Messiah Shall Descend Upon Jerusalem

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد وبارك وسلم وصلى عليه

Most Muslims who believe in the literal second advent of the Messiah Jesus of Nazareth على نبينا وعليه السلام tend to believe he shall descend from Heaven to the east of Damascus, near the White Minaret.

Commenting on the Hadīth about the Messiah descending to Damascus:

إِذْ بَعَثَ اللهُ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ، فَيَنْزِلُ عِنْدَ ‌الْمَنَارَةِ ‌الْبَيْضَاءِ شَرْقِيَّ دِمَشْقَ، بَيْنَ مَهْرُودَتَيْنِ، وَاضِعًا كَفَّيْهِ عَلَى أَجْنِحَةِ مَلَكَيْنِ، إِذَا طَأْطَأَ رَأْسَهُ قَطَرَ، وَإِذَا رَفَعَهُ تَحَدَّرَ مِنْهُ جُمَانٌ كَاللُّؤْلُؤِ، فَلَا يَحِلُّ لِكَافِرٍ يَجِدُ رِيحَ نَفَسِهِ إِلَّا مَاتَ، وَنَفَسُهُ يَنْتَهِي حَيْثُ يَنْتَهِي طَرْفُهُ

Allah will send the Messiah, son of Mary. He will descend at the white minaret on the eastern side of Damascus, wearing two garments lightly dyed with saffron and placing his hands on the wings of two Angels. When he lowers his head, there will fall beads of perspiration from his head, and when he raises it up, beads like pearls will scatter from it. Every Kāfir (i.e. disbeliever) who smells the odor of his body will die and his breath will reach as far as he is able to see (Sahīh Muslim)

Imran N. Hosein writes: “This writer finds it strange and perplexing that the miraculous return of Jesus should occur in Damascus rather than Jerusalem” (An Islamic View of Gog and Magog in the Modern World, p.116)

The Salafi muhaddith, al-Albāni explained that the idea that the Messiah shall literally land on top of this minaret is erroneous. The correct meaning is that the Messiah shall descend near the White Minaret in the east of Damascus:

And they think that Jesus, عليه الصلاة والسلام, will come down at that minaret and they interpret that previous hadith, “He will descend by the white minaret, [in the] east[ern part] of Damascus …” they explain this hadith [by saying that it is referring to] the minaret which is present today east of the Amawi mosque–and this is an incorrect explanation. That is because the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, said, “He will descend by the white minaret …” and not from the [actual] minaret, and there is a big difference [between the two]. They say, “He will descend in the minaret, then he will come down to the mosque from the minaret,” and the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, says, “He will descend by the white minaret …” Neither did he say, “East of the mosque …” but rather, “… [in the] east[ern part] of Damascus …” it is obligatory upon us not to add to the sayings of the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم, that which is not from it.

(al-Fatāwa al-Muhimmah lil-Allāmah Muhammad Nāsir ud-Dīn al-Albāni, of Salāh ud-Dīn Mahmūd as-Sa’īd; pp.290-291)

However, there is another Hadīth which states that the Messiah shall descend to Mount Afīq:

فَعِنْدَ ‌ذَلكَ ‌يَنْزِلُ ‌أَخِى ‌عِيسَى ‌ابْنُ ‌مَرْيَمَ ‌مِنَ ‌السَّمَاءِ ‌عَلَى ‌جَبَل ‌أَفِيقٍ إِمَامًا هَاديًا وَحَكَمًا عَادِلًا عَلَيْه بُرْنُسٌ لَهُ مَرْبُوع الْخَلْقِ أَصْلَت سَبط الشَّعْر بِيَدهِ حربَةٌ يَقْتُلُ الدَّجَّالَ فَإِذَا قَتَلَ الدَّجَالَ تَضَعُ الْحَرْبُ أَوْزَارَهَا وَكَانَ السِّلْمُ فَيَلْقَى الرَّجُلُ الأَسَدَ فَلا يُهَيجُهُ وَيَأخُذُ الْحَيَّةَ فَلا تَضُرُّهُ وَتُنْبِتُ الأَرْضُ كنَبَاتِهَا عَلَى عَهْد آدَمَ وَيُؤْمِنُ بِهِ أَهْلُ الأَرْضُ وَيَكُونُ النَّاسُ أَهْلَ ملَّةٍ وَاحدَةٍ

