Promised Messiah will be an Imam from among the Ummah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على سيدنا ومولانا محمد وبارك وسلم وصلى عليه

Years ago I wrote two articles, one in 2016 and the other in 2017, in which I explained that the words of the Hadith:

كَيْفَ أَنْتُمْ إِذَا نَزَلَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ فِيكُمْ وَإِمَامُكُمْ مِنْكُمْ

What will be your condition when the Son of Mary descends among you and your Imam is from among you?

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

is a proof that the coming Messiah shall in fact be someone from this Ummah that will be our Imam “your Imam is from among you”. The promised Messiah is an individual raised up as an Imam from this very Ummah, and not the original Jesus son of Mary – the Israelite Prophet – who appeared some two millennia ago. Although most Muslims today believe the promised Messiah is that original Jesus and will physically descend from Heaven in the End Times the Hadith under discussion is a strong refutation of that idea.

Many Muslims argue that “your Imam is from among you” is not referring to the coming Jesus but to a second individual who will appear alongside Jesus, namely, the Mahdi. However, Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani has quoted the view of the early Ulama that “your Imam is from among you” refers to the coming Jesus and not a Mahdi who is an individual distinct from Jesus:

وَقَالَ أَبُو ذَرٍّ الْهَرَوِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا الْجَوْزَقِيُّ عَنْ بَعْضِ الْمُتَقَدِّمِينَ قَالَ مَعْنَى قَوْلِهِ وَإِمَامُكُمْ مِنْكُمْ يَعْنِي أَنَّهُ يَحْكُمُ ‌بِالْقُرْآنِ ‌لَا ‌بِالْإِنْجِيلِ

Abu Dharr al-Harawi said: al-Jawzati told us that some of the early Ulama said: the meaning of his [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] saying ‘your Imam is from among you’ is that he [Jesus] will judge by the Quran and not by the Gospel (Fath al-Bari; v.6, p.494):

In other words, these early Ulama clearly understood the clause of the Hadith ‘your Imam is from among you’ as referring to the person of the coming Jesus and not a separate individual such as the Mahdi or anyone else. And they interpreted this description of the coming Jesus being an Imam from among the Ummah as proof that he will judge by the Quran and not like the original Jesus who judged according to his revelation – the Gospel.

White Palace the Mosque of Ahmad صلى الله عليه وسلم

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

One of the amazing prophecies of my master the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is concerning the appearance of his sacred mosque in Medina – Masjid an-Nabawi – in the future. He said:

يَوْمُ ‌الْخَلَاصِ ‌وَمَا ‌يَوْمُ ‌الْخَلَاصِ ‌يَوْمُ ‌الْخَلَاصِ ‌وَمَا ‌يَوْمُ ‌الْخَلَاصِ ثَلَاثًا فَقِيلَ لَهُ وَمَا يَوْمُ الْخَلَاصِ قَالَ يَجِيءُ الدَّجَّالُ فَيَصْعَدُ أُحُدًا فَيَنْظُرُ إِلَى الْمَدِينَةَ فَيَقُولُ لِأَصْحَابِهِ أَتَرَوْنَ هَذَا الْقَصْرَ الْأَبْيَضَ هَذَا مَسْجِدُ أَحْمَدَ ثُمَّ يَأْتِي الْمَدِينَةَ فَيَجِدُ بِكُلِّ نَقْبٍ مِنْهَا مَلَكًا مُصْلِتًا فَيَأْتِي سَبْخَةَ الْحَرْفِ فَيَضْرِبُ رُوَاقَهُ ثُمَّ تَرْجُفُ الْمَدِينَةُ ثَلَاثَ رَجَفَاتٍ فَلَا يَبْقَى مُنَافِقٌ وَلَا مُنَافِقَةٌ وَلَا فَاسِقٌ وَلَا فَاسِقَةٌ إِلَّا خَرَجَ إِلَيْهِ فَذَلِكَ يَوْمُ الْخَلَاصِ

