Death of Jesus
Rizwan Jamil writes:
Dear Dr. Zahid!
I want to ask you a question regarding Jesus’s (PBUH) death. Can you please open a new thread with this topic?
Thanks!
July 6th, 2012
This entry was posted on Friday, July 6th, 2012 at 11:16 am and is filed under general. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
From Rizwan Jamil:
Thank you!
AAIIL claims that Sahaba also knew that Jesus (PBUH) died. If so then:
1. When in history did that transition from the idea of Jesus’s death to Jesus’s ascension occur among the Muslims?
2. How come the classical Muslim scholars of that era (in which this transition in idea occurred) did not debate on this issue, while they used to leave no issue without debate?
From Zahid Aziz:
Dear Rizwan,
1. The transition occurred when large numbers of Christians embraced Islam, bringing with them the belief that Jesus had been raised up by God to heaven physically. An evidence of this is the belief about the similar ascension of the prophet Idris based on the verses: “And mention Idris in the Book. Surely he was a truthful man, a prophet. And We raised him to an elevated state (wa rafa`-na-hu makan-an `aliy-an)” (19:56-57). These Arabic words literally mean: We lifted him to a high place.
At this link is the page from an Urdu translation of Tafsir Ibn Kathir where comments on these verses are given. After quoting the meaning as related by Ka`b, Ibn Kathir writes: “It must be remembered that this statement of Ka`b is from among Israelite stories, and some of it is wrong, and Allah knows best.”
This shows that classical commentators recognised that explanations of the Quran contained stories from the Bible, which may be unreliable. In the Bible, the prophet Enoch (identified with Idris) was said to have been physically raised by God (Genesis, 5:24; Hebrews, 11:5).
In the case of Idris, some classical commentators held that this “raising” was not physical, but spiritual elevation in the next world.
This is also how the misconception of Jesus’ physical ascension entered into Islamic literature.
2. There are many interpretations whose significance did not become important till much later when new circumstances arose, and classical Muslim scholars may not have scrutinised them. In those times, Christians were not trying to convert Muslims, certainly on a mass world-wide scale, by exploiting certain Quranic interpretations to their advantage (e.g. Jesus sitting with God, while the Prophet Muhammad lay buried in the earth).
The lack of any discussion, or perhaps lack of any record of such a discussion, by classical Ulama cannot overturn the actual fact that when the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) died, Hazrat Abu Bakr read out the verse about “messengers before him had passed away”, and no one among the Sahaba pointed out that any were alive and so the Holy Prophet might be alive somewhere too.
When my father was dying, I asked the doctor: Do you know of anyone in this condition who survived? The doctor didn’t answer this question. If he had known of even one person who had survived, he would have told me in order to raise my hopes. Similarly, even if one prophet had been alive, and especially if it had been a well-known belief that Jesus was still alive, someone would have contradicted Hazrat Abu Bakr’s argument that the Holy Prophet had to die.
From Rizwan Jamil:
Thank you for your response Dr. Zahid!
1. Tafsir of Ibn Kathir shows that Mujahid believed that Prophet Idris also did not die LIKE Prophet Jesus and was ascended to heaven alive LIKE Prophet Jesus.
Now I am quoting from Wikipedia that who Mujahid was:
“Mujahid ibn Jabr (d.722CE) was a Tabi‘in and one of the major early Islamic scholars. He was one of the leading Qur’anic commentators of the generation after that of the Prophet Muhammad and his Companions. He is the first to compile a written exegesis of the Qur’an. He is said to have studied under ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib until his martyrdom. At that point he began to study under Ibn Abbas, a Companion of the Prophet known as the father of Qur’anic exegesis. Mujahid Ibn Jabr was known to be willing to go to great lengths to discover the true meaning of a verse in the Qur’an.”
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahid_ibn_Jabr]
So Mujahid was a Tabai and was directly in contact with Sahaba including Ali and Ibn Abbas. And was a very able commentator of Quran. If such a Tabai was also of the opinion that Jesus did not die but was ascended to heavens, Sahaba must also be of the same opinion. Ibn Kathir also quotes it as the controversy lies only with how Prophet Idris ended up and not with how Prophet Jesus did. The impression made by Ibn Kathir is simply that the latter is undoubtedly understood. So how could the Sahaba have held the opinion of the death of Jesus?
2. And if it is still argued so, it would mean that the transition in the idea from Jesus’s death to ascension occurred from Sahaba to Tabain. If really so, than the books of tradition must have been containing a lot of information regarding this transition. Even the disagreement of Abu Zarr Ghaffari with other Sahaba over the minor issue of legitimacy of saving money is known, than how could such a big controversy in idea have escaped the books of traditions or Islamic histories?
3. Moreover, the maximum the story of prophet Idris shows, is that there could be a CHANCE that the idea of the death of Jesus was also affected by Christian ideas, as happened with Prophet Idris. But whether this idea was really affected, is the real question, which needs to be answered. The mere existence of chance does not necessitate the truth of the idea of the death of Jesus.
4. We can also see that the controversy that exists in the story of Prophet Idris has atlast been found in one of the commentaries. Even though the story of Prophet Idris is not of much significance or relevance to the Muslims and conforms only to a static part of history. On the other hand, the idea of the death of Jesus is directly relevant to Muslims as the idea of the coming of Dajjal, Imam Mahdi and Jesus is. This is because, if Jesus has already died, he will not return in his own person. He will return in his own person only if he was ascended and not died. Since, the much less important controversy regarding the end of Idris is found in a commentary, the much important controversy regarding the end of Jesus should also have been found in history.
5. Regarding the contention that Sahaba did not object to the Quranic verse quoted by Abu Bakr at Prophet Muhammad s.a.w death, I would say that the reason for this is debatable. It is very much possible that the Sahaba understood this verse in general sense, with purposeful exceptions allowed. For example they heard from the Prophet s.a.w that Jesus will return, so they knew this was why he was not made to die and was ascended. But as Prophet Muhammad s.a.w never told them about his s.a.w return, they knew that he s.a.w also had to die like everyone else. So as they knew this, when they were made to realize this by Abu Bakr, they did not object or argue about it and accepted it.
From ikram:
This thread like any other on the topic of whether Jesus died or ascended alive to return in person triggers certain thoughts, which are indirectly related to question at hand.
I as a person cannot go beyond the limits of my comprehension in accepting an opinion or giving my own. One of such external opinion that comes to me is that of Islam as a religion. Then its my comprehension about Islam from Quran, history of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), history of his companions and then other rightfully guided persons whether in history or our personal experience of them in our life time. All these external sources of information are incorporated into my comprehension and out of that my opinion emerges whether to accept Islam or not. If I accept Islam, then how to follow it for its details is confined to perimeters of my intelligence.
I as an average human am governed by laws around me. Some of those laws are in domain of physical world (of physics, chemistry, biology etc.) that besides my own intelligence can be tested in the lab to validate them and I can accept them as truth, e.g. gravity. Similarly, and in parallel there are my needs of non-physical laws that I as a person experience too, but those laws cannot be tested in a classical lab, but lab of “living a life” e.g. truthfulness is good, equality of humanity, humility etc. etc.
Both of these physical and moral laws have commonality of logic that my own limited life experience and the collective experience of history validates for me. This commonality emanates from the basic logic and fact that creator of laws of both these domains i.e. physical and moral, has a common source, i.e. Allah. Because the source is the same, hence there is no incongruity in them. Both pathways ultimately lead to the Creator. For example, the morality of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) gave him the physical triumph and the riches of Abu-Bakr (RA) and Usman (RA) gave them the spirituality of Islam. In reality, there is no separation of both the physical and moral domains, just like wood and fire, where one is inherent property of the other.
It would be injustice of the Creator if I as a Muslim should be in any form be at disadvantage to seek Islam and its truths just for the mere fact that I exist about 1500 years after the Prophet. With this axiom in mind, when I read Quran, I feel equally empowered and logical as any companion of the prophet. By this I do not mean in any sense of my equality of piety or truthfulness, but only trying to address that as a person I can take advantage of Quran like anyone in history.
When one discusses religion or its aspects or incidences in history, one is factually discussing the intelligence of Allah, which in no manner can be less than that of a human which includes me the foremost.
With this lengthy prelude I come to topic at hand i.e. Prophet Issa (PBUH). Now by the physical laws governed by Allah, if he does not die, then Allah is breaker of his own law whereas He states It is We that have ordained death for all of you. And We cannot be stopped from (it),” (55:60). If Jesus, spiritually and morally ascended despite the opposition of Jews and Romans, then the moral laws of Allah proved their existence.
When Abu-Bakr (RA) states, that And Muhammad is but a messenger — messengers have already passed away before him. If then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels? (3:144), it would be sheer polemic if for any reason I start to dig for an exception to the rule i.e. messengers have already passed away before him. Doing so will only be in an effort to find a possible reason in prevailing myth about Jesus. That exception will break the fundamental rule of Allah i.e. every soul follows the laws of biology. It is to prevent these kind of exaggerations and fancies that Quran gives us another rule – Say, `O People of the Scripture! do not exaggerate in (the matter of) your religion falsely and unjustly, nor follow the fancies of a people who had gone astray before (you) and had led many astray, and (now again) who have strayed away from the right path (5:77).
I will end my thought with a simple question that when Allah states about Himself – Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, The Beneficent, the Merciful, (1:1-2), is there exception to His Lordship, Beneficence and Mercifulness during famine, war, epidemics, earthquakes, floods etc. or is that these experiences are covered under other laws, both moral and physical?
Whether it is Jesus ascending, Moses splitting the water or Jonah being entrapped in a fish, all these essentially point to the ultimate outcome of moral triumphs of Divines. As to the details of these miracles, it will need a separate discussion.
[All verses above are from Translation of Quran by Muhammad Ali, ed. Zahid Aziz except 5:77 and 55:60 which are by Nooruddin, rendered by Amatul Rahman Omar, Abdul Mannan Omar]
From Zahid Aziz:
Rizwan Jamil, I was going to post my response today but haven’t had time to complete it. I hope I can post it tomorrow.
From Zahid Aziz:
Dear Rizwan Jamil,
I make a few points below, which I hope will deal with all your queries.
1. When something is clearly established from the Quran, it cannot be overturned by any report, hadith, commentary etc. Moreover, in this case we would have to overturn the Quran’s verdict on the basis of a statement (from Mujahid) contained in a commentary, and reports in commentaries are less substantiated. (Ibn Kathir wrote 700 years after Mujahid’s statement. Was there a reliable line of transmission from Mujahid to Ibn Kathir?)
Just because we can’t pin-point when a wrong belief was introduced, it doesn’t prove that it is not a wrong belief. For example, we as Muslims can show changes made by people in the text of the Bible, but it is almost impossible to pin-point when these occurred, who did them, etc.
2. When you accept a belief, you cannot then escape its implications. In this case, the serious implications are too numerous to mention here. How can a prophet come after the Holy Prophet, what authority will he have, how will he learn Quran and Islam, etc.
3. Even supposing that Muslims in earlier times didn’t question this wrong belief, they have been questioning it in these times. The Rector of Al-Azhar, Mahmud Shaltut, issued a ruling in the late 1940s rejecting the belief in the ascension of Jesus (Link), and Muhammad Asad rejected it in his ‘Message of the Quran’ translation. Thirdly, the well known Adil Salahi, who answers religious questions in ‘Arab News’ of Saudi Arabia, stated in an answer that belief in death of Jesus is a valid and reasonable interpretation which a Muslim is entitled to hold (Link).
So why are Muslim scholars with no connection to Ahmadis, expressing these views?
4. Regarding views of the Sahaba, it is clearly reported in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim that they considered a youth in Madina to be the Dajjal who was to come. Hazrat Umar and one or two others even stated on oath that he was Dajjal, in the presence of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). The Holy Prophet himself considered that he might possibly be the Dajjal.