(Tarīkh Dimashq; v.47, p.505):

However, this Hadīth, which explicitly states that the Messiah shall descend from Heaven, is weak. Ibn Asākir did not cite it’s full chain from him connecting it to sayyidinā Ibn Abbās رضى الله عنهما narrating from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

Nu’aim bin Hammād reports a narration which states that the Messiah shall descend, not to Damascus, but to Jerusalem:

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ عَنِ ابْنِ لَهِيعَةَ وَاللَّيْثِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ عَنْ خَالِدِ بْنِ يَزِيدَ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ أَبِي هِلَالٍ عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو قَالَ يَخْرُجُ الدَّجَّالُ بَعْدَ فَتْحِ الْقُسْطَنْطِينِيَّةِ قَبْلَ ‌نُزُولِ ‌عِيسَى ‌ابْنِ ‌مَرْيَمَ ‌بِبَيْتِ ‌الْمَقْدِسِ

Abd Allāh bin Amr said: The Dajjāl shall emerge after the conquest of Constantinople, before the descent of Jesus son of Mary to Bait al-Maqdis (al-Fitan; v.2, p.253, #1468)

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ عَنِ ابْنِ لَهِيعَةَ، وَاللَّيْثِ عَنْ خَالِدِ بْنِ يَزِيدَ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ أَبِي هِلَالٍ عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ إِذَا ‌نَزَلَ ‌عِيسَى ‌بَيْتَ ‌الْمَقْدِسِ وَقَدْ حَاصَرَ الدَّجَّالُ النَّاسَ فِي بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ مَشَى إِلَيْهِ بَعْدَمَا يُصَلِّي الْغَدَاةَ يَمْشِي إِلَيْهِ وَهُوَ فِي آخِرِ رَمَقٍ فَيَضْرِبُهُ فَيَقْتُلُهُ

(ibid; v.2, p.559, #1563):

Another Hadīth indicates that the Messiah shall descend to Jerusalem and not Damascus:

هُمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ قَلِيلٌ وَجُلُّهُمْ بِبَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ وَإِمَامُهُمْ رَجُلٌ صَالِحٌ فَبَيْنَمَا إِمَامُهُمْ قَدْ تَقَدَّمَ يُصَلِّي بِهِمُ الصُّبْحَ إِذْ نَزَلَ عَلَيْهِمْ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ

On that day they [Arabs] will be few, and most of them will be in Jerusalem, and their leader will be a righteous man. When their leader has stepped forward to lead them in the morning prayer, Jesus son of Mary will come down to them (Sunan Ibn Mājah; #4077)

The muhaddith, Uthmān al-Dāni (d.444 H), brought out another narration:

لَا تَزَالُ طَائِفَةٌ مِنْ أُمَّتِي تُقَاتِلُ عَنِ الْحَقِّ حَتَّى ‌يَنْزِلَ ‌عِيسَى ‌ابْنُ ‌مَرْيَمَ ‌عِنْدَ ‌طُلُوعِ ‌الْفَجْرِ ‌بِبَيْتِ ‌الْمَقْدِسِ يَنْزِلُ عَلَى الْمَهْدِيِّ، فَيُقَالُ لَهُ تَقَدَّمْ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ فَصَلِّ لَنَا فَيَقُولُ إِنَّ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَمِينٌ بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ لِكَرَامَتِهِمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ

A faction of my Ummah will not cease fighting upon the truth until Jesus son of Mary descends, at the dawn of Fajr, in Jerusalem. He will descend upon the Mahdi, so he will say to him: ‘Lead us in the prayer, O Prophet of Allah’. But he will say, ‘Allah has honored this Ummah, some over others’ (al-Sunan al-Wāridah fil-Fitan wa-Ghawā’ilihā wal-Sā’ah wa Ashrātihā; v.2, p.1236, #686):

I personally lean toward the view that the Messiah shall descend not to Damascus but to Jerusalem. This is an ancient prophecy found in the Hebrew Bible:

וְעָמְד֣וּ רַגְלָ֣יו בַּיֹּום־הַ֠הוּא עַל־הַ֨ר הַזֵּתִ֜ים אֲשֶׁ֨ר עַל־פְּנֵ֥י יְרוּשָׁלִַם֮ מִקֶּדֶם֒

On that day, He will set His feet on the Mount of Olives, near Jerusalem on the east (Zechariah 14:4)

It is a distinct possibility that the narration about the Messiah descending to Damascus is an error of one or some of the narrators. Because Jerusalem and Damascus are both in the land of Shām (the Levant), and because Shām is primarily associated with Damascus, it is possible that the prophecy of the Messiah descending to Jerusalem was mistakenly transmitted as him descending to Damascus. The prophecy in Zechariah 14, clearly a Messianic prophecy, speaks of the Mount of Olives in the east of Jerusalem. Interestingly, the Hadīth about Damascus says that the Messiah shall descend to its eastern part. This is another indication that the original prophecy still has traces found in the Hadīth, except that it has erroneously substituted Damascus in place of Jerusalem. The Hadīth also speaks of the White Minaret. Most Muslims imagine this is the White Minaret of the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, but it appears that what is meant is a white minaret or tower in the Old City of Jerusalem. It may even possibly refer to a future project of the Jordanian government to build a minaret on the eastern part of the Temple Mount overlooking the Mount of Olives.

According to the Christian text Acts of the Apostles: “And when he [Jesus] had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey” (Acts 1:9-12)

Magic is Not Real (Part 3) Believer in Magic Won't Enter Paradise

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على محمد وآل محمد وبارك وسلم وصلى عليه

An additional grounds for why I reject the reality or existence of magic is that my Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم reportedly said:

لَا يَدْخُلُ الْجَنَّةَ صَاحِبُ خَمْسٍ مُدْمِنُ خَمْرٍ وَلَا ‌مُؤْمِنٌ ‌بِسِحْرٍ وَلَا قَاطِعُ رَحِمٍ وَلَا كَاهِنٌ وَلَا مَنَّانٌ

"Five will not enter Paradise: a drunkard, a believer in magic, one who severs ties of kindship, a soothsayer, and a reminder of favors"

(Musnad Ahmad: v.17, p.178, #11107: grade: hasan lighairihi):

Rafidi Shi'ah Believe Ali is Equal to Prophet Muhammad

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

These days Satanic preachers of the Rāfidī Shī’ah sect, like Mahdi al-Modarresi and Hassan Allahyari, are openly professing that amīr al-mu’minīn Alī bin Abī Tālib كرم الله وجهه is equal in every sense to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

Did Ghulam Ahmad Claim Prophesy (Part 15): No Claim to Original or Actual Prophesy

 ‌بِاسْمِكَ ‌اللَّهُمَّ وَفِي سَبِيلِكَ وَعَلَى مِلَّةِ رَسُولِكَ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

In my previous article in this series debunking the myth that Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad claimed to be an actual prophet of God, I quoted his statements where he clarified that any indication he might have given of possessing superiority over the Messiah of Nazareth على نبينا وعليه السلام is to be understood as a partial superiority only.