"The Day of Khalas! And what is the Day of Khalas? The Day of Khalas and what is the Day of Khalas” - he repeated it thrice – they said to him “what is the Day of Khalas?” He said: “The Dajjal will come and climb Mount Uhud and gaze upon al-Madinah, saying to his companions: ‘Do you see that white palace? It is the Mosque of Ahmad’ Then he will come toward al-Madinah but every pathway he will find an armed Angel Then he will go towards Sabkhat al-Harf and will strike his camp and al-Madinah will be jolted thrice as a result of which every hypocrite man and woman and habitually sinning man and woman will leave, and this is the Day of Khalas" (Musnad Ahmad; v.31, p.312)

Presently, the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina is a prominent, large white structure although this was certainly not its appearance during the Prophet’s own lifetime, and for many centuries after he passed away. And we know that the Prophet’s Mosque shall essentially remain in this form of a large white structure up until the Antichrist makes his way into its vicinity and points to it, naming it “that white palace” and the “Mosque of Ahmad”.

Female Prophets

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

A minority view among Islamic scholasticism is that Prophesy is not exclusive to men, rather there were prophetesses in the past. According to the Torah, Miriam, the elder sister of Moses, is called a prophetess (Exodus 15:20). Deborah is called a prophetess (Judges 4:4) along with Huldah (2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chronicles 34:22). According to the Christian New Testament, an elderly woman of the tribe of Asher, Anna daughter of Phanuel, was a prophetess (Luke 2:36)

Muslims who contend that all prophets were necessarily men cite the following passage from the holy Quran:

وَ مَاۤ اَرۡسَلۡنَا مِنۡ قَبۡلِکَ اِلَّا رِجَالًا

We sent not before thee as Messengers any but men

My response to this argument is that this passage is specifically referring to Messengers or Apostles – those who are sent with a message. While all Messengers of Allah are necessarily Prophets, the Prophetesses were not Messengers who were sent to their people with a message. Rather, they were simply recipients of prophesy and revelations without being charged with a message to deliver to their people. This is because it is the teaching of our Faith that women are meant to be veiled and not public figures who interact with the people. Another argument put forward to answer the standard interpretation of this passage in the Quran:

“It is therefore reasonable to argue that by “men” (rijālan), the Qur’ān intended “human beings” as opposed to “angels,” proposed by the sceptics and rejecters. Although possible, the likelihood that the Qur’ān actually intended “men” as opposed to “women” is remote and not supported by the occasion of the revelation. This is simply because the doubters did not propose “women” – in the first place – to warrant the affirmation of “men,” having been sent. Instead, they proposed “angels” which would warrant the Qur’ān countering that with “human being” but only using “rijālan.” Therefore, construing rijālan as human beings removes a key premise behind the rejection of the prophecy of women; after all, women are also human beings. So Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s use of these verses to conclude that God has never sent a woman as a prophet is methodologically out of sync. Another indication of the error is that rijālan does not necessarily have to retain its literal meaning of “men” in this passage. The Qur’ān has used the term to signify different things such as angels (7:46), husbands (2:228; 4:34), and of course, men (4:1; 33:40). Ibn al-Jawzī mentions that rijāl is employed in the Qur’ān in eleven senses and cites Qur’ān, 21:7 as an example where it means “messengers” and not “men”. Based on this possibility, it is rather incorrect to use these verses to reject the prophecy of women.” (Intellectual Discourse, vol.23, no.1, 2015; pp.83-84)

Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani mentions the views of several classical Muslim scholars:

قَالَ الْقُرْطُبِيُّ الصَّحِيحُ أَنَّ مَرْيَمَ نَبِيَّةٌ لِأَنَّ اللَّهَ تَعَالَى أَوْحَى إِلَيْهَا بِوَاسِطَةِ الْمَلَكِ وَأَمَّا آسِيَةُ فَلَمْ يَرِدْ مَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى نُبُوَّتِهَا

