• Contact us
• Search the website

Delete the word ‘Prophet’ from my writings and replace it with ‘Saint’

Link back here to read the declaration by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, made in February 1892, that the word nabi about him should be replaced by muhaddas.

In later years Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad referred to this debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim. In the debate he had presented the Islamic concept of muhaddas (a non-prophet to whom God speaks) and had stated that his claim is that of being a muhaddas and not a prophet.

1. “In Lahore I had a debate with a Maulvi Abdul Hakim. I put to him: Why do you object to God speaking, when Hazrat Umar was a muhaddas. He denied it flatly and said that the Holy Prophet had only stated hypothetically [that Hazrat Umar was a muhaddas], and that Hazrat Umar was not a muhaddas. He did not at all believe that there was any revelation after the Holy Prophet.”

— Malfuzat, Ruhani Khaza’in No. 2, 1984 edition, v. 3, p. 54-55; 24 May 1903

---

2. “In Lahore I had a debate with a Maulvi on the word muhaddas, that it says in Hadith reports that muhaddas is one to whom God speaks, and this applied to Hazrat Umar. The Maulvi replied that as in Islam there is no revelation after the Holy Prophet, therefore Hazrat Umar did not achieve this rank.”

— Malfuzat, Ruhani Khaza’in No. 2, 1984 edition, v. 7, p. 229, statement made on 28 October 1904.

These statements show that in 1904 Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was still confirming the standpoint he had taken in his debate with Maulvi Abdul Hakim in 1892. That standpoint was that revelation continues among followers of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, that this was why Hazrat Mirza himself received revelation, and that such persons are known as muhaddas in Islam.

3. At another place where Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is reported as saying something similar in September 1901, the editor of the Ahmadiyya community newspaper Al-Hakam has added a footnote about Maulvi Abdul Hakim. Hazrat Mirza is reported there as saying:

“I had a debate with a man in Lahore, called Abdul Hakim. He said plainly that even Hazrat Umar was not a muhaddas. He interpreted the hadith report about him as meaning that if there was going to be a muhaddas it would have been Umar.”

The editor’s footnote at this point is as follows:

“When the debate of this Maulvi Abdul Hakim with the holy Imam was held in Lahore in February 1892, I myself, the editor of Al-Hakam, was present at that occasion. This man went off with the papers of the debate at the end. Then he came to Qadian, unashamedly, in 1900. Matters were explained to him but he did not understand and started saying ridiculous things. When he was reminded of the Lahore debate and accused of running off with the debate papers, he promised to have them printed and to send them to the editor of Al-Hakam within one month; otherwise, he said, he should be considered as a liar. Now, let alone one month, one year is passing and he has still not sent the papers. If that wretch had sent the papers, we would have published the Hazrat’s speeches. Anyhow, it is that Abdul Hakim who is mentioned here.”

— Malfuzat, Ruhani Khaza’in No. 2, 1984 edition, v. 2, p. 353, from Al-Hakam, 30th September 1901, p. 2

This shows that in September 1901 the position taken by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in his 1892 debate was still accepted in the Ahmadiyya Movement, so much so that if the record of the debate had been available it would have been published in the Ahmadiyya community’s newspapers.