And certainly it is possible that a non-prophet, an Ummatī, have a partial fadīlah (excellence or virtue) over a Prophet. I previously quoted the founder of the Deobandi sect, mawlānā Qāsim Nānawtawī (1832-1880 CE):

انبیاء اپنی امت سے اگر ممتاز ہوتے ہیں تو علوم ہی میں ممتاز ہوتے ہیں۔ باقی رہا عمل، اس میں بسا اوقات بظاہر امتی مساوی ہوجاتے ہیں بلکہ بڑھ جاتے ہیں

Prophets, if they excel their Ummah (nation), then it is in the field of knowledge that they excel. As for good deeds, then sometimes an Ummati, at face value, exceeds (Tahdhīr un-Nās)

However, as pointed out to me by several individuals on both sides of the fence—meaning those who accuse Ghulām Ahmad of having claimed to be an actual prophet, and those who don’t believe he made such a claim, from this latter category is Nāsir Ahmad Sultānī—Ghulām Ahmad later altered his belief and began professing total and absolute superiority over Jesus son of Mary عليهما السلام

The source for this information is what the respected Mirzā wrote in his answer to the first question posed in Haqīqat ul-Wahī.

However, there are two possibilities. If the respected Mirzā meant that he is absolutely superior to Jesus of Nazareth in his personal capacity, then I must respectfully disagree. It should be noted that many other Muslims, notably the Shī’ah, likewise believe that their twelve Imāms, despite being non-prophets, are superior to all of the Prophets of God from Adam till Jesus عليهم السلام

Some of the Rāfidī Shī’ah even have the audacity to proclaim that amīr al-mu’minīn Alī bin Abī Tālib كرم الله وجهه is equal in rank to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم – and we ought to seek refuge in Allāh from such a damnable heresy, which is a means for Satan to rob a person of his faith completely.

Nevertheless, these controversies on the subject of superiority and inferiority are not from the basic necessities of Islām, they are not from the essential Articles of Faith. Differing over them may at most be a matter of guidance and misguidance, but not a matter of īmān and kufr. Therefore, while it is my solid conviction that even the smallest of the Prophets is totally superior to the greatest and most righteous non-prophet, whether that be sayyidinā Abī Bakr as-Siddīq, or the Imām al-Mahdī رضى الله عنهما, if Mirzā Ghulām Ahmad declared himself fully superior to Jesus Christ عليه السلام that is certainly not kufr, and likewise, it is certainly not a proof that he claimed to be a prophet himself in the true sense.

However, it appears to me that the respected Mirzā actually meant that not in his personal capacity, but in the capacity of being the reflection or mirror image of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم he is not inferior than Jesus Christ. And this is most likely what he meant, as he stated elsewhere:

میرا نفس درمیان نہیں ہے۔ بلکہ محمد مصطفے صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ہے

My self doesn’t come in between, rather it is Muhammad Mustafā blessings of Allah and peace be upon him (Rūhānī Khazā’in; v.18 p.216)

In the pages of Haqīqat ul-Wahī in which the respected Mirzā is supposedly clarifying his full superiority over Jesus of Nazareth, he actually, once again, elucidates the fact that he is not making any claim to actual prophesy for himself:

یاد ر ہے کہ بہت سے لوگ میرے دعوے میں نبی کا نام سنکر دھوکہ کھاتے ہیں اور خیال کرتے ہیں کہ گویا میں نے اس نبوّت کا دعوی کیا ہے جو پھلے زمانوں میں براہ راست نبیوں کو ملی ہے لیکن وہ اس خیال میں غلطی پر ہیں میرا ایسا دعوی نہیں ہے بلکہ خدا تعالی کی مصلحت اور حکمت نے آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے افاضہ روحانیہ کا کمال ثابت کرنے کے لئے یہ مرتبہ بخشا ہے کہ آپ کے فیض کی برکت سے مجھے نبوت کے مقام تک پہنچایا۔ اس لئے میں صرف نبی نہیں کہلا سکتا بلکہ ایک پہلو سے نبی اور ایک پہلو سے امّتی اور میری نبوت آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی ظل ہے نہ کہ اصلی نبوت۔ اسی وجہ سے حدیث اور میرے الہام میں جیسا کہ میرا نام نبی رکھا گیا ایسا ہی میرا نام امتی بھی رکھا ہے تا معلوم ہو کہ ہر ایک کمال مجھ کو آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی اتباع اور آپ کے ذریعہ سے ملا ہے۔

