I will now address, one by one, the allegations made against the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at and its founder, the Promised Messiah(as). As I read out some excerpts from the booklet, it will become evident that these objections are a masterpiece of deception in which truth is mixed with falsehood, wrong conclusions are deliberately drawn from the truth, and misleading statements are made on the basis of erroneous assumptions. As a result, the entire booklet has become a masterpiece of deception and of covering up the truth. Now, let us read an excerpt from it. It states:
In the last fourteen hundred years, the indisputable meaning of the phrase Khataman-Nabiyyin has been that the Holy Prophet(sa) was the last Prophet and no Prophet would come after him. The Companions of the Holy Prophet(sa) also understood the Qur’anic term Khataman-Nabiyyin in the same way. Based on this unshakable belief, they vehemently fought any one who claimed to be a Prophet. In the entire history of Islam, the Muslim ummah never spared a person who claimed the status of prophethood. (Qadiyaniyyat—Islam kei liye eik Sangin Khatrah [Qadiyaniyyat—A Grave Threat to Islam,] p. 24–25)
It also claims:
Prominent Muslim scholars and historians, Ibn-e-Khaldun, Imam Ibn-e-Taymiyyah, his brilliant disciple Ibn-e-Qayyim, Shah Waliyyullah Dehlavi, and ‘Allama Iqbal, are renowned thinkers who have discussed the intellectual, social and political aspects of Khatm-e-Nubuwwat. ‘Allama Iqbal’s views on this subject can be read later on in this document. (Qadiyaniyyat—Islam kei liye eik Sangin Khatrah [Qadiyaniyyat—A Grave Threat to Islam,] p. 6–7)
The second part of the allegation—dealing with the treatment meted out to the claimants of prophethood in the history of Islam and the conclusions to be drawn from it—will be discussed later. To begin with, I would like to say that the claim that all the respected Muslim religious leaders have understood the phrase Khatamun-Nabiyyin to have no meaning other than the last Prophet of God, is an outright lie and a slander against them. There is nothing more to it.
Khatm-e-Nubuwwat is a vast subject and has deep implications. It has so many meanings that covering all its positive aspects, let alone refuting the opponents’ claims, would take much more time than is allotted in one sitting. Therefore, I will limit my responses to the aspects pertaining to the objections [stated in the White Paper].
As far as the great thinkers of Islam are concerned, we do not question the first three names cited in the White Paper. They undoubtedly provided great services to Islamic thinking and philosophy. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at agrees that they were great intellectuals and men of great knowledge and understanding. However, regarding ‘Allama Iqbal, I will present a passage from his own writings to demonstrate his status as a religious thinker and authority. In his letter to Professor Sufi Ghulam Mustafa Tabassum, the ‘Allama writes:
The scope of my religious knowledge is very limited… I have spent most of my life studying western philosophy. That point of view has largely become second nature to me. Consciously or unconsciously, I study the teachings of Islam from this [western] vantage point. (Iqbal Namah, (A Collection of the Letters of Iqbal) part 1, p. 46–47, publisher: Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf, Kashmiri Bazaar Lahore)
‘Allama Iqbal himself acknowledges that his study of the Qur’an is influenced by Western thinkers and philosophy and that his own religious knowledge is very limited. To think that such a person can be presented as an authority for Muslims suits only the objectives of those who authored the White Paper. No unbiased person can entertain such a thought.