Many questions arise from this incident. If they believed that Jesus in person was going to come, how could they consider that Dajjal had already arisen? It would mean they believed that Jesus could return in the Holy Prophet’s lifetime!
If the Sahaba were correct in identifying him as Dajjal, it means Dajjal came and went long ago, without Jesus coming back.
If the Sahaba were wrong in identifying him as Dajjal, then you can’t use the argument that if Sahaba believed in the ascension of Jesus then they must be right, since they can be wrong!
5. The issue of whether Jesus died is (yes, is) discussed in Sahih Bukhari. This is my claim! It is because when Bukhari reports the hadith about the return of Jesus he surrounds those reports with others which show he has died and cannot return. Referring to the Muhsin Khan translation (end of Book 55 and beginning of Book 56):
Numbers 648, 649: These two reports give two different physical descriptions of Jesus, one as seen in Miraj and the other (different) as in his second coming.
Number 656: clearly proves that Jesus cannot return.
Number 657-658: mentions descent of Jesus.
Number 661: proves Jesus cannot come because prophets cannot come, only khalifas.
Number 662: Muslims will do same wrongs as Jews and Christians, hinting that as Muslims will become ‘like’ Jews and Christians, so any one coming (i.e. a khalifa) will also be a ‘like’ of Jesus, not Jesus personally.
Bukhari is obviously putting these forward for a discussion as to why there are reports leading to opposite conclusions.
6. Regarding the verse quoted by Abu Bakr about the Holy Prophet, there is an identical one about Jesus:
wa ma Muhammad-un illa rasul. Qad khalat min qablihi al-rusul – 3:144
ma al-Masih-u ‘bnu Maryam illa rasul. Qad khalat min qablihi al-rusul – 5:75
“Muhammad / Messiah son of Mary / is only a messenger. Messengers before him indeed passed away.”
If 3:144 proves the death of the Holy Prophet, then 5:75 proves the death of Jesus.
If Jesus was an exception to the law of 3:144 for messengers, then Hazrat Abu Bakr should have mentioned it as an the exception, especially since Jesus was the immediately preceding prophet.
Before reciting this verse, Hazrat Abu Bakr said:
“whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die.” (Bukhari, Number 333)
If he believed that Jesus was alive, he would have to acknowledge that: “Whoever worships Jesus, then Jesus is still alive”, making it justified for Christians to continue worshipping Jesus.
From Rizwan Jamil:
Dear Ikram!
There was only one thing in your comment which I think requires an answer. Quran does make general statements but may also specify it or make exceptions to it at other places. There is a rule in Islamic Fiqh that all things are Mubah unless mentioned otherwise. This rule is extracted from a general verse of the Quran (and others of the like):
“He is Who created for you all that is on earth.” [Quran 2:29]
But Quran makes exceptions to this rule by prohibiting intoxicants and flesh of swine, for example. Similarly authentic Sunnah can also specify or make exceptions to a general statement of the Quran as well as of the Sunnah.
The reason why there is no exception in the general Attributes of Allah like His Lordship etc is also that Sharah (i.e. Quran and Sunnah) has not made any exceptions to them. So it is very much possible that Allah at one place revealed that messengers have passed away before Muhammad s.a.w but exceptions like Jesus also exist in Quran or Sunnah. This was my point.
And I would request everyone to please do not flood this thread by irrelevant details so that the discussion may be closed on some point.
I also want to make myself clear that I am approaching this issue of Jesus’s death here from a historic point of view i.e. whether the idea of the death of Jesus passes the test of history or not. For this reason, I want to leave aside the ongoing debate on the Quranic verses regarding Jesus’s death or second coming assuming both interpretations to be equally valid and possible for instance.
I will now add a few points to my previous points so that Dr. Zahid may be able to reply comprehensively in the light of all the points made by me yet. I left at Point # 5 previously…
6. The following link contains Ibn Kathir’s tafsir for Surah 43:61…
http://www.file-wire.net/file/HjNdrPZlwd1n
Leaving aside commentators’ differences in interpretations of this particular verse, the tafsir shows that the following people believed that Jesus was ascended or raised up alive:
Abu Huraira (Sahabi)
Ibn Abbas (Sahabi)
Ikrama (Sahabi)
Qatadah (Sahabi)
Dhahhaak (Sahabi)
Mujahid (Tabaee)
Hassan Basri (Tabaee)
Imam Malik (d. 179 AH)
7. Ibn Kathir’s tafsir for Surah 4:159 is presented below:
http://www.file-wire.net/file/5kplICH5Wpge
Again, leaving aside the interpretative differences, the tafsir again shows that the following people believed in the ascension or physically raising up of Jesus:
Qatadah (sahabi)
Wahb bin Munabbih (Tabaee)
Mujahid (Tabee)
Hassan Basri (Tabaee)
Imam Malik (d. 179 AH)
Ibn Jarir (d. 310 AH)
8. Moreover on the 2nd page of the above pdf file, a hadith regarding Jesus ascension, narrated by Ibn Abbas with “Sahih isnad” has also been quoted by Ibn Kathir, which has also been quoted to be existing in Sunnan Nasai from Muawiya.
9. The famous hadith of Malik’s Muwatta (Book 49, Hadith 2 – only reference quoted for brevity’s sake) shows that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w in his dream visions Jesus (and not someone else having Jesus’s manifestation) along with Dajjal. This hadith is narrated by Abdullah bin Umar and it clearly shows that people from Abdullah bin Umar upto Imam Malik’s time believed that Jesus will return at the time of Dajjal.
10. Ibn Majah, Bab Fitn, Hadith 1882 (provided at the link below) shows that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w met Jesus (not Jesus’s manifestation) in his journey of Miraj. And Jesus told Prophet Muhammad s.a.w that he will be descended to earth before Qiyamah.
http://www.file-wire.net/file/J5BWMtLaVZqM
11. Various ahadith in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud and Musnad Ahmad narrated by Abu Huraira, Nawwas bin Saman and Hudhaifa bin Usaid use the word “NUZUUL” for the coming of Jesus, which means “descent” in English. And one can only descend when he was ascended at the first place. Only references are given below for simplicity:
Bukhari, Book 34, Sales & Trade, Hadith 425
Bukhari, Book 43, Oppressions, Hadith 656
Bukhari, Book 55, Prophets, Hadith 657
Muslim, Book 1, Faith, Hadith 287-292
Muslim, Book 41, Turmoil & Portents of Last Hour, Hadith 7015
Muslim, Book 41, Turmoil & Portents of Last Hour, Hadith 6932
Abu Dawud, Book 32, Battles, Hadith 4310
MY CONCLUSION:
In the light of the above historical facts, it has been proven that so many among the Sahaba, Tabaeen and those belonging to later generations believed in the ascension and return of Jesus. If so, than that alleged transition in idea from Jesus’s death to ascension could not have been taken place. In my view, the idea of the death of Jesus fails the test of history while the idea of his ascension and return passes it successfully.
From Zahid Aziz:
Further to my earlier comment, Ibn Abbas believed in the death of Jesus as quoted in Bukhari. Go to this link of an online edition of Bukhari in Arabic and scroll down to “13 Bab” and read the line just above hadith 4666: “Ibn Abbas said: Mutawaffika means mumituka“. This refers to verse 3:55 of the Quran about Jesus, and shows that Ibn Abbas believed that this verse says that Jesus died.
Then read under “14 Bab”, hadith 4669, in which the Holy Prophet says that he too would give the same reply as Jesus is quoted in 5:117 in the Quran as giving, that he was a witness of his followers’ condition only when he was among them but after that only Allah knew of their condition. Just as Jesus said that he was not aware of how Christians deviated after his death, so would the Holy Prophet say about his own followers. If Jesus returns, he would be aware of their deviation after him.
See this page from Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Urdu translation, and read line 3 of the commentary area: “In some hadith it says: If Moses or Jesus were alive they would have had no choice but to follow me”.
From Farhan:
@ Ibn Abbas theory
1. Didnt Ibn Abbas believe that Esa (as) would physically return?
2. Didnt Ibn Abbas believe that Muhammad (saw) was physically on the Mir’aj?
3. Didnt Ibn Abbas believe in the Physical Raffa of Idris (as).
In conclusion, some Muslims did believe that Esa (as) died before his exodus, however, none of them ever wrote that he died in India. They (mujadids, muffassirs) all believed that Esa (as) woudl physically return.
Furthermore, the concept of Physical Raffa and Nuzool were common in the Abrahamic religions as well as the Hindu religions and ancient egytptian religions. It seems that Ahmadiyyat was constructed in an era wherein science was challenged in this respect. New trends in science have opened the ideas of the masses that thru technology, anything could be achieved.
From Zahid Aziz:
Dear Farhan,
The answer to your questions 1-3 is that in the Mi’raj, according to Bukhari, the Holy Prophet saw several prophets including Adam, Idris, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Jesus and Yahya (John The Baptist). He met Jesus and Yahya in the same heaven, and met other prophets (e.g. Moses) in heavens even higher than where Jesus was. If Jesus ascended physically to where the Holy Prophet saw him, then so did all the other prophets ascend to heaven, some higher than even Jesus who is supposed to have ascended “to Allah”.
The Holy Prophet himself after his death, and also righteous deceased Muslims, would be in the same celestial regions as where he saw these prophets including Jesus.
As to mujaddids and muffasirs believing that Jesus would return physically, then why are more and more Muslim scholars (Muslim here means Muslim as recognised by you) including muffasirs rejecting this belief, and some while accepting it are regarding it as an acceptable interpretation to reject this belief?
Death is India is only a matter of detail. Proving that Jesus died and didn’t physically ascend doesn’t rely on proving that he died in India.
If “Physical Raffa and Nuzool were common” in various religions, that doesn’t make it true, especially as Jesus (in an Abrahamic scripture) rejected the physical descent of Elijah and interpreted it as the coming of John the Baptist.
Modern science and technology have indeed, as you say, shown that it is possible for man to ascend physically. If that supports your belief about Jesus, it means that you consider Jesus to have ascended to some physical location, where Allah also is located (while we are taught that Allah is everywhere).
Modern technology has shown that anyone, whether it be an atheist, Jew, Christian, enemy of Islam, good, bad, or a Muslim, can rise physically and reach far beyond the earth. On the other hand, Islam teaches that raf`is only attainable by the righteous and the prophets. If ascent by technological means is the same as the Islamic concept of raf` then Islam has been proved wrong in holding that only the righteous can ascend.
P.S. Your use of the word “exodus” in connection with Jesus is quite correct. Both Moses in his exodus and the Holy Prophet Muhammad in his Hijra were delivered by Allah from their enemies by fleeing to another place on earth.
From Rizwan Jamil:
Thank you! I am replying to the points you have made, sequentially and with the same numbering, so that you may be able to refer back to your point with the same number.
1. The point is that it is not “clearly” established from the Quran… If it was, it would not have come into discussion only after 1200 years of Islam (i.e. in 19th century CE)… The greatest of Islamic religious ideological figures passed in these 1200 years and no one ever discussed that Jesus pbuh died instead of being ascended?… And this is the very question with which I began this thread…
The fact is that there have been differences in the interpretation of these verses related to Jesus pbuh depending upon which pronouns the commentators deemed more suitable to select… but even on the basis of those differences, no one ever concluded in the whole 1200 years what AAIIL does after that!