Keep in mind, quite a few people are misled when they come across the term ‘Prophet’ with reference to my claim. They think as if I have claimed the kind of Prophethood as was vouchsafed directly to the Prophets of old. But they are wrong in thinking so; I make no such claim. On the contrary, the wisdom and providence of God Almighty has bestowed this status in order to prove the excellence of the spiritual blessings of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that He took me to the station of Prophethood through the blessings of his (the Holy Prophet’s) grace. Therefore, I cannot be defined only as a Prophet. Rather, I am a Prophet in one respect and an ummati [follower of the Holy Prophet sa] in the other. My Prophethood is a reflection of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and not an independent Prophethood [original prophethood “aslī nubuwwat”]. This is why in the hadith as well as in the revelation vouchsafed to me, I have been named a Prophet, just as I have been named an ummati, so that it may be known that every excellence has been bestowed on me through following the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and through his medium (Haqīqat ul-Wahī; Rūhānī Khazā’in, v.22 p.154, footnote):

Reality of Mubāhalah, Prayer Contest, 3:61

 

‌بِاسْمِكَ ‌اللَّهُمَّ وَفِي سَبِيلِكَ وَعَلَى مِلَّةِ رَسُولِكَ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

From the Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم sīrah we read about his fascinating encounter with the Trinitarian Christians of Najrān, and his debate with them on the subject of the deification of Christ. In that context Allāh Ilāh al-ālihah عزّ وجلّ revealed the following āyah:

فَمَنۡ حَآجَّکَ فِیۡہِ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِ مَا جَآءَکَ مِنَ الۡعِلۡمِ فَقُلۡ تَعَالَوۡا نَدۡعُ اَبۡنَآءَنَا وَ اَبۡنَآءَکُمۡ وَ نِسَآءَنَا وَ نِسَآءَکُمۡ وَ اَنۡفُسَنَا وَ اَنۡفُسَکُمۡ ۟ ثُمَّ نَبۡتَہِلۡ فَنَجۡعَلۡ لَّعۡنَتَ اللّٰہِ عَلَی الۡکٰذِبِیۡنَ

Now whoso disputes with thee concerning him, after what has come to thee of knowledge, say, ‘Come, let us call our sons and your sons, and our women and your women, and our people and your people; then let us pray fervently and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie’

(Surah 3:61)

This verse is better known as āyat al-Mubāhalah, meaning the prayer contest in which two parties invoke the curse of God upon the one that is associated with falsehood in a religious dispute.

Some Muslims, especially those affected by the malady of modernism and materialism, ridicule the concept of mubāhalah, or otherwise say it is not a valid practice after the Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه and that it is forbidden for any non-prophet to engage in a mubāhalah of his own initiate on behalf of Islam. They also falsely claim that a mubāhalah cannot be done between Muslims.

But in this article I shall prove all these ridiculous assertions wrong by citing examples from some of the Prophet’s own companions رضى الله عنهم and some of the classical imāms and the ulamā of Islām.

Sayyidinā Ibn Abbās رضى الله عنهما issued a challenge for mubāhalah over a disagreement on a jurisprudential problem. He said that both he and the party that accepts his challenge should gather at the sacred Ka’bah, both place their hands on the Rukn (the Yemenite corner), then invoke the curse of Allāh upon the liars (Musannaf Abd ur-Razzāq; v.7, p.288, #17186):

لَوَدِدْتُ أَنِّي وَهَؤُلَاءِ الَّذِينَ يُخَالِفُونِي فِي الْفَرِيضَةِ , نَجْتَمِعُ فَنَضَعُ أَيْدِيَنَا عَلَى الرُّكْنِ , ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلُ , فَنَجْعَلُ لَعْنَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

Likewise, sayyidinā Ibn Mas’ūd رضى الله عنه issued a challenge for a prayer contest addressed to fellow Muslims who disagreed with him regarding the chronological sequence of the revelation of certain āyāt in the Qurān:

مَنْ شَاءَ لاَعَنْتُهُ لأُنْزِلَتْ سُورَةُ النِّسَاءِ الْقُصْرَى بَعْدَ الأَرْبَعَةِ الأَشْهُرِ وَعَشْرًا

“I can invoke His curse on anyone who wishes...” (Sunan Abī Dāwud #2307) al-Albānī graded this narration sahīh.