وَقَدْ نُقِلَ عَنِ الْأَشْعَرِيِّ أَنَّ من النِّسَاء من نبىء وَهُنَّ سِتٌّ حَوَّاءُ وَسَارَةُ وَأُمُّ مُوسَى وَهَاجَرُ وَآسِيَةُ وَمَرْيَمُ وَالضَّابِطُ عِنْدَهُ أَنَّ مَنْ جَاءَهُ الْمَلَكُ عَنِ اللَّهِ بِحُكْمٍ مِنْ أَمْرٍ أَوْ نَهْيٍ أَوْ بِإِعْلَامٍ مِمَّا سَيَأْتِي فَهُوَ نَبِيٌّ وَقَدْ ثَبَتَ مَجِيءُ الْمَلَكِ لِهَؤُلَاءِ بِأُمُورٍ شَتَّى مِنْ ذَلِكَ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَوَقَعَ التَّصْرِيحُ بِالْإِيحَاءِ لِبَعْضِهِنَّ فِي الْقُرْآنِ وَذَكَرَ بن حَزْمٍ فِي الْمِلَلِ وَالنِّحَلِ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الْمَسْأَلَةَ لَمْ يَحْدُثِ التَّنَازُعُ فِيهَا إِلَّا فِي عَصْرِهِ بِقُرْطُبَةَ وَحَكَى عَنْهُمْ أَقْوَالًا ثَالِثُهَا الْوَقْفُ قَالَ وَحُجَّةُ الْمَانِعِينَ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قبلك إِلَّا رجَالًا قَالَ وَهَذَا لَا حُجَّةَ فِيهِ فَإِنَّ أَحَدًا لَمْ يَدَّعِ فِيهِنَّ الرِّسَالَةَ وَإِنَّمَا الْكَلَامُ فِي النُّبُوَّةِ فَقَطْ قَالَ وَأَصْرَحُ مَا وَرَدَ فِي ذَلِكَ قِصَّةُ مَرْيَمَ وَفِي قِصَّةِ ‌أُمِّ ‌مُوسَى مَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى ثُبُوتِ ذَلِكَ لَهَا مِنْ مبادرتها بِإِلْقَاءِ وَلَدِهَا فِي الْبَحْرِ بِمُجَرَّدِ الْوَحْيِ إِلَيْهَا بِذَلِكَ قَالَ وَقَدْ قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى بَعْدَ أَنْ ذَكَرَ مَرْيَمَ وَالْأَنْبِيَاءَ بَعْدَهَا أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ أنعم الله عَلَيْهِم من النَّبِيين فَدَخَلَتْ فِي عُمُومِهِ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ

Al-Qurtubi said, "The correct opinion is that Mary was a prophetess because Allah the Exalted revealed to her through an Angel. However, it was not mentioned that Aasiyah was a prophetess." However, it was transmitted from al-Ash'ari that some women became prophets, and these are six. They are Eve, Sarah, the mother of Moses, Hagar, Aasiyah, and Mary." According to his criteria, if an Angel came to a person with a ruling, or information about what will happen in the future, then that person is a prophet. It has been established that Angels came to these women, and they informed them about different things from Allah the Exalted. It was also explicitly mentioned in the Quran that revelation occurred to some of these women.

In al-Milal wa an-Nihal, Ibn Hazm mentioned that no difference of opinion occurred on this issue except during his time in Cordoba. He mentioned three opinions of the scholars on this issue. The third opinion was those of the scholars who refrained from giving a view on the issue. He stated that the proof of those who rejected the prophethood of women is Allah's statement: "And We sent not before you [as messengers] except men to whom We revealed" [Yusuf: 100]. He said, "There is no proof in this verse because no one has claimed that women were messengers. Rather, the discussion is on prophethood." The most explicit evidence in this regard is what was transmitted in the story of Mary, and the story of Moses's mother. That affirms the prophethood of women. This included Moses's mother's quickly throwing Moses into the sea inside a basket, as soon as it was revealed to her to do so. He went on to say, "After Allah mentioned Mary and the prophets who came after her, Allah said, "Those were the ones upon whom Allah bestowed favor from among the prophets" [Maryam: 85]. Thus, Maryam is part of the generality of this verse. And Allah knows best. (Fath al-Bari; v.6, pp.447-448):