Moreover, it is well-known that Tafsir Ibn Kathir is a summarized version of Tafsir Tabari who lived in the period of the collectors of six books of ahadith “Sihah Sitta”… so Ibn Kathir does not quote reports recorded by himself after 700 AH… but he quotes directly from the books of ahadith and from Tafsir Tabari… but I agree that as he does not mention the isnad, his mentioned reports may not be relied upon so conveniently…
The analogy derived by you between the Christian and Muslim histories is not valid… this is because Christians did not record their history with the way Muslims did… if you slightly look at the Science of Hadith (Asma ar-Rijal and Isnad etc) you will realize why such a question is incorrect to ask in Christians case while totaly justified in the case of Muslims…
2. A lot has been written by classical scolars on the authority of Jesus pbuh which he will assume after he descends to earth… it has also been mentioned everywhere that he will not come as a prophet (bringing new shariah for that generation) but as an ummati of Prophet Muhammad pbuh… even the leader of the ummah of that time will not be him but Imam Mahdi who will be the than Khalifah of the whole Muslim Ummah, like Khulafah-e-Rashid were… so Jesus will not have to be a scholar of Islam…
3. The people you have mentioned upholding the view of the death of Jesus pbuh, all belong to 20th century… it does not answer the question that when did in history this transition in idea occurred and why is the classical Islamic literature empty with discussions on it… the reason why people after AAIIL started upholding this view, in my opinion, is the influence of the teachings of AAIIL on its readers… Muhammad Asad’s translation also clearly shows heavy influence of MMA’s translation over it… and the reason why they remained non-ahmadis is that one can remain a Muslim even without becoming an ahmadi… so they might not have found a severe need of associating themselves without any good reason with a jamaat not held in praise among general Muslim community… and the reasons may be many, but I believe that these scholars also made a mistake by not verifying the historical credibility of their expounded viewpoint…
4. Coming of Dajjal does not necessitate the instant coming of Jesus and of Imam Mahdi… As mentioned in the ahadith Dajjal will come and spread corruption on earth… Than will come Imam Mahdi and than Jesus… But as Jesus has not arrived yet, and that youth considered to be Dajjal has died, it means that Sahaba mistakenly identified him as Dajjal… But it needs to be understood that identification of Dajjal is not a matter to be revealed by Allah to the Muslims… means Allah will not make people identify Dajjal through His revelation… people will identify him themselves and thus can also be wrong in their identification, as Sahaba were… however contrary to this, the matter of Jesus’s ascention and return was a revealed matter… and Sahaba could not have been mistaken on that on a communal level…
5. My comments on ahadith of Bukhari, Muhsin Khan translation (end of Book 55 and beginning of Book 56):
Numbers 648, 649:
As these two ahadith depict Jesus at two different occasions, there is no issue if he was seen with curly hair at one and combed hair at the other. The point is that he was Jesus, because if he were not, Prophet Muhammad s.a.w would not have been able to recognise him. Moreover, although hadith 55/649 describes his complexion as brown but the same hadith elsewhere (Bukhari 87/128,153) mentions his complexion as red, as mentioned in hadith 55/648.
Number 656:
In this hadith, verse 5:117 is recited by Prophet s.a.w for himself while it is the wording of Jesus pbuh quoted by Allah in Quran. The arabic word used in this verse is “TAWAFFA”. The literal and general meaning of this word is “to take/receive/summon” while it can also be used metaphorically to mean the infliction of death. And this word is used in both meanings in Arabic language. Jesus used it for himself as mentioned in 5:117 in its literal sense while Prophet Muhammad s.a.w used it in metaphorical sense for himself. See Maududi’s tafsir below for verse 3:55 using the same Arabic word:
http://www.file-wire.net/file/WyQuYIbh0FgS
Number 657-658:
Starts with Baab “Isa bin Maryam ka Nuzuul” and mentions his descent.
Number 660:
You have missed this hadith. It starts with a new Baab “Bani Israel ka Zikr”. In this hadith, Prophet Muhammad warns that Muslims shall not become like Jews and Christians who used to build places of worships at graves.
Number 661: Does not prove that Jesus cannot return. This is because that Baab is already closed and new Baab about Bani Israel is opened. This hadith mentions Bani Isarel so it is quoted here. Moreover Jesus in his 2nd coming will not do siyaasah/politics for Muslims. Imam Mahdi as Khalifat-ul-Muslimeen will do that. Jesus will only deal with Dajjal.
Number 662: Muslims will become like Jews and Christians in the same way as mentioned in hadith 56/660 above. And not in any other way as claimed by you and mentioned by MMA in his Fazl-ul-Bari.
So these ahadith do not contradict each other. They are quoted in two separate Baab’s. And even if it is claimed that Bukhari had put these allegedly contradictory ahadith together for a discussion, the question is again that where is that discussion than?… Why do not we see it in the religious literature of those times?… The time of Bukhari was a peak time of Muslim classical scholars… no one discusses it while even the minutest details of Jesus’s return, his place, time, Dajjal, his coming, place etc are dealt with exhaustively…
6. The Arabic word used in both verses 3:144 and 5:75 is KHALAT which means “passed away or gone by”. It does not literally mean “died” but can be used in this sense as well. In verse 3:144 i.e. in the case of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w, it signifies the meaning of “died”. This is because what is meant in this verse is that Prophet Muhammad can also die just like the prophets of the past did. So the mention of Prophet Muhammad’s death gives the meaning of “died” to KHALAT. However in verse 5:75 i.e. in the case of Jesus pbuh, it is mentioned that like other prophets who were sent to Bani Israel for their guidance, Jesus was also a prophet. So they should not worship Jesus. So these verses preceding verse 5:75 give KHALAT the meaning of “gone by” and not “died”.
Moreover if Allah has kept Jesus alive to be sent later again, it does not give Jesus any share of God. If it did, all Muslims believing in Jesus’s return would also consider him a god like the Christians do. But they do not. So Jesus’s ascension does not necessitate Jesus to be a god.
I would again like to say that it is an old ongoing debate that which of the two interpretations is more valid, and I think threads are not suitable places for such debates. Books and commentaries have been written on that from both sides. So instead of initiating the same old debate from zero, I want to approach this problem with a completely different angle i.e. history and thus expect an answer from history alone.
MY POINT:
Let us analyse the hadith in which Prophet Muhammad s.a.w mentions both Jesus and Dajjal. This hadith occurs in Muwatta, in Bukhari and in Muslim as well. Imam Malik gives a separate title to it mentioning both Jesus and Dajjal in the title. Muslim also starts it with a new Baab “Zikr-e-Masih bin Maryam wa Masih Dajjal”. This can be seen in the following two links:
http://www.file-wire.net/file/JzPtJECZBrR0
http://www.file-wire.net/file/MvF40P4UEXQD
Please see the arabic as well. Both Jesus and Dajjal are called Masih in this hadith. Their mention together portraits a clear picture of Jesus vs Dajjal. Dajjal is still to come, thus will Jesus descend for him.
Muwatta, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are considered as the most reliable of all hadith books. Out of them, Imam Malik (a taba-tabaee) heard this hadith with the shortest of chains i.e. from Naafi (a great Muhaddith himself and exteremly reliable) who heard it directly from Abdullah bin Umar (Sahabi). So there is no doubt on the authenticity of this tradition. And this chain consists of the first three generations only. So if this hadith mentions Jesus and Dajjal together and both as Masih, it shows that Taba-tabaeen, Tabaeen and Sahaba believed in the return of Jesus in the time of coming of Dajjal.
Same hadith travels to Bukhari and Muslim as well, with the same chain upto Imam Malik (taba-tabaee) with the addition of one or two later generation(s) i.e.from Imam Malik to Bukhari, and from Imam Malik to Muslim. Following is their references along with chain of narrators:
Bukhari, Book 87, Dreams, Hadith 128
Abdullah bin Umar -> Naafi -> Imam Malik -> Abdullah bin Muslima
Bukhari, Book 72, Dress, Hadith 789
Abdullah bin Umar -> Naafi -> Imam Malik -> Abdullah bin Yusuf
Muslim, Book 1, Faith, Hadith 323
Abdullah bin Umar -> Naafi -> Imam Malik -> Yahya bin Yahya
The same hadith is also narrated by Musa bin Uqba (taba-tabee) from the same tabaee Naafi:
Bukhari, Book 55, Prophets, Hadith 649
Abdullah bin Umar -> Naafi -> Musa bin Uqba -> Abu Zumra -> Ibrahim bin Munzir
Muslim, Book 1, Faith, Hadith 324
Abdullah bin Umar -> Naafi -> Musa bin Uqba -> Anas bin Ayyaz -> Muhammad bin Ishaq
And it is also narrated by Saalim (tabaee) from his father Abdullah bin Umar:
Muslim, Book 1, Faith, Hadith 325
Abdullah bin Umar -> Saalim -> Hanzalah -> Ibn Numair
Bukhari, Book 87, Dreams, Hadith 153
Abdullah bin Umar -> Saalim -> Zuhri -> Shoaib -> Abul Yamaan
Bukhari, Book 55, Prophets, Hadith 650
Abdullah bin Umar -> Saalim -> Zuhri -> Ibrahim bin Saad -> Ahmad bin Muhammad Makki
As the same hadith has travelled from the times of taba-tabaeen to the times of Bukhari and Muslim, same idea must have been travelled from the former times to the latter times.
Imam Ibn Abdul Barr (born in 356 AH) a Maliki scholar commenting on this hadith of Imam Malik says in his books:
“In this Hadith, Allah knows best- there is an evidence that Issa will descend on shrines and will make Tawaf (cirucumbulation) around the Ka’bah.”
[Al-Tamhîd limâ fîl-Muwatta’ min al-Ma`ânî wal-Asânîd (The Facilitation to the Meanings and Chains of Transmission Found in Mâlik’s Muwatta)]
“Ahl Al-Sunnah believe in the descent of Issa.”
[Al-Istidhkâr li Madhhab `Ulamâ’ al-Amsâr fîmâ Tadammanahu al-Muwatta’ min Ma`ânî al-Ra’î wal-Athâr (The Memorization of the Doctrine of the Scholars of the World Concerning the Juridical Opinions and the Narrations Found in Mâlik’s Muwatta)]
This is quoted in the following link:
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=88216
So this early Maliki scholar also confirms the opinion of Imam Malik (a taba-tabaeen) which necessitates that the first three generations believed in the ascention and return of Jesus.
It should also be noted that all the six collections of Sihah Sitta ending with the death of Imam Nasai in around 300 AH, contains each and every and even the minutest details of the future events of Dajjal and Jesus. Musnad of Ahmad (d. 241 AH) also contains many such ahadith. So if even the tiniest of details regarding Dajjal and Jesus were in circulation in the times of these Fuqaha, Mujtahids and Muhaditheen, than why did not anyone even discussed the transition in such a prominent idea of Jesus death explicitly?…
Summing it up, as both kinds of interpretations of Quranic verses regarding Jesus pbuh exist, I think what is sensible is to adopt that which is consistent with history far from which totally belies it.
From Farhan:
Dear Zahid Aziz
I have read your responses…its the common Ahmadi rhetoric.
You are claiming that if this happened, then X and Y must have happened. You are wrong…we dont know that science of Allah. The science of Allah is unlimited. Space-time doesnt even exist in the realm of Allah, hence, men and women dont age in that realm.
You are then asserting that Muhammad (saw) must be there based on a previous assumption…thats not how religion works…you are mixing religion and science and looking to find a happy medium wherein your Islam is still relevant. I am telling you that in Islam, some things are unexplained as remain as such. What will Esa (as) do when he returns??? We actually dont know..we have hadith that give us a picture..however, we dont know exactly what they mean, we can only guess.
Why are more and more Muslims accepting that supernatural events are laaame and should be re-explained?? My answer is European colonialism. If you want to learn Islam, you must study how it was practiced in the golden era of Islam. Not how, recent trends have changed the opinions of the educated.
Ahmadis will soon run away from the Esa (as) died in India theory…I think this is black eye on Ahmadis. If only, your Mirza sahib had avoided this arena of entanglement. However, his mental state kept him engaged in new quack theories.
Are you quoting the Bible for the 2nd coming of Elijah (as)?? I hope you know that this book has been changed 1000’s of times. Christians didnt write tafsirs like Muslims…they just changed the words. And now you are referencing that material? By the way..in that same book, Yahya (as) denies being Elijah (as). As Muslims, we follow the Quran..the Quran didnt mention the physical return of Elijah (as). Hence, we dont believe it.