And it is narrated the Ibn Abbās or his client Ikrimah رضى الله عنهم issued an open challenge for mubāhalah over the dispute on zihār (Sunan al-Dār Qutnī; v.4, p.493, #3861):

al-Albānī has quoted a similar narration about a challenge of mubāhalah from sayyidinā Ibn Abbās رضى الله عنهما and graded it hasan (Irwā al-Ghalīl; v.6, p.145, #1706):

Imām Ibn Hajr al-Asqalānī رحمه الله writes that mubāhalah may be done on a disagreement after the proof has been manifested (but the opposing party stubbornly refuses to accept it). He mentions the challenge issued by sayyidinā Ibn Abbās, and also al-Awzā’ī as well as a group from among the Ulamā. He mentions that it is something observed that whoever accepts a challenge of mubāhalah while being upon falsehood is destroyed within the duration of a year from the day of the mubāhalah, and that this was his personal experience when he undertook a mubāhalah with someone who was a bigoted mulhid and that person was destroyed after merely two months:

وَفِيهَا مَشْرُوعِيَّةُ مُبَاهَلَةِ الْمُخَالِفِ إِذَا أصر بعد ظُهُور الْحجَّة وَقد دَعَا بن عَبَّاسٍ إِلَى ذَلِكَ ثُمَّ الْأَوْزَاعِيُّ وَوَقَعَ ذَلِكَ لِجَمَاعَةٍ مِنَ الْعُلَمَاءِ ‌وَمِمَّا ‌عُرِفَ ‌بِالتَّجْرِبَةِ ‌أَنَّ ‌مَنْ ‌بَاهَلَ ‌وَكَانَ ‌مُبْطِلًا ‌لَا ‌تَمْضِي ‌عَلَيْهِ ‌سَنَةٌ مِنْ يَوْمِ الْمُبَاهَلَةِ وَوَقَعَ لِي ذَلِكَ مَعَ شَخْصٍ كَانَ يَتَعَصَّبُ لِبَعْضِ الْمَلَاحِدَةِ فَلَمْ يَقُمْ بَعْدَهَا غَيْرَ شَهْرَيْنِ

(Fath al-Bārī; v.8 p.95):

To be continued ان شاء الله

Warning Against False Prophets (Part 2)

 ‌بِاسْمِكَ ‌اللَّهُمَّ وَفِي سَبِيلِكَ وَعَلَى مِلَّةِ رَسُولِكَ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

Allah جلّ جلاله says:

وَ مَنۡ اَظۡلَمُ مِمَّنِ افۡتَرٰی عَلَی اللّٰہِ کَذِبًا اَوۡ قَالَ اُوۡحِیَ اِلَیَّ وَ لَمۡ یُوۡحَ اِلَیۡہِ شَیۡءٌ وَّ مَنۡ قَالَ سَاُنۡزِلُ مِثۡلَ مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ

And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah, or says, ‘It has been revealed to me,’ while nothing has been revealed to him; and who says, ‘I will send down the like of that which Allah has sent down?’

(Surah 6:93)

The mufassirīn say that the words “one who says ‘it has been revealed to me’ while nothing has been revealed to him” were revealed concerning the pretender Musaylimah bin Habīb al-Hanafī; and the words “one who says ‘I will send down the like of that which Allah has sent down’” were revealed concerning the apostate and hypocrite Abd Allāh bin Sa’d bin Abī Sarh.