Taliban, Huthis and Near Future Emergence of the Mahdi

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الصلاة والسلام على سيد المرسلين

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين

The changes to the geopolitical chessboard is accelerating so that a clearer image of the end game is now somewhat discernible. The stage for the final showdown pitting the forces of Light and Darkness against each other is almost set. As was revealed to me in a kashaf this world is the battlefield in the cosmic war between Heaven and Hell. Each side has their pawns and also their more dangerous pieces – the latter are not restricted to being powerful military or political forces. Rather, this war is primarily waged as an intellectual struggle for souls. Due consideration must be given to rising religious forces like the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Huthis in Yemen. Both of these factions, although apparently unrelated and separated by thousands of miles, will play a crucial role in bringing about an apocalyptic, religious awakening among ordinary Muslims that will pave the way for the emergence of the promised Mahdi. In Afghanistan, the US have almost completely withdrawn their military presence, leaving the ineffective and corrupt Afghan government virtually defenceless against the Taliban onslaught. Within months we can expect a near total victory for the Taliban. They are on the march to final victory, and as that victory appears more and more attainable in a short period of time, their incentive to compromise on the negotiating table will diminish. A Taliban takeover of Afghanistan will be a huge game changer for the Muslim world. Muslim states that are generally corrupt, weak and fail to invoke any confidence or inspiration in their citizens have much to be worried about the Taliban’s success as an armed group that identifies itself with Islam and the Shari’ah. Likewise, the Saudi failure to not only defeat but even contain the Huthis – a Zaidi revivalist movement that seeks to establish an Imamate – bodes ill for the corrupt Gulf monarchies. Both the lands of Yemen and Khorasan are intimately connected with the rise of the promised Mahdi. These are countries where historically Muslims were successful in resisting cultural Westernization and modernization. According to a set of narrations, the promised Mahdi shall be backed by armies from the East, from Khorasan, identified by their black banners. Another narration predicts that the Mahdi shall emerge from a small town in Yemen called Kari’ah:

يَخْرُجُ الْمَهْدِيُّ مِنْ قَرْيَةٍ بِالْيَمِينِ يُقَالُ لَهَا ‌كَرِعَةٌ وَعَلَى رَأْسِهِ عِمَامَةٌ فِيهَا مُنَادٍ يُنَادِي أَلَا إِنَّ هَذَا الْمَهْدِيُّ فَاتَّبِعُوهُ

The Mahdi shall come out from a village in Yemen called Kari’ah. Upon his head is a turban and a caller shall call out ‘this is the Mahdi, so follow him’

(al-Mu’jam Ibn al-Muqri: Hadith #94):

Although the authenticity of this particular narration is questionable, there is a distinct possibility that the promised Mahdi shall indeed hail from this northern region in Yemen, while being a resident of modern-day Saudi Arabia. He shall also be a descendant of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم through his illustrious daughter sayyidatuna Fatimah سلام الله عليها

But do not construe this as an endorsement of either the Taliban or the Huthis. Both have employed tactics in war that are undoubtedly contrary to the principles of the Shari’ah, including tactics which are borderline described as terrorism. I do not say that either faction is truly Mahdist, but it is a distinct possibility that either one of them, or even both, shall eventually morph into a force that shall be the initial support for the promised Mahdi when he does emerge in the Hejaz.