Allah may have a location…we dont know. However, I dont think we will ever find it. The specific Raf that is in the Quran means 2 things..one that the prophet was cleared of wrongdoing and protected by Allah and 2, that Esa (as) and Idris (as) were lifted to heaven. By the way..the Quran doesnt say that Muhmamad (saw) was raffa.
The reason I used the word exodus was to be politically correct. FYI: some Muslims believed that Esa (as) died…then his body was physically Raffa.
In conclusion. when Mirza sahib claimed to be Esa (as) he quickly had to denounce 2 FACTS about Islam:
1. Muhammad was physically RAFFA and Nuzool during his miraj.
2. Idris was physically Raffa
From Rashid:
Brother Rizwan Jamil wants to discuss issue of ‘Death of Jesus’ from historical angle. Instead of going to remote history which is not as accurately recorded as 20th and 21st century history is recorded, so I will stay in recent history.
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad somewhere wrote that in about 200 years ‘necks of people who are looking at sky for descent of Jesus will be tired and then they will start believing that Jesus AS has indeed died’.
Review of modern translators of Holy Quran, especially outside Indian subcontinent, testifies to HMGA prophecy. As these translators are translating Holy Quran verses that support ‘Death of Jesus AS’. Perhaps their necks are tired by looking up at the sky for hundreds of years. So far only 100 years have passed after death of HMGA.
Educated Muslims, especially those living in Europe and North America read translations of Holy Quran by these 20th and 21st century Islamic Scholars. These Educated Muslims do not read Tafsir Ibn Kathir or Tafsir Tabari. As education is spreading among Muslims so it is obvious they will definitely read Holy Quran Translations by 20th-21st century Islamic Scholars. In next 100 years children of brother Rizwan Jamil will not read Tafsir Ibn Kathir or Tafsir Tabari. Rather they will read Holy Quran translations by people like Muhammad Asad and Tarif Khalidi. This will only prove that their necks are tired too by looking at the sky to witness descent of Jesus AS.
This ‘TIRED NECK SYNDROME’ is common among opponents of HMGA that when they start their opposition discussions on blogs and forums on internet, in the very beginning they say: Jesus death is a Non-Issue.
I hope brother Rizwan Jamil will take a note of recent history too.
Two years ago I wrote short blog on Tarif Khalidi’s translation. I reproduce it below.
July 28th, 2009
Tarif Khalidi’s Translation of Holy Quran and Jesus’ Death
Submitted by Rashid Jahangiri.
Recently I purchased Holy Quran Translation by Tarif Khalidi. This translator has previously taught at the Oxford University and the University of Chicago, and currently he is professor at the American University of Beirut. He has published number of books on Islam and Arab history. His translation of Holy Quran was published in 2008.
In his translation of Chapter 5 Verses 115 to 117, he translates:
“I was a witness to them while I lived among them,
But when You caused me to die, it was You Who kept watch over them.”
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib’s mission included the subject of Death of Jesus. For his stand on this subject abuses were hurled at him in his lifetime and even to this day. But the good news is that Muslim Translators of Holy Quran living in Muslim majority countries feel courageous enough to translate these verses truthfully.
Review of his translation by Ziauddin Sardar in the Guardian
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan, my response may be the common rhetoric, but at least yours is novel in many respects.
According to you, all the prophets whom the Holy Prophet saw in Mi`raj have been taken up bodily. So there is nothing inside the tombs of Abraham etc. on this earth. And bodily the Holy Prophet went to his grave in Madina, where his body rests till today, while these other prophets continue to remain bodily in heaven.
Then you tell us that the Holy Prophet Muhammad did not have raf`. But the Quran say that Allah exalted (raf`) some prophets above others and that Muslims will be given raf` due to their faith and possession of knowledge. Your comment could be deemed an insult to the Holy Prophet.
Then you enlighten us that some Muslims believe that Jesus died and then his body was physically raised. This would mean he would need to be raised to physical life again from the dead, just as Christians believe about Jesus. Perhaps these Muslims could step forward and defend their belief.
You say that I am quoting the Bible which is an altered scripture. It was you who stated that concepts of rising to heaven and descent from it physically were common in ancient religions including Abrahamic religions. So I quoted from what I called “an Abrahamic scripture” that such descent has also been rejected.
Your tactic to evade answering questions is to say “we actually don’t know” what Jesus will do when he returns, It is widely taught by those who agree with you about Jesus’s return that when he comes he will offer mankind “no other alternative” but to accept Islam. You do know that and perhaps don’t wnat it mentioned!
Again you say “Allah may have a location, we don’t know”. But you do know, because you have been stressing physical lifting to heaven, and Jesus was “raised to Allah”.
As to the “facts” which you say Mirza sahib quickly had to denounce, he has only rarely mentioned those issues.
From Farhan:
1. This is getting childish…why did Muhammad (saw) see all prophets in the miraaj, or most of them..I dont know!! In Islam, we dont live our lived based on the idea that we to solve every complexity in Islam.
1.a. Your real issue is why did he see Esa (as)…maybe the outside of space-time the aging process differs..maybe the rules of physics dont apply. Maybe he saw them in an era before space-time…we simply dont know…it is all conjecture. Your Mirza sahib claimed to know all the answers which is impossible.
2. Muhammad (saw) wasnt specifically RAFFA. He was Khatamun Nabiyeen. Raf has different meanings…see the raising of the walls at the kaaba..see the raising of the mountain for the people of Musa (as).
3. I told you that some Muslims did believe that Esa (as) may have died…however, they also believed in his physical raffa and nuzool. You shouldnt be allowed to quote them at all whatsoever.
4. Quoting a verifiable concept is different that quoting a specific sentence. For example, from the Bible we learn that Esa (as) existed and may have been physically RAFFA. The same goes for Idris (as).
4.a. You on the other hand..you quote the Bible heavily in your jesus in India thoery…which nowadays you are beginning to move away from.
5. This is what the Muslims from the golden era preserved for us. They also preserved mathematics and astronomy. They were best in preservation of data in the history of the world. How can I doubt them? Did they err in terms of the Quran?
6. As far as the location goes…the map of our current universe is very small…we have no idea how big it is…we can only guess. Allah may be in a realm that is paralel to our universe. Ever heard of string theory?
7. Mirza sahib planned everything…he was Esa (as) (naozobuillah) as far back as 1880…he secreetly and discreetly dropped hints from 1881-ish to 1891….
7.a He even denied claiming to be Esa (as) in 1884 in his Braheen. He was very deceptive. He knew that if he denounced Esa (as) ascending, he would also have to denounce Idris (as) and the Mir’aj.
From Zahid Aziz:
I hope readers can see Farhan’s tactics continuing. Any objection or question raised to his assertions is evaded by “I don’t know”, “we don’t know”. His “plan” was to use the discussion of this issue as a cover for abusing Hazrat Mirza sahib. Having got the venom off his chest, I hope he is feeling better.
He clearly stated that the Holy Prophet was raised physically and bodily during the Mi`raj to the heavens where he saw Jesus who had been already physically raised to the heavens. If both of them were there because of being raised bodily, then so were the other prophets seen there, Abraham, Moses etc,. and therefore their bodies are not in their graves on earth.
He stated clearly that the Holy Prophet did not have a physical raf`a after his death. The only conclusion is that the body of the Holy Prophet lies buried in his grave in Madina while all these other prophets are in the heavens in their earthly bodies.
The conclusions of his own beliefs is what he is avoiding answering.
From Zahid Aziz:
Rizwan Jamil, I refer to an article “The Place of Isra’iliyyat in Tafsir” by Shaykh Ahmad Shakir at this link.
The article has been translated at that link and the translator has also made his own comments.
As you can see, the author gives several examples from the commentary of Ibn Kathir to show that Ibn Kathir himself states that many of the reports in his commentary, even those from people such as Mujahid and Ibn Abbas, are unsubstantiated Israelite stories. For example, Ibn Kathir writes:
“There are many narrations that have been reported from the Salaf concerning this, and the majority of them are from the Isra’iliyyat which are reported so that they may be examined, and Allah knows best what is the true condition of many of them…. and the Qur’an suffices us from the reports of the preceding (nations)… ”
Another example given is that Ibn Kathir mentions a long report from Ibn Abbas and calls it “rejected” and “strange” and says: “What is most likely concerning the likes of these reports is that they are taken from the People of the Book,…”
Another example from Ibn Kathir:
“There are narrations concerning the story of Harut and Marut from a group of the tabi’in, such as Mujahid, as-Suddi, al-Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, Abu al-‘Aliyah, az-Zuhri, ar-Rabi’ ibn Anas, Muqatil ibn Hayyan, and others, and many of the scholars of tafsir, from the early ones and the later ones, mentioned these stories. In their details, they are dependent upon the reports of the Children of Isra’il,…”
Another example:
“there is nothing marfu’ [i.e. traceable to the Holy Prophet] concerning any of its contents except a little bit, and it is as if ibn Abbas took it from that which has been permitted to narrate of Isra’iliyyat,…”
The translator of the article by Ahmad Shakir writes in footnote [3]:
“Likewise the mere fact that he mentioned these narrations in his Tafsir does not mean that he relied on them as the explanation of the meanings of the Qur’an, just as he did not intend that weak hadiths be relied on as the explanation of its meanings, yet he chose to quote all hadiths relevant to every topic that came up, irrespective of their level of authenticity.”
Read also the comment by the translator down below in the blog discussion on that page:
“…I think that what many of the scholars of recent generations have done of exchewing Isra’iliyyat from their works, particularly their works of Tafsir, and advising against reading them and mentioning them is praiseworthy and has had considerable benefit. This is because there is no doubt that as generations have passed, people have become far too lax with the Isra’iliyyat.
However, nonetheless, I feel it is incorrect to censure the Imams of the past who mention Isra’iliyyat in their works, particularly in the area of Tafsir. These would include Companions, Tabi’in, authors of great Tafsirs like Imam ibn Jarir at-Tabari, al-Baghawi, ibn Kathir, and others. … What may be suitable for one audience may not be suitable for another audience.”
The meaning of his last remark (as is clear from footnote [10]) is that this tafsir is suitable for discening, learned scholars, and not for the ordinary reader who will become “confused” and be “misled”.
This comment really sums up our own position, along with the statement in the first quote above from Ibn Kathir: “and the Qur’an suffices us from the reports of the preceding (nations)”.
And that position is that we reject these reports when they are in conflict with the Quran, even though the reports may have originated from Companions or the Tabieen. Why such reports might originate from them is explained in the article.
I think this answers the basic questions asked of us by Rizwan Jamil, as to how the wrong belief about Jesus’ bodily descent arose, and why we reject it despite the existence of reports from Companions or the Tabieen.
From ikram:
Mr. Farhan states – 4.a. You on the other hand..you quote the Bible heavily in your jesus in India thoery…which nowadays you are beginning to move away from.
What Farhan might not know is that it is the Quran which places Jesus (PBUH) outside Middle East and by modern research in Kashmir:
Naturally, the refuge and exile happens at the time when the physical survival of a Prophet and his mission is at risk. In case of Jesus such a tipping point came when he was put on cross and survived. Thereafter, it was natural for him to seek refuge for himself and his family, which is no different than that of Prophet Muhammad. In context of Prophets, there is no point of being given a refuge when there is no threat to one’s life before prophethood because there is no Message yet nor its corresponding opposition.
Last time I checked, Middle East is devoid of lofty ground having meadows and springs.
The facts that logically precede the above verse surround the issue of crucifixion, which are as follows:
There is a fine point in 4:159 i.e. none of the People of the Book but will believe in this before his death which clearly points to death of Jesus at a later stage after his crucifixion attempt in his new abode referred to in 23:50. Such a death in Kashmir does not conflict with 56:60. We have ordained death among you [–mankind, Adam onwards] and We are not to be overcome,
If Jesus was lifted bodily to “heavens” then logically he never got a chance to seek refuge referred to in 23:50 …We gave them [–Jesus, Mary and possibly his followers] refuge on a lofty ground having meadows and springs. Bodily ascension of Jesus makes 23:50 an irrelevant statement, which by definition cannot happen in Quran, unless Farhan can make the statement that 23:50 is about a physical heaven, but out of this world.