But it should be borne in mind that the knowledge of asbāb al-nuzūl does not mean the āyāt of the Qurān don’t have a broader and general application beyond the original objects for the cause of their revelation from Heaven. In other words, this āyah is not restricted in applying to the antichrist Musaylimah but to all false prophets and individuals who falsely claim to have received revelation from Allāh سبحانه وتعالى

The Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه prophesied:

وَوَلاَ تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى يُبْعَثَ دَجَّالُونَ كَذَّابُونَ قَرِيبًا

مِنْ ثَلاَثِينَ، كُلُّهُمْ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ رَسُولُ اللَّه

The Hour shall not be established until there appear nearly thirty dajjāls [deceivers] and liars. Each of them will claim ‘I am an Apostle of Allah’

(Sahīh al-Bukhārī & Sahīh Muslim)

In another version, it is reported that he صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

وَإِنَّهُ سَيَكُونُ فِي أُمَّتِي كَذَّابُونَ ثَلاَثُونَ كُلُّهُمْ يَزْعُمُ أَنَّهُ نَبِيٌّ وَأَنَا خَاتَمُ النَّبِيِّينَ لاَ نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي

And there shall come in my Ummah thirty liars; each of them will claim ‘I am a prophet’.

But I am the Seal of the Prophets, there is no prophet after me

(Sunan Abī Dāwud)

This latter narration clarifies that the thirty false prophets will in fact come out from the Ummah of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

Therefore, this prophecy does not apply to the false prophets of other religions like Judaism and Christianity who arose after the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

There is unanimous agreement within the world of Islām that among these thirty false prophets are the first two such liars, namely, al-Aswad al-Ansī whose real name was Abhalah bin Ka’b, and the aforementioned Musaylimah bin Habīb لعنة الله عليهما

Although the prophecy undoubtedly speaks of thirty or nearly thirty pretenders, that doesn’t mean there won’t be considerable more such false prophets who originate from this Ummah. The prophecy is therefore referring to thirty or nearly thirty specific major false prophets, and not every lunatic who gets up one day without washing his face and claims he is a prophet.

The prophecy should probably also not apply to those false prophets who repented, like Tulayhah bin Khuwaylid al-Asadī رضى الله عنه and the false prophetess who later repented, namely, Sajāh bint al-Hārith.

Regarding sayyidinā Tulayhah, it is narrated that sayyidinā Umar al-Fārūq once addressed him after his repentance:

يَا خُدَعُ، مَا بَقِيَ مِنْ كَهَانَتِكَ

“You imposter, what is left of your soothsaying?”

نَفْخَةٌ أَوْ نَفْخَتَانِ بِالْكِيرِ

He replied, “A puff or two in the bellows.” (Tārīkh al-Tabarī)

Tulayhah’s enigmatic response could possibly be interpreted to mean that he viewed himself as some kind of mulham who receives the kind of divine inspiration spoken of in the Qurān known as nafkh

وَ مَرۡیَمَ ابۡنَتَ عِمۡرٰنَ الَّتِیۡۤ اَحۡصَنَتۡ فَرۡجَہَا فَنَفَخۡنَا فِیۡہِ مِنۡ رُّوۡحِنَا وَ صَدَّقَتۡ بِکَلِمٰتِ رَبِّہَا وَ کُتُبِہٖ وَ کَانَتۡ مِنَ الۡقٰنِتِیۡنَ

And Mary, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her private parts — so We breathed into him of Our Spirit — and she fulfilled in her person the words of her Lord and His Books and was one of the obedient.

(Surah 66:12)

And perhaps it was this initial spiritual connection which sayyidinā Tulayhah al-Asadī had with Allāh تعالى in the form of inspiration which made him imagine he was actually a prophet, but he soon came to his senses and repented from such misguidance.

