Note 23, 24 & 25

[ BACK ]

Note 23

These lines are further clear proof that he is discussing the root or linguistic meaning of nabi, in terms of language, as distinct from the defined Islamic concept.

Note 24

This again refers to a saint or muhaddas. Just as someone who is described as a nabi in the linguistic or metaphorical sense is not in fact a prophet but is a saint, similarly someone who is described as a non-law-bearing nabi, for whom "it is not a requirement that he should be a bearer of shariah", is not a prophet but is a saint. The reason is that every prophet is a bearer of shariah, in that every prophet had authority over the law, even though he might be following a law revealed before him. Any prophet became a prophet by receiving wahy nubuwwat, the revelation exclusive to prophets. He acted directly under the authority of his own revelation, which was supreme over any previous law or revelation he might be following.

On the other hand, a saint like Hazrat Mirza is a recipient of wahy wilayat which has no authority over the Quran and Islamic shariah, but is itself subordinate and subject to the Holy Quran and shariah. In view of this distinction between prophets and saints, the Sufis devised the term "prophet without a shariah" to refer metaphorically to a saint. See further Note 29.

Note 25

He has fully explained that these titles are not meant in the real sense when they are given to him or to any other Muslim saint by God. See the preceding Notes.