Besides, there should be no hesitancy in quoting other scriptures for historical connection when they enhance Quranic message, because if nothing else, it only proves that prophets and Islam came to every nation, though not in its original form now. For example, one of the Hindu site mentions Prophet Muhammad:
If any one is interested in such a statement as above paragraph, they can read a unique and mammoth scholarly work by Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi – “Muhammad in World Scriptures”. [link]
The current Jesus issue draws attention to natural progression of any myth in history. Nobody knows where any myth arises, but with time the myth of Zeus and Venus only got fanciful because more and more details are filled in by the religious scholars and priests when questions arise from a skeptical audience. No wonder, a lie begets more lies. Quran foresaw it all when it states:
Say, `O People of the Scripture! do not exaggerate in (the matter of) your religion falsely and unjustly, nor follow the fancies of a people who had gone astray before (you) and had led many astray, and (now again) who have strayed away from the right path (5:77).[Nooruddin]
[non-italicized text in square bracket above is not part of original quoted sources]
Unless noted otherwise, all verses above are from Translation and Commentary of Holy Quran – by, Muhammad Ali, ed. Zahid Aziz.
From Rizwan Jamil:
Dear Zahid!
In my previous comment, I already left the part of my argument relating to tafsir of Ibn Kathir by writing:
“but I agree that as he does not mention the isnad, his mentioned reports may not be relied upon so conveniently…”
And in that comment, besides replying to your points, I totally emphasized on my actual argument mentioned under heading “MY POINT”… In that, I proved that Imam Malik (taba-tabaee) narrates a hadith in his Muwatta showing the return of Jesus at the time of coming of Dajjal… This means that the alleged transition in idea from Jesus’s death to his ascension should have occurred before the time of Imam Malik… But that time is the time of Tabaeen and Sahaba!… So how could have that transition in idea occurred in the time of Tabaeen and Sahaba who themselves allegedly believed in Jesus’s death?…
Moreover, even if it is argued that hadith of Malik’s Muwatta does not point towards the return of Jesus in the time of coming of Dajjal, it is agreed by all of us that Sihah Sitta mentions Jesus’s descent/return with all its minutest of details… and this is before 300 AH… it includes the time of the greatest fuqaha, mujtahideen and muhaditheen of Islam… so why is any discussion in this transition in idea absent from their writings?…
These were the questions with which this thread was started… and they still remain unanswered… please answer them without getting into unnecessary details…
Thank You!
From Yahya:
A similar question to that originally posed by Rizwan Jalil was asked at the understanding Islam website.
http://www.understanding-islam.com/q-and-a/islamic-beliefs/did-knowledge-of-jesus-pbuh-death-disappear-in-such-a-short-time-span-6418
In the response to the query Mr. moiz Amjad has quoted from ibn hajr’s commentary on Bukhari to show that during the times of ibn hajr there were differences among the Muslims with respect to the death of Jesus (pbuh).
From Farhan:
@ Zahid
I have read your response..my answers are as such:
1. You are making a mockery of Islam by insinuating that every single person that Muhammad (saw) saw was physically Raffa. Very childish. Again…Allah isn’t bound by any rules of science. In the Quran it is written many times over that Allah can do as he wishes.
1.a. Mirza Sahib found the gray areas of Islam and began challenging people for debate on topics that never really had clear arguments to begin with. He was a semi-lawyer…he understood the concept of making an argument. He made some arguments…then claimed himself to be Esa (as). A very sad story of deceit.
2. Obviously, you agreed with your co-religionists inasmuch as Islam was primitive and full of contradictions. With this in mind…your are a solid Ahmadi, the only alternative is Atheism.
2.a. As Muslims…we are unsure of the circumstances of the return of Esa (as) and the appearance of the Mahdi and Dajjal. However, based on the charachter and writings of Mirza sahib…we are sure that he is NOT our savior or hero or leader. For God’s sake he couldnt even free us from British occupation.
From Farhan:
@ Ikram
1. You people have been totally redefining Islamic verses since 1891, then 1914. This is nothing new…the verse you quoted in the above…99% of Muslims always understood to be dated at the birth of Esa (as). Not after his alleged crucifixtion. I am sure you know that.
2. This is a free country, you are welcome to hold whatever beliefs you deem fit. However, you are calling 1000+ years of Islamic research and development as a sham.
@ Zahid
3. The return of Esa (as) is different than the reports as discussed by Shakir and Ibn Kathir. The return of Esa (as) bin Maryam is established by over 10+ mutawatir hadith that are traced to Muhammad (saw). This isnt a whim.
4. Ahmadis dont realize that their particular belief system is inflammatory inasmuch as it calls Islam primitive and stupid.
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan, you are proving true to the form that I suggested in my last e-mail. Certainly your belief is primitive and stupid that when Jesus comes he will force people all over the world to accept Islam, “without any alternative” (I am quoting this from the commenrary of Al-Hilali and Muhsin Khan). That is why we have given up your interpretations and adopted the Quran as our standard, and accepted Hadith in conformity with the Quran.
From Zahid Aziz:
Rizwan Jamil, you write:
“This means that the alleged transition in idea from Jesus’s death to his ascension should have occurred before the time of Imam Malik…”
Where do you get “ascension” from in this hadith? It doesn’t mention ascension. We accept this particular report, but it is a dream (beginning “While sleeping near the Ka’ba last night, …”) and it is known from the Quran and Bukhari that what is seen in a dream represents something else symbolically.
For example, the Holy Prophet said: “And I saw cows (being slaughtered) there, … those cows proved to symbolize the believers (who were killed) on the Day (of the battle) of Uhud” (Bukhari, Book of Dreams).
We apply the principles of the Quran and Hadith to understand this hadith about Jesus and Dajjal (where Dajjal being called “Masih” is also significant).
The reports mentioning “ascension” in Ibn Kathir contradict each other, and are also in conflict with the Quran. We reject those.
You write: “it is agreed by all of us that Sihah Sitta mentions Jesus’s descent/return with all its minutest of details…”
But I mentioned previously that the Sahaba were sure that a certain youth in Madina was Dajjal, and the Holy Prophet himself considered it a possibility. Yet that youth did not fulfil the signs of Dajjal. So they didn’t take the “minute details” literally, because they knew that it was a prophecy and prophecies are usually not fulfilled literally.
I don’t think any hadith in the reliable collections mentions the ascension of Jesus. They mention his “nuzul”, and “nuzul” is used in the Quran for Allah bringing about things in the world without meaning any physical descent from above.
So our answer to your question is that the early great men, such as Bukhari, did not accept the coming of Jesus literally (they don’t mention his ascension anyway), but they accepted the prophecy and realised that its actual manner of fulfilment was unknown to them.
This is why, as I stated previously, Bukhari included hadith reports which prove the death of Jesus, because he wanted to show that we need to reconcile the fact of the death of Jesus with the prophecy of his coming.
I mentioned from Bukhari the hadith number 656 (Muhsin Khan edition) where the Holy Prophet said that he would say the same as Jesus did in 5:117. You responded that the expression with the word tawaffa, when used by Jesus, means “when You took me”, and when used by the Holy Prophet about himself it means “when You caused me to die”. But whichever meaning of tawaffa you take about Jesus, this verse by itself proves that Jesus cannot return. Jesus replies to Allah, on the Day of Judgment, that he was only responsible for what he taught his followers while he was with them in this world, but after his “tawaffa” it was only Allah Who was the watcher over them, and not Jesus. Jesus could not possibly give this reply if after his tawaffa he: (1) returned back to this world, (2) saw Christians on the wrong path, (3) called them to accept the oneness of God, and (4) made them actually become Muslims. But (1) to (4) is what is supposed to happen. If (1) to (4) happened, his reply would have been: O Allah, after my tawaffa You were the watcher over them, until I returned and then rescued them from the wrong beliefs that You (O Allah) are complaining about.
Now that is proved by the verse 5:117 on its own. The hadith in Bukhari, saying that the Holy Prophet would give the same reply, is only added and extra proof. And as I showed in a later, brief comment, at another place (Kitab al-Tafsir) Bukhari has repeated this hadith and there quoted in a chapter heading the statement of Ibn Abbas that tawaffa means maut. So this is further, extra and added proof.
I believe I have answered your questions. And the number of Muslim scholars and commentators of the Quran who accept the death of Jesus from the Quran is growing.
I comment briefly now on an earlier response which I didn’t do before to save time.
I asked, How will Jesus learn what Islam is? You replied: “Jesus will not have to be a scholar of Islam” because the Mahdi will be the leader. But surely Jesus will need to know how to recite Sura Fatiha and scores of other things necessary for an ordinary Muslim!
So you see, the implications of the return of Jesus are absolutely ridiculous, in fact disasterous, all round.
From ikram:
My apologies to Rizwan for digression from his original question and the main purpose of this thread. But, the posts from Farhan need a brief discussion.
Farhan states – 1. You people have been totally redefining Islamic verses since 1891, then 1914. This is nothing new…the verse you quoted in the above…99% of Muslims always understood to be dated at the birth of Esa (as). Not after his alleged crucifixtion. I am sure you know that.
What surprises me is that he is willing to believe in an unseen heaven and will even accept it with different laws of physics, but is unable to find a corresponding place on this very earth that he lives in where there is a lofty ground having meadows and springs (23:50). Even if we take Farhan’s argument that verse 23:50 is about place of birth of Jesus, then the burden is on him or his scholars to locate that place, which definitely is not in Middle East. Followers of Bible spend life times to find Noah’s ark, but we Muslims have not been able to find a patch of land which is a lofty ground having meadows and springs. Still, if we re-read the verse 23:50. And We made the son of Mary and his mother a sign, and We gave them refuge on a lofty ground having meadows and springs it becomes utterly clear that it talks of Jesus first, then Mary thus meaning ‘both’ were given refuge and no where can we deduce that first a ‘single’ person, pregnant Mary was given refuge and then came the delivery of Jesus. In plain language ‘both’ went to the refuge.
Farhan states – 2. This is a free country, you are welcome to hold whatever beliefs you deem fit. However, you are calling 1000+ years of Islamic research and development as a sham.
The above approach makes Islam a fossilized religion. Why is it unnerving to Farhan to find possibility of Jesus being buried in Kashmir, just because his grave is not mentioned in Quran despite his death being told? He has to ask this question to himself that in the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) no body knew the full implications of body of Pharaoh, which only came to light recently:
If the body of Pharaoh can be discovered, so could be the grave of Jesus. Both discoveries supplement Quran and remove any objections that might arise otherwise against it.
Farhan states – 3. The return of Esa (as) is different than the reports as discussed by Shakir and Ibn Kathir. The return of Esa (as) bin Maryam is established by over 10+ mutawatir hadith that are traced to Muhammad (saw). This isnt a whim.
Fundamental rule is that prophecies cannot be read in plain language alone, but interpreted in full light of context, metaphor and prevailing linguistic constructs. And when the prophecy is fulfilled then it obeys the natural laws e.g. the prophecy of Pharaoh above.
If return of Esa (PBUH) and Mahdi as generally understood by people like Farhan is taken as the truth then it negates the fundamental principles of Islam and Quran. Firstly, the finality of Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH) is negated. Secondly, their duo will abrogate Quran because they will ignore the basic premise of freedom to adopt a faith:
Thirdly, out of anxiety or anger or both, the duo will kill the disbelievers, which is exactly opposite of what Quran states:
Farhan states – 4. Ahmadis dont realize that their particular belief system is inflammatory inasmuch as it calls Islam primitive and stupid.
This forum is by Lahori Ahmadi’s who believe Quran to be the most modern book ever written/revealed and will remain so till eternity. Please exclude Rabwah/Qadiani Ahmadi’s from you thoughts.
I believed that myths to be more ‘inflammatory’ than the truth of Quran. But seems that I am mistaken in in my assumption. Rather, in certain segments of Islam discussing Quran is ‘inflammatory’ rather than ‘healing’:
[All verses above are from Translation and Commentary of Holy Quran – by, Muhammad Ali, ed. Zahid Aziz.]
From ikram:
Continuing with further evidence from Quran about death of Jesus
For some odd reason, generally the discussions around Jesus mention him talking when in cradle and that’s where they end. Some argue it as metaphorical of Jesus being wise from very early age others take it as a miracle, but we will not dwell on it because we are discussing death not birth of Jesus.
Now, we know by general history that Jesus faced attempted crucifixion quite early in his prophethood as he only had converted a handful of followers yet. The consensus of his age is about 33 years when he was put on the cross. By any standards he was 33 years young, not old. If he was bodily lifted up and left the earth then he never spoke to people when of old age. This will be one more instance where we will make portion of 3:46 irrelevant, which is not possible for Quran. After attempted crucifixion, obviously he along with mother found refuge in Kashmir indicated in the following verse:
By secondary sources of Hadith, we know that he died at age of 120 which is definitely an old age and the words of Quran come out true.
Now if we take myth of Jesus being lifted up (where?) and he is still alive, then his age is at least 2045 (33 + 2012) years. That too contradicts Quran, because if nothing else, Jesus is apparently living forever or he is not a mortal i.e. a human:
As to why Jesus died of an old age, the next verse tells it all:
If bodily ascension of Jesus is so important then it is no more than a myth which is obvious from the following verse:
Of note is that in above verse, interpreting His presence in physical terms will be damning of the very limitless attribute of God Himself who is not physical and not limited by space, dimension or location. Naturally Jesus is exalted in moral and spiritual sense despite facing the extreme ridicule of his time.
Now all of us have to decide for ourselves as to which belief is kufr, if at all, Jesus physically lifted or his spiritually rising?
[non-italicized text in square bracket above is not part of original quoted sources]
All verses above are from Translation and Commentary of Holy Quran – by, Muhammad Ali, ed. Zahid Aziz.
From Zahid Aziz:
Instead of believing in the personal return of Jesus and expecting him to make Islam triumphant, I would far prefer Rizwan Jamil and Farhan to undertake, within their limitations, the task which they are expecting Jesus to be doing, which is principally to convince his followers of the oneness of God and of the truth of the Holy Prophet Muhammad. Rizwan and Farhan would then be sharers in the fulfilment of the prophecy of the appearance of the Messiah.
Rizwan and Farhan are already ummatis of the Holy Prophet; neither of them has to become an ummati as Jesus would have to become. Also, Jesus was a messenger to the Israelites according to both the Quran and the Gospels, but Rizwan and Farhan are already charged by the Holy Prophet Muhammad to take his message to all humanity. The door is open to them to fulfil the prophecy themselves.
From Farhan:
Mr. Aziz
1. I told you before…all you are doing is making a mockery of Islam. All Mirza sahib did was point out a glaring inconsistency in Islam..there are many others by the way.
1.a. Imam Zamaskhari explained this before in his writings, Im sure you have read that. Imam Maliki offered his opinion on it as well…he said that maybe…when Esa (as) returns he wont be a prophet.
2. You need to focus on proving that Mirza sahib was even an honest man, forget about Messiah-ship. Forget about mujadid-ship. I doubt that he was even an honest man.
3. Prophecies are unknown. Muslims have no idea how things will play out when Esa (as) returns, when the Imam Mahdi is also there. We do know that Mirza sahib failed to help the Muslims in India.
4. The Muslims in India are still a bit lost. Mirza sahib preached Hindu-Muslim unity in his final book, however, Ahmadis were readily supporting the 2-state theory and unwilling to live with Hindus. This is not love…this was hate. The Indian economy was thus dealt a huge blow that it has yet to overcome.
In the end…Lahoris have also denied the immaculate conception. Muhammad (saw) offered a mubahila to anyone who wanted to debate that. Those people refused. Mirza sahib used these Mubahilas almost every day of his life when he was engulfed in rage. We all know how a gentlemens debate (athim) turned into a death threat. This is your founder. This is your leader.
From Farhan:
@ Ikram
1. All you need to say is this: I dont care what the scholars of the golden era of Islam have written. My Islam is per the science of the 20th century.
2. Jesus is dead, Jesus us dead, and he had a biological father, even though his name was Esa (as) bin Maryam. Which is unique and singular in the history of the world.
From Zahid Aziz:
Dear Farhan, you are proving true to form. Your aim is merely to hurl abuse, and if it helps your mental condition I will let you spout out your venom. However, while doing that you are making mistakes as follows.
” Muslims have no idea how things will play out when Esa (as) returns,”.
Then why does Rizwan say:
“it is agreed by all of us that Sihah Sitta mentions Jesus’s descent/return with all its minutest of details”.
Look at Maudoodi’s tafsir that Rizwan has referred us to. At the end of chapter 33, he gives a detailed account of where Jesus will descend, what he will do, etc.
Maudoodi even writes: “Anyone who looks at the conditions of the Middle East in the light of the prophecies of the Holy Prophet will immediately realise that the stage is completely set for the appearance of that Dajjal Akbar about whom the Holy Prophet gave the news…”
Maudoodi even knows that the “stage is completely set”!
Then you write: “Mirza sahib preached Hindu-Muslim unity in his final book, however, Ahmadis were readily supporting the 2-state theory and unwilling to live with Hindus.”
What do you think of the other Muslims who supported the creation of Pakistan? What does Rizwan Jamil (from Pakistan) think of the 2-state theory? What do the anti-Ahmadiyya Ulama of Pakistan think of the 2-state theory? They will declare you an Indian agent and kafir for opposing the 2-state theory!
It should be widely published in Pakistan and among Pakistanis in other countries that the anti-Ahmadiyya groups condemn Ahmadis for supporting the creation of Pakistan. Therefore the anti-Ahmadiyya groups are enemies of Pakistan!
You write: “Lahoris have also denied the immaculate conception. Muhammad (saw) offered a mubahila to anyone who wanted to debate that.”
Please clarify. Do you mean that the Holy Prophet Muhammad offered a mubahila specifically on the question of the immaculate conception to those who believed that Jesus had a father?
From Rashid:
I am trying to find Rizwan and Farhan in crowd waiting for Jesus physical return in following photos:
In Pictures: Brazil’s million Christian march
Masses of evangelical devotees take part in the annual “March for Jesus” event in Sao Paulo.
Last Modified: 16 Jul 2012 12:25
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/2012/07/201271593725895542.html
From ikram:
Farhan states – 1. All you need to say is this: I dont care what the scholars of the golden era of Islam have written. My Islam is per the science of the 20th century.
It would be arrogant for anyone not to care about scholarship in any viable field of knowledge. But who determines the quality of that scholarship in present or the past? That determination is on us individually. Even, companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) used to clarify his statements from him as to whether what he is saying to them was from God or his personal opinion. Many a times, prophet let opinion of his companions override his opinion e.g. location of camp in Badr, digging of trench in Medina, cross pollination of date trees in Medina etc. If the sunnat of the greatest man in history is to let the best idea win, then why should we not develop our own opinions that comes to us by Prophet’s personal example. Who stops that or takes that right from us, especially when one’s opinion is based upon direct words of Allah, i.e. Quran?
Farhan needs to define what that “Golden era of Islam” was. I have no disagreement with him if he limits the golden era to the time of Prophet and Khulufa-e-Rashideen. Thereafter, we see one king after another; one sect emerging after another despite of, rather factually due to presence of Farhan’s scholars among their midst; Muslims killing Muslims etc. But the Muslim thought continued to give the impetus to sciences, mathematics, arts etc. till the time that Islam bred the minds similar to Farhan, who will not question what ever came their way as long it was from the “Ustad” or teacher or a ‘scholar’. The knowledge base of Islam soon turned into a bouncing ball, with each subsequent bounce of next generation it went lower and lower. Field of chemistry that was earlier feather in cap of the universities of Muslim world, decayed instead into making gold out of cow dung. Same happened with other sciences.
Farhan is ignorant of the fact that there is a fundamental difference between science and technology. He got them both mixed up in his argument. For example, Gravity was only discovered by science, not made by science, but was made by Allah. The spinoff from science is technology that utilizes the scientific laws of Allah. That’s when human hands come in. Farhan cannot call himself a scientist if he can type on a keyboard and dial a mobile phone. He is only a user of technology. Now it depends upon us humans as to how we use technology. For example, banking technology can be used by a hard honest worker to feed his family, whereas the same bank is used to siphon off corrupt money by politicians and heads of states of Muslim countries. Simply put, God made scientific laws and man created technology.
Long story short, it is the technology which is corrupting, not science. Yes, my Islam believes in science and its laws that were made by Allah Himself in the same manner that He made ‘Adam’ and the moral and spiritual laws for Adam. Yes, my Islam will grow with science from 21st into 22nd century and so on till the Final Day:
Irony is that minds like Farhan have turned the grand Quran into a mere grand piano of soulless homilies, which is factually insult of Quran and by implication of God Himself.
As discussed before, one of Allah’s laws is that of biology, where 21:35. Every soul must taste of death including Jesus nearly two thousand years ago.
Farhan, myself and all Muslims must pay attention to the following verses in light of when we reject Allah’s created scientific and moral laws, that collectively are “The Truth” aka “Islam”:
Farhan states – 2. Jesus is dead, Jesus us dead, and he had a biological father, even though his name was Esa (as) bin Maryam. Which is unique and singular in the history of the world.
While trying to mock, essentially Farhan is telling us that Jesus is alive in heavens, and he was born without a father. All Farhan has to do is to walk into nearest church and he might be surprised to find his coreligionists chanting the same belief that Quran fundamentally refutes. Earlier in this thread he was admonishing us that we should not look for historical links in Bible, but he himself actually believes in the main facet of the Bible i.e. fatherless birth and lasting physical life of Jesus. Welcome to Christianity. Isn’t he self-contradicting?
It might be surprising for Farhan to find name of a mother associated with her son, but for Prophet Muhammad it was a non-issue. One of his wife’s title was Umm-e-Habbiba by which she was known and addressed in the time of Prophet and Islamic history calls her by the same, not by Ramla, her original name. Prophet never changed her being addressed as mother of Habbiba. To correct Farhan, it is not Esa-bin-Maryam. It is ibn-e-Maryam. His mother was more prominent for her piety, for her formal education in a convent, for being niece of a prophet – Zachariah, and being cousin of another prophet – Yahya (John the Baptist). Jesus’s father was a non-entity and an ordinary carpenter. No wonder, Jesus is recognized by his mother’s name.
I will leave Farahan with a parting verse:
From Rizwan Jamil:
Dear Zahid!
I will reply in a couple of days inshaAllah due to being busy.
Thanks.
From Zahid Aziz:
Due to the forthcoming start of the month of Ramadan, I will be involved in some other tasks, and may not be able to give detailed responses to comments.
From Zahid Aziz:
In his book Finality of Prophethood (available at this anti-Ahmadiyya website) Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maudoodi writes:
“Yet another point which is made equally clear by the traditions is that Christ son of Mary will not descend in the capacity of a newly appointed Apostle of God. He will not receive any Divine revelations.”
(See under “Verdict of these traditions”; bolding here is mine).
A little above this, under “Traditions relating to the descent of Christ, Son of Mary”, Maudoodi quotes from a hadith as follows:
“Meantime when Dajjal will be engaged in perpetrating such deeds, God shall send Christ, son of Mary. Christ (PBUH) will descend near the white tower in the eastern quarter of Damascus… Later the son of Mary will pursue Dajjal and will overtake him at the gate of Lydda and put him to death.”
If we read this hadith as in Sahih Muslim (Book 41, Number 7015 in the A.H. Siddiqui translation widely available online), we find that continuing from the point where Maudoodi finishes quoting it above, the hadith says:
“Then a people whom Allah had protected would come to Jesus, son of Mary, and he would wipe their faces and would inform them of their ranks in Paradise and it would be under such conditions that Allah would reveal to Jesus these words: I have brought forth from amongst My servants such people against whom none would be able to fight; you take these people safely to Tur,” (bolding is mine).
So Maudoodi is contradicting the very hadith he himself is quoting.
Moreover, if you read this entire hadith in Arabic or Urdu translations you find that while mentionong the activities of Jesus after his supposed return, he is referred to by the title “nabi of Allah” four times. (The English translation does not reflect this.) If this hadith is taken at face value, it shows Jesus to be a prophet after his return.
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan, your tactics of posting further allegations won’t work. You first have to answer the three questions I have asked you about your beliefs, but which you are avoiding.
1. Mi`raj: I said that the only conclusion of your beliefs is that the body of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) lies buried in his grave in Madina while all the other prophets seen during the Mi`raj (Abraham, Moses, Jesus) are in the heavens in their earthly bodies, and their graves are empty.
See my comment http://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress/2012/07/06/death-of-jesus/#comment-7544
No answer from Farhan!
2. Farhan repeatedly claims: “As Muslims…we are unsure of the circumstances of the return of Esa (as) and the appearance of the Mahdi and Dajjal.”
So I asked: Why does Rizwan say that the “Sihah Sitta mentions Jesus’s descent/return with all its minutest of details”? And Maudoodi gives a detailed account of where Jesus will descend, what he will do, and even that the conditions for his coming have arisen, etc.
See my comment: http://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress/2012/07/06/death-of-jesus/#comment-7561
No answer from Farhan, despite his anti-Ahmadiyya fellows giving details of the return of Jesus.
3. Farhan had alleged: ” Ahmadis were readily supporting the 2-state theory and unwilling to live with Hindus. This is not love…this was hate.”
I asked: “What do you think of the other Muslims who supported the creation of Pakistan?” What about their leaders?
And is Farhan prepared to make the same allegation against the present-day anti-Ahmadiyya groups in Pakistan who claim to have supported the creation of Pakistan as an Islamic state?
See my comment: http://ahmadiyya.org/WordPress/2012/07/06/death-of-jesus/#comment-7561
Until Farhan answers these three questions, I will not be publishing any further allegations by him.
From Farhan:
Answers for Mr. Aziz
1. I dont really even understand this question. It seems like you are inferring that Muhammad (saw) should not have been able to see Esa (as) in heaven when he went on his Miraj. Please correct me if I am wrong. I have never avoided answering anything. That is a false accusation. Please take it back. You dont know me well enough to make this assumption.
You write:
“I said that the only conclusion of your beliefs is that the body of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) lies buried in his grave in Madina…”
2. Yes. Muhammad’s (body is still in his grave at Madina. I agree.
Then you write:
“While all the other prophets seen during the Mi`raj (Abraham, Moses, Jesus) are in the heavens in their earthly bodies, and their graves are empty.”
3. I never said anything about earthly bodies. I did say that we have no idea what state they are in. This is a matter of the unseen. It is not proper to form definitive conclusions about this realm of data. However, the mufassirs and shaikh’s have given their opinions on these matters. I am not a shaikh, neither are you. Before we critisize any hadith..we must pray for all of the transmittors….
4. Then you ask:
“Why does Rizwan say that the “Sihah Sitta mentions Jesus’s descent/return with all its minutest of details”? And Maudoodi gives a detailed account of where Jesus will descend, what he will do, and even that the conditions for his coming have arisen, etc.”
–Like I said before…Muslims have given their opinions on these topics for 1400 years…and they will continue to do so. Rizwan is referring to scholars who knew Arabic in and out as well as Islam. Their opinions must be listened to. For example, we know that Mahdi and Messiah (as) are 2 seperate people.
—My answer SPECIFICALLY to Ahmadis and their trend of polemics is “we dont know”. This way…the burden is on you to prove that Mirza sahib is even a truthful person..forget about inspired. We have instances wherein this person chased a married woman…Before we even get into the polemics we need to analyze his behavorial pattern.
5. Then you ask : “What do you think of the other Muslims who supported the creation of Pakistan?” What about their leaders?”
—This question is again inconsequential. They are free to have their opinions. However, Mirza sahib wrote a book wherein he discussed Loving HIndus…it doesnt seem like any Ahmadis paid any heed to the advice therein.
I hope I answered everything…if not…counter..then, I will answer again.
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan says:
“I have never avoided answering anything. That is a false accusation. Please take it back. You dont know me well enough to make this assumption.”
I think you have lost your sense and reason. I am saying that in this discussion, which we can all read, you are avoiding answering my questions.
You yourself admit that you are avoiding answering questions when you say:
“—My answer SPECIFICALLY to Ahmadis and their trend of polemics is “we dont know”. This way…the burden is on you …”
So you avoid answering any questions about your beliefs by saying “we don’t know”, so that the burden of answering is always placed on us!
“I never said anything about earthly bodies.”
— Yes you did. You said Jesus is in heaven with his earthly body, and that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) rose up in his earthly body during Mi`raj and returned back bodily. So all the other prophets seen in the Mi`raj are also obviously there bodily! And the Holy Prophet is the only one of them who is not there now because his body lies buried on earth.
“Muslims have given their opinions on these topics for 1400 years …”
— So, I asked, why are you saying “As Muslims…we are unsure of the circumstances of the return of Esa (as)”?
Maudoodi seems very sure, as I showed from the link to his book. In that book Maudoodi writes that Jesus will pursue Dajjal and:
“A great slaughter of the Jews will ensue and every one of them will be annihilated. The nation of Jews will be exterminated.”
Is this your belief about what Jesus will do on his return?
Regarding the “2-state” theory allegation, you are now changing what you said. Now you claim that you only pointed out that Ahmadis by supporting the 2-state theory went against Mirza sahib. But you had attacked the 2-state theory itself. You said: “The Indian economy was thus dealt a huge blow that it has yet to overcome”. Partition was brought about by an enormous number of other Muslims, so blame them and their leaders.
Your whole tactic is to change the subject from the death of Jesus (a subject I didn’t start but Rizwan did) by bringing in allegations against Hazrat Mirza sahib. When you say “We have instances wherein this person chased a married woman”, you should think about the shamelessness of your own Ulama who have incorporated a story about the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) wanting to marry the wife of a Muslim, and then Allah marrying her to the Holy Prophet and she joining his household without even the need for a nikah. And the book by a Muslim in English which repeated this story is regarded as the most authentic biography of the Holy Prophet, so much so that the government of Pakistan gave it the first prize in a “seerat” competition and presented the author with a reward of about 3000 dollars! You are not even concerned that you are handing the opponents of Islam a tool with which to attack the Holy Prophet. So the behaviour you are objecting to is regarded by your own Ulama as acceptable, praiseworthy behaviour by a man sent from God!
From Farhan:
My dear Aziz sahib
You are taking my writings so far out of context…this is amazing. You know what I mean..however, you are carefully side-stepping and creating a smoke screen.
1. Ahmadis have been drawing Muslims into a futile debate on the death of Esa (as) and thus creating a smoke screen. The real issue here is the life of Mirza sahib, not the death of anyone.
1.a. The death of Esa (as) or the lack thereof has been discussed by the scholars of the past. However, none of them claimed to be Esa (as). There were always beliefs swirling that Esa (as) may died before his exodus. However, all of those people believed in the physical return of Esa (as).
1.b. Debating this topic is useless. Ahmadis need to prove that Mirza sahib was an honest person. Ahmadis are simply setting a trap….then they argue for hours and hours.
2. I believe that Esa (as) physically ascended to heaven, i also believe that Idris (as) did the same. I also believe that Muhammad (saw) did the same.
2.a. And…its not just me…billions of Muslims agree with me.
2.b. You are asking…how is it possible that Esa (as) was seen there amongst dead people? Again, this question is itself a trap. The truth is that we dont know. The scholars of the past didnt differ over this situation.
2.c. I offered an explanation…I said that maybe outside of space/time the laws of pyhsics are differnt…maybe we cant comprehend them.
2.d. It was been 100+ years…Muslims havent fell for this conversation….it hasnt worked…this argument is thus faulty.
3. Maudoodi offered his opinion…what about the christian version…what about the Judaic version of the return of Elijah (as)??? This is all conjecture….first…you need to prove that Mirza sahib was an honest man…
4. Did I attack the 2-state theory..maybe…the overall point was that Ahmadis should have supported it..hadnt they read “Message of Peace”??? Obviously they hadnt…
Farhan
From Zahid Aziz:
Due to Ramadan and activities in relation to it, it may be a day or so before I can respond to this comment from Farhan.
Meanwhile, readers may care to look at the Daily Quran Studies that I am compiling and posting.
From Zahid Aziz:
Here is my response to Farhan.
1. Hazrat Mirza sahib has announced very clearly that if it can be proved that Islam teaches that Jesus is alive in heaven and will return, then his claim is wrong. Far from being a “smoke screen” it provides a single point on which to refute his claims.
As to your allegations about his character, I hope you have now read that award-winning, Muslim biography of the Holy Prophet Muhammad that I referred you to, in response to your earlier allegation. The compiler quite shamelessly, but approvingly, relates from earlier sources of Islam that upon visiting a certain married woman at her home, in the absence of her husband, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) realised that she “loved him and that he loved her and that she knew he loved her”. (Astaghfirullah, I seek refuge in Allah from being forced to quote this.)
1.a. I asked earlier, why then are more and more Muslims now coming to believe that Jesus is not alive in heaven and will not return? I referred to the Al-Azhar ruling. I referred to a Saudi newspaper which mentions that there are “a number of scholars, some of them prominent indeed” who believe this, and that it is a justifiable interpretation.
As to the “beliefs swirling” that Jesus died but still he rose again physically and will return, will he then die again a second time after his return? If so, why did Hazrat Abu Bakr say of the Holy Prophet after his death “Allah will not combine two deaths on you”?
1.b. See above.
2. You forgot here that you also believe that the Holy Prophet returned back from heaven quite speedily in one night and never went there again, while many other prophets are there in heaven.
2.a. “Billions of Muslims” don’t know who Idris is or what is stated in the Quran about him. Moreover, many mainstream Quran commentators don’t believe this about Idris. Abdullah Yusuf Ali writes that the raf` of Idris means that he held a high position of piety and truthfulness in the eyes of his people, and not that he didn’t die.
2.b./c. The whole Mi`raj hadith mentions Jesus in the same way and condition as other prophets. The Holy Prophet’s interaction with him was the same as with other prophets. Laws of science don’t come into it, they can’t ever tell us where the spirits of the dead are in the next world. It is the teachings of Islam that we must go by.
2.d. See 1.a above about Muslim scholars who are accepting that Jesus will not return.
3. “Maudoodi offered his opinion”. Maudoodi has followers all over the Muslim world, he founded a political party which seeks power in Pakistan, there are related parties in other Muslim countries. His “opinion” is accepted as fact by a large number of Muslims. Why should I concern myself with Christian or Jewish versions? They don’t affect me or any other Muslim, and I reject and laugh at them.
Not only Maudoodi, but read the well known translation of the Quran by Muhsin Khan and Al-Hilali, officially approved by the Saudi government. It says that when Jesus returns:
— “he will not accept any other religion except Islam” (footnote [1] under 8:39)
— “all mankind will be required to embrace Islam with no other alternative” (footnote [2] B under 8:39)
— Non-Muslims would not be allowed to keep their own religions “but all people will be required to embrace Islam and there will be no other alternative” (footnote [1] b under 3:55)
This is what Muslims are being told to look forward to when Jesus returns.