So if we were to numerate the sum of false prophets who had risen from the Muslim Ummah throughout history, from the time of Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وسلم last days till present, it would surely be greater than thirty. Hence it is stated in another version of this prophecy, or perhaps it is a separate prophecy:

لَا تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ حَتَّى ‌يَخْرُجَ ‌سَبْعُونَ ‌كَذَّابًا

The Hour shall not be established until there come seventy liars

(al-Mu’jam al-Kabīr)

it is said this narration is weak due to the narrator Yahyā bin Abd al-Hamīd al-Himmānī. And in another version, with this wording:

يَكُونُ قَبْلَ خُرُوجِ الدَّجَّالِ ‌نَيِّفٌ ‌عَلَى ‌سَبْعِينَ ‌دَجَّالًا

Prior to the coming of the Dajjāl there shall be a little over seventy dajjāls

(Musnad Abi Ya’la; v.7, p.108, #4055):

However, this narration is weak due to the narrator Layth bin Abī Sulaym.

And if we were to accept this prophecy of seventy antichrists and liars who shall come forth before the Antichrist (False Messiah or the Dajjāl), then perhaps we can count among them the infamous pretender of the Thaqīf, namely, al-Mukhtār bin Abī Ubayd.

And after him, al-Hārith bin Sa’īd of Damascus during the tenure of the Umayyad ruler Abd al-Malik bin Marwān.

Then there was a false prophet by the name of Hāshim, but better known as al-Muqanna “the veiled”. It is said he was a chemist who veiled his face to conceal the disfigurement caused by a chemical explosion from one of his experiments.

Other false prophets and pretenders who arose from the Ummah in modern times were Mirzā Husayn Alī Nūrī, so-called Bahā Ullāh of Iran revered by the Bahai religion, Elijah Poole who was the leader of the so-called Nation of Islam, a racist Black cult, and Rashād Khalīfa the infamous Sunnah and Hadīth rejecter who founded the United Submitters International.

It is often argued that prophesy has ceased absolutely, in every sense of the word, after Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم on the basis that he predicted there would arise nearly thirty false prophets after him from the Ummah. But then how would Muslims respond to certain cessationist Christians who argue along the same lines that Jesus Christ is the last prophet, and that Prophet Muhammad cannot be a true prophet since Jesus said:

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves (Matthew 7:15)

And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many (Matthew 24:11)

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22)

But as Muslims answer that even if Jesus warned against the rising of false prophets after him doesn’t logically prove that the coming of a truthful prophet after him is impossible, likewise, it must be pointed out that the Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم prophecy concerning nearly thirty false prophets is not a proof that prophesy has been discontinued after him in absolute terms.

Barelawi Says Mirzais Don't Deny Khatm an-Nubuwwah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله تعالى على خاتم النبيين

In his polemical work against the Deobandis and so-called ‘Wahhabis’, the Barelawi polemicist Sufi Muhammad Allah Ditta Naqshbandi wrote:

مرزائی ایک آیت کا مفہوم بگاڑ کر پیش کریں یعنی خاتم النبیین کی آیت کے منکر نہیں۔ کوئی مرزائی یہ نہیں کہتا کہ میں آنحضرت صلی اللہ تعالی علیہ وسلم کو خاتم النبیین نہیں مانتا صرف مفہوم کو بگاڑ تے ہیں ان کے پیچے تو لٹھ لیے پھرتے ہو۔

"Mirzais [derogatory term for followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad] distort the meaning of a single Ayah, that is, the Ayah of Khātam an-Nabiyyīn. No Mirzai says ‘I don’t believe Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is Khātam an-Nabiyyīn’. They only distort the meaning, and for that you chase them around with a stick" (Bher Numa Bheriay, p.12):

According to this Barelawi polemicist, the Deobandis make a big hue and cry about the Ahmadis/Qadianis being deniers of the finality of prophesy, although in fact Ahmadis/Qadianis don’t deny khatm an-Nubuwwah they only differ as to its correct interpretation, whereas the Deobandis themselves are guilty of much greater rejection of the Quran and the true reality of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم