyani).

Another difference between a 'rasool' (messenger) and a Nabi(as) is that a 'rasool' receives revelation directly from Allah without mediation of hazrat Gabrael, or/and through Hazrat Gabrael in the form of Allah's words -a book; when received directly, revelation is expressed in words of Rasool. It is the basic identity of a Rasool that he is given Book/'saheefa'(ale-Imran-184)); whereas a Nabi (as) receives revelation through Hazrat Gabrael in the form of Allah's Idea translated into words by Hazrat Gabrael or by the Nabi(as) himself (for detail plz see my article "Wahi, Intuition and their Implications" on this same blog).In other words, a complete Book is always revealed to a 'rasool' in the form of Allah's words, and all Nabis(as)coming before or after that 'rasool' and belonging to that rasool's ummah, receive revelation asto that Book in the form of Allah's Idea translated into words by Hazrat Gabrael or by the concerned Nabi(as).

This fact that a Rasool is given revelation in the form of Allah's words -i.e. a Book- also exposes mirza's claim of Resalat. The books presented by mirza Qadyani show an average standard of writing and comprehensiveness; these books can not be considered as words of Allah, even in the wildest imagination. Comparing Quran's standard of writing and comprehensiveness with that of mirza's books, we find no match. Therefore mirza's claim to be Rasool is no more than a blatant lie. (it may be noted that Mirza qadyani's books are not claimed by qadyanis as words of Allah; though they are claimed to be based on revelation).

Ummah may be defined as peoples to whom a messenger’s ‘resalat’ applies. According to Quran, every Ummah has only one Messenger (rasool):
“And verily, We have sent among every Ummah a Messenger (proclaiming): "Worship Allah (Alone), and avoid (or keep away from) Taghut -all false deities” ….(al-nahl-36).
“Then We sent Our messengers in succession. Every time there came to a ummah its messenger, they denied him” (muminoon-44).
In both verses quoted above, singular form, not plural form, of word ‘messenger’ has been used with reference to an ummah; it shows that for every ummah, there is only one Messenger (rasool).
From muminoon-44, quoted above, it is also clear that a Messenger’s ummah does not necessarily consist of Muslims only; a Messenger’s ummah also includes people not having faith in him. Sura Ra’d-30 states about Muhammad (saw) “Thus have We sent you to a ummah before which [other] ummahs have passed on….”. There is no denying fact that Muhammad (saw) has been sent to whole mankind (aaraf-158). It means the ummah to whom Muhammad (saw) has been sent, is whole mankind- both Muslims and non-Muslims; the Muslims among this ummah are called Muslim Ummah.

From above quoted both verses, it is also proved that no ummah can have more than one messenger (rasool). The coming of a messenger (rasool) means a new ummah has come into being. For Muhammad’s (saw) ummah, no other Messenger can be sent; sending of another Messenger would mean a new ummah which would not be included in the Muhammad’s (saw) ummah. Since whole mankind-both Muslims and non-Muslims,to be born till the last day of this world- are included in Muhammad’s (saw) ummah, no other Messenger can be sent among Muhammad’s (saw) ummah.
These verses clearly refute Qadyanis’ claim that Mirza Qadyani was a Messenger (Rasool). Al-imran-81 establishes that the last prophet has to be a 'Rasool'; the last prophet can not be a Nabi only because a Rasool is bound to come after Nabi or Nabis. Therefore Qadyanis' claim that Mirza is a Nabi is also baseless and incorrect.


  1. I got through your second commen which I feel must be replied because it is creating a genuine misunderstanding. . The literal meaning of Nabi is knowing of unseen , but what is unseen for one person may not be unseen for another person. what is revealed to a Nabi is revealed to Hazrat Gabrael before that. It means a Nabi is not first recipient of knowledge of unseen given to him; but verse of Sura Jin, you quoted, specifically IMPLIES that whenever Allah wants to reveal such knowledge of unseen which HE has not given any person before that, He chooses a Rasool for that. In other words, it is such a knowledge of unseen which is directly revealed to a Rasool without mediation of Hazrat Gabrael. Sura al-shura-51 describes three ways of Allah's communication with mankind; through 'wahya'; from behind a veil;and through a. angel. The first way is associated with 'Rasool' and the third way is for Rasool and Nabis combined. It means there is a difference between knowledge of unseen which is given to Nabi and which can be given to a Rasool.
    Your second viewpoint is that if 'nabuwwat' is discontinued, Allah's communication with mankind would be discontinued; this is most illogical argument. If we accept this argument, it would mean that after Muhammad (saw) and before mirza qadyani (for thirteen hundred years) Allah's communication with mankind was discontinued and after mirza, it is again discontinued. If Allah's communication remained discontinued for such long periods of time, why it can not be so permanently. In other words, if we can accept that what has been revealed to Muhammad (saw) was enough communication for mankind for thirteen centuries, why can't we accept, it is enough communication with mankind for ever.

  2. Mr. Jalal you can read my blog 'wahi and intuition and their implications' for more details about it.