4. The “Message of Peace” asked Hindus to acknowledge the Holy Prophet as a true prophet and stop abusing him. But they didn’t even stop abusing him. They even had my grandfather arrested in 1923 for writing an article about the Vedas in response to their filthy allegations against Islam.
I think your sentence that due to partition “The Indian economy was thus dealt a huge blow that it has yet to overcome” is meant to enflame Indians against Ahmadis. It somehow slipped through by mistake. To Pakistanis you would say the opposite, that “Ahmadis opposed the creation of Pakistan”. Unfortunately, you slipped up here! You see, you have to say to Christians that Mirza sahib was against them, but you have to say to Muslims that Mirza sahib was on the Christians’ side! This is what is called false, devious propaganda, a technique you are mastering.
From Farhan:
My dear Mr. Aziz
1. You seem to have entangled a bunch of topics in a very lawyer-esque manner. Very good job! Its amazing that you look for inconsistencies in my writings yet you overlook the inconsistencies in basic lahori dogma, i.e. That Mirza sahib claimed prophethood. … [Excised by Admin]
1.a. Mirza sahib knew that this was gray area (the death of Esa (as)]. He fought for land all thru his life. … [Excised by Admin]
1.b. I am not sure what Seerah you are referring to. Please give a name..I may have missed it in the above. Is it Ibn Ishaq/Ibn Hisham or Tabari?? Did they give an award for Kanzul Ummul or Dar-e-Qutni??
1.c. Muslims have argued before that Esa (as) died, they may continue to argue that…however, they arent joining your religion, thats for sure. Again…Esa (as) may be dead…Thats a belief that a Muslim could hold, however, the extension of prophethood is not. And we are sure that your Mahdi/Messiah claimed as such. We do know that he hid his claim to being Esa(as) for 11 years…
1.d. And now you are mixing up a general hadith of Abu Bakr into this scenario..that’s wrong. Esa (as) had many special rules associated with him…the immacualte conception is one. I know you people dont believe that…again…you contradict the writings of your own founder and then explain them away in lawyer-esqe fashion.
2. Yes..I believe that Muhammad (saw) traveled to and from heaven in one night. So do 10000000000’s of other Muslims…the only reason Mirza sahib denied it was because he had to deny that entire concept of physical Raffa and Nuzool as a matter of principle. Do you even know what book he referenced? Wasnt it Ibn Hisham???
2.a. Thousands and thousands of Ahmadis have no idea what ahmadiyyat is, nor have they read about its dogma whatsoever. In fact, 90% of Lahoris have no idea of how Mirza sahib called himself a nabi, I would even include 95% of Qadianis into this.
2.b. Abdullah Yusuf Ali is a new-age commentator…If you want to learn Islam you must read from the earliest sources…and you know that very well. And by the way..Yusuf Ali would not join your religion. I wonder why?
2.c. In terms of the Miraj…at that point in Islamic history..the story of Esa (as) hadnt been explained. It wasnt til Muhammad (saw) was in full power at Medina when the Esa (as) story was explained. Hence…however, or whatever state Esa (as) was in is inconsequential.
3. You are making a mockery of Islam with your style of polemics. In the USA, we dont focus on these scenarios….call it what you want…CAIR or ISNA are not obsessed with the return of Esa (as), nor do they issue fatwas as to what will happen when Esa (as) returns. We have general guidelines…for example, the Mahdi and Esa (as) will be 2 seperate people. Islam will be triumphant. And how did the europeans conquer the americas?? I dont see you critisizing them…what about what teh British did to India?
4. Ahmadis were involved in politics since like forever… [Excised by Admin]
4.a. Personally, I think Mirza sahib was looking out for himself… [Excised by Admin]
I hope I have answered all questions…let me know if I havent.
From Zahid Aziz:
Comment from Farhan has been received. I am delayed in dealing with it due to Ramadan activities.
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan, I have excised from your submission the allegations you are trying to sneak in, in attempting to change the subject.
You have been exposed more and more with each of your own postings as being completely ridiculous, and you don’t even have the sense to realise how absurd you have made yourself look. I wonder how many anti-Ahmadiyya persons, witnessing your discomfiture, would even like to associate their names with your postings!
1. As to inconsistencies, you wrote earlier: ” All Mirza sahib did was point out a glaring inconsistency in Islam..there are many others by the way.” (See link.) Your accusation of inconsistency against us has no value in the eyes of any Muslim because you have accused even Islam of having many inconsistencies, one of them you say is a glaring one!
I am sure on the basis of your statement many Muslims will declare you as kafir (although we won’t if you still recite the kalima).
1.a. You have been tellling us that all or almost all Muslims up to Mirza sahib’s time believed Jesus is alive and will return. So how did the death of Jesus become a “gray area” for him to exploit?
1.b. “Muhammad: His life based on the earliest sources” based on Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Saad, first edition 1983. Notice “earliest sources”. This author, a Muslim, claims to have simply compiled the accounts from the “earliest sources”.
1.c. But you have told us that the Muslims who have believed before that Jesus died also believed in his return. You wrote: ” However, all of those people believed in the physical return of Esa (as).”. But the ones I have quoted don’t believe in his return. Now you claim “Esa (as) may be dead…Thats a belief that a Muslim could hold”. But you have been telling us before that a Muslim has to believe in his return and all Muslim do so.
1.d. It is not a “general hadith”. It is the hadith about what happened after the Holy Prophet died and some Muslims thought that he would return. So now you say that Jesus can die twice, even though Hazrat Abu Bakr said regarding the Holy Prophet that two deaths would not be allowed by Allah!
You say Jesus had “special rules associated with him”, despite being called in the Quran: only like Adam, only a messenger, nothing but a servant, and it being said that if Allah had wished to destroy Jesus, nothing could have stood in Allah’s way!
2. It is clearly written in classical tafsirs of several centuries ago that some Muslims of the Holy Prophet’s time considered the Mi`raj to be spiritual and not physical.
2.a. You have said this in reply to my point that “billions of Muslims” don’t even know who Idris was, let alone believe that he was raised alive to heaven. If Ahmadis, as alleged by you, don’t know what is written in their dogma, then at least it can be found written in the dogma but they don’t know it. But in case of Idris it is not even written. Here is what Maudoodi says about that verse:
“The plain meaning is that God had favored Idris with a high rank, but according to the Israelite traditions, God took up Idris (Enoch) to heavens.”
2.b. Is Maudoodi also a “new-age” commentator?
“Yusuf Ali would not join your religion. I wonder why?”
Because he didn’t regard it as a “religion”. In his preface to his Quran translation he calls Ahmadis “a sect”. Why do Muslims quote non-Muslims (e.g. Bernard Shaw) in favour of Islam? Did they join “your religion”. I wonder why?
You are obviously too infantile to understand that when an outsider agrees with you on some point (when other outsiders don’t) it then becomes a strong evidence in your favour as regards that particular point. If Yusuf Ali had become an Ahmadi, then you would say his view of Idris is completely invalid because he is bound to agree with Ahmadis!
2.c. I see. So the Holy Prophet till the Madina period thought Jesus was dead as he had been shown to him among deceased prophets, but at Madina Allah revealed to him: No, in fact Jesus is alive.
3. “CAIR or ISNA are not obsessed with the return of Esa (as), nor do they issue fatwas as to what will happen when Esa (as) returns.”
CAIR have been promoting Muhammad Asad’s translation of the Quran in the US. So people all over the US are learning that according to the Quran Jesus died and will never return, and the stories of his return believed by Muslims are only myths.
Your mention of CAIR now brings this debate to a conclusion, because the very organisation which you mention as being a recognised Muslim body is widely promoting a translation of the Quran which supports us on the death of Jesus and goes completely against you.
I notice that you have not rejected Maudoodi’s belief that each and every Jew “will be annihilated” and “will be exterminated” (his words) by Jesus when he returns, or the belief in the Saudi promoted Quran translation that “all people will be required to embrace Islam and there will be no other alternative”.
You have clearly accepted these as possibly correct interpretations because you keeping on saying that you don’t know what exactly will happen. You have therefore confirmed that if Jesus actually did these things when he came, then all Muslims (including you if you were present) will be duty-bound to exterminate all Jews and to force every other non-Muslim to accept Islam “with no alternative”.
Thank you. This exchange is now at an end.
From Rashid:
First Test Tube Baby Birthday
Christianity’s beliefs are unscientific and irrational. This is the reason to survive it has to continuously keep changing its doctrine.
34 years ago on July 25th 1978 first test tube baby was born. Catholic Church then condemned. Today it accepts it.
It is a clear proof. If Catholic Church fails to remain consistant in their beliefs, NO support by Muslims such as Farhan and Rizwan can help irrational Christian doctrine ‘Jesus alive physically’ to survive.
Please watch following newsreport at time of test tube baby birth at 2:15
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/25/12931520-happy-birthday-ivf-inconceivable-mom-looks-back-at-first-test-tube-baby?lite
From Zahid Aziz:
There is a section in Tafsir Ibn Kathir where it is discussed whether the Mi`raj was physical or spiritual and it is recorded that some believe it to have been only spiritual, and Hazrat Aishah is mentioned as one of those.
I have placed the relevant text at this link.
Please read the first couple of lines and then the paragraph which I have marked by blue lines in the margin, and also the sentence just before it which I have underlined in blue.
This edition of Tafsir Kabir is online at http://www.qurango.com/tafseer.html and the text above is under “Part 15”, from page 207 to 208.
From Zahid Aziz:
Farhan has submitted a post which ends with the following words:
This is clear proof that Farhan has lost all sense and reason. I have listened to this audio and point to the following statements in it by Hamza Yousaf. I also indicate the time in this clip at which you can hear the particular comment.
0.32: Lahori Ahmadis are not outside Islam. They had “some really solid scholars” of Islam. One of them was Maulana Muhammad Ali.
0.50: His English translation of the Quran is the best in my estimation.
1.40: It is not accurate to say that Ahmadis are kafir.
2.35: In the early period there was some very solid scholarship among Ahmadis.
2.50: Ahmadis did some of the best refutation of Christian attacks on Islam. Maulana Muhammad Ali did some of the best work of defence of Islam for the Muslim community that I have seen.
3.00: A lot of Muslims “borrowed heavily” from Maulana Muhammad Ali’s original work, without attributing it to him, “even though it is very clear where they took it from”.
3.18 to 3.45:
Pickthall’s translation was “highly influenced by Maulana Muhammad Ali’s.” Pickthall then influenced later translators.
Therefore Maulana Muhammad Ali has “definitely made his impact on the English speaking Muslim community whether they realise it or not”.
“I wish the best for him. He seemed like a very devout Muslim.”
Since Farhan has himself referred us to this 6 minute talk, presumably he has listened to it. Therefore his own reference condemns his views about us, thoroughly and utterly. I see no reason to continue the dialogue with him and waste time, since he has been completely defeated and routed by his own hands.
From Rashid:
Shaikh Hamza Yousaf has performed Nikah of a Lahori-Ahmadi and highly praised Maulana Muhammad Ali sahib in presence of Lahori-Ahmadi.
From ikram:
If I recall correctly and as a witness, Shaikh Hamza Yousaf performed the said Nikah of a Lahori Ahmadi in early 1990s. During the Nikah, he was carrying with him the green hardcover copy of Maulana Muhammad Ali's English translation and commentary of the Holy Quran.
From Regis:
Is this video available anywhere on the Internet? Is it part of a longer speech? Does anyone know where I would find it?
I note that it was put up by an anti-Ahmadi group to 'disgrace' Hamza Yusuf for his tolerant views.
Unfortunately Mr. Yusuf then capitulated to the rantings of bigots which is a very great pity. I'm sure he had his reasons though.
From Regis:
I am reminded, regarding this, by the words of the late, great Lahori Ahmadi and grandson of Maulana Hakim Noor-ud-din: Jamil Omar who said, "Muslim societies… will only come of age when they are willing to challenge fundamentalism" [Source]