The persistent weakening of modern states in the Muslim world leading to the inevitable collapse of many of them (at the moment, the collapse of Lebanon seems imminent) lays the groundwork for the emergence of the Mahdist movement that will miraculously establish a Caliphate in the Middle East and perhaps the liberation of Jerusalem from Zionist control. There will also be a spiritual uprising in Istanbul, modern day Turkey, after which in short order the Antichrist will surface and move toward the Holy Land from the east. It appears to me that there is a link between the emergence of the Antichrist and the so-called Islamic Republic of Iran. For the Antichrist emerges from Khorasan, or from Asbahan, regions in northern and central Iran, backed by a force of seventy thousand strong. This force of seventy thousand are described as having Turkic features, though according to a Hadith in Sahih Muslim, they are Jews of Asbahan. It may be that the Twelver Shi’ites of Iran, and other Shi’ite communities especially the Hazara of Afghanistan, shall imagine that the Antichrist is their fictional Twelfth Imam.

Destruction of Babu Elahi Bakhsh

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Babu Ilahi Bakhsh, a follower of the monotheist saint Abdullah Ghaznawi (1811-1881), subsequently became a follower of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1839-1908) and alleged that he himself was a mulham (recipient of ilham—divine inspiration). When Ilahi Bakhsh raised a doubt that being a mulham he was not subordinate to Ghulam Ahmad, the latter wrote Darurat ul-Imam (the Need for the Imam).

Babu Ilahi Bakhsh publicly disavowed his former spiritual guide, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and began opposing him. He wrote a book, Asa-e-Musa (Staff of Moses) in which he attempted to answer Ghulam Ahmad’s Darurat ul-Imam and also published some of his alleged revelations. Babu Ilahi Bakhsh claimed on the basis of divine revelation that he was the similitude of the great prophet Moses على نبينا وعليه الصلاة والسلام and that he had been made into an Imam (Muhasibah-e-Qadiyaniat v.1; Asa-e-Musa pp.36, 83):

He also alleged that Allah had revealed the following ilham to him concerning Mirza Ghulam Ahmad:

سَنَسِمُہٗ عَلَی الۡخُرۡطُوۡمِ

We will brand him on the snout

(ibid, p.74):

Yet, Babu Ilahi Bakhsh died within Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s lifetime, on 7 April 1907, apparently from the plague. Ghulam Ahmad lived on to boast about the apparent divine sign of Babu Ilahi Bakhsh’s destruction:

کہاں ہےبابو الہی بخش صاحب مؤلّف عصاۓ موسی اکونٹنٹ لاہور؟ جس نے اپنے تئیں موسی قرار دےکر مجھے فرعون قرار دیا تھا اور میری نسبت اپنی زندگی میں ہی طاعون سے ہلاک ہونے کی پیشگوئی کی تھی اور میری تباہی کی نسبت اور بھی بہت سی پیشگوئیاں کی تھیں اخر وہ بھی میری زندگی میں ہی اپنی کتاب عصاۓ موسی پر جھوٹ اور افتری کا داغ لگا کر طاعون کی موت سے بصد حصرت مرا۔

Where is Babu Ilahi Bakhsh author of Asa-e-Musa, accountant, Lahore who declared himself Moses and myself Pharaoh and regarding me prophesied that I would die of plague within his lifetime, and many other prophecies relating to my destruction? In the end he too, in my lifetime, died of plague thereby placing a stain of falsehood and fabrication upon his book Asa-e-Musa. (Ruhani Khaza’in v.23 p.3; Chashma-e-Ma’rifat)

Coming of Two Prophets When the Antichrist Emerges

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

My beloved master the holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:

إنه لم يكن نبي إلا وقد أنذر الدجال أمته ألا وإنه أعور عين الشمال وباليمنى ظفرة غليظة بين عينيه كافر يعني مكتوب ك ف ر ويخرج معه واديان أحدهما جنة وأخرى نار فناره جنة وجنته نار فيقول الدجال للناس ألست ربكم أحيي وأميت ومعه ‌نبيان ‌من ‌الأنبياء إني لأعرف اسمهما واسم آبائهما لو شئت أن أسميهما سميتهما أحدهما عن يمينه والآخر عن يساره فيقول ألست بربكم أحيي وأميت فيقول أحدهما كذبت فلا يسمعه أحد من الناس إلا صاحبه ويقول الآخر صدقت ويسمعه الناس وذلك فتنة ثم يسير حتى يأتي المدينة فيقول: هذه قرية ذاك الرجل فلا يؤذن له أن يدخلها ثم يسير حتى يأتي الشام فيهلكه الله عند عقبة أفيق

There wasn’t a prophet except he warned his Ummah about the Dajjal. Beware, he is blind in the left eye and his right eye is protruding. Between his eyes is written K F R. He will come with two valleys, the first is a garden and the second is a fire. But his fire is a garden and his garden is fire. The Dajjal will say to the people: “Am I not your Lord, giving life and death?” And there shall be with him two prophets from among the Prophets. I know their names and the names of their fathers. If I wished I could name them. The first of them at his right side and the other at his left side. When he [Dajjal] says: “Am I not your Lord, giving life and death?” the first [prophet] will say “you have lied” but no one from the people will hear him except his companion, the second [prophet] who will say to him “you have said the truth” which will be heard by the people, and that shall be a trial. Then he will travel until he comes to the city and say “this is the town of that man” but he will be prevented from entering it. Then he will travel till he comes to the Levant and Allah shall destroy him at the slope of Afiq (Musnad Abi Daud at-Tayalisi; v.2 p.430):

Dr. Muhammad bin Abdul-Muhsin at-Turki in his checking of this Musnad declared the Hadith ‘isnaduhu hasan’.

This narration is interesting in that it speaks of the future appearance of two Prophets عليهما السلام calling into question the traditional or standard interpretation of the doctrine of khatm an-Nubuwwah.

However, another version of this Hadith explains that the two Prophets are in fact two Angels that come in the form of Prophets:

‌معه ‌ملكان من الملائكة يشبهان نبيين من الأنبياء لو شئت سميتهما بأسمائهما وأسماء آبائهما

He [Dajjal] comes with two Angels from among the Angels, resembling two Prophets from among the Prophets. If I wished I could name them (Musnad Ahmad; v.36, p.258):

However, in his checking of the Musnad, Shuaib Arnaut declared this narration da’if (weak).

There appears to be some connection between this prophesy of two Prophets who appear during the time of the Dajjal and the Two Witnesses spoken of in the eleventh chapter of the Christian Book of Revelation, who are killed by the Beast. Some early Christian theologians like Tertullian, Irenaeus and Hippolytus of Rome, explained that the Two Witnesses are the two ancient prophets Enoch and Elijah who did not die but were taken by God from this world alive. Incidentally, some Muslims believe that the prophets Idris [Enoch] and Ilyas [Elias] are alive like Jesus. It is also said that the man whom the Dajjal shall kill and resurrect is al-Khidr عليه السلام

Al-Zajjaj Refuting Interpretation of 4:159

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على سيدنا ومولانا محمد

وبارك وسلم وصلى عليه

The famed grammarian, Abu Ishaq al-Zajjaj (d. 922 CE), refuted the interpretation of 4:159 that the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) will all believe in Jesus before Jesus’s death:

وقال بعضهم إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ أي سيؤْمن بعيسى إِذا نزل لقتل المسيح

الدجَّال وهذا بعيدُ في اللغَةٍ لأنه قال وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ

والذين يبقون إِلى ذلك الوقت إنما هم شرذمة منهم ولكنه يحتمل أنهم كلهم

يقولون إن عيسى الذي ينزل لقتل الدجال نحن نؤمن فيجوز على هذا

واللَّه أعلم بحقيقته

Some of them say: ‘except they will believe in him’ that is, they will believe in Jesus when he descends and kills the Antichrist. But this is far-fetched linguistically, because He said ‘and there is none from the People of the Scripture except will believe in him before his death’ while they who remain at that time will only be a fragment from among them [the People of the Scripture]. But if it means that all of them say ‘Verily, Jesus will descend and kill the Antichrist and we believe in him’ then this [meaning] would be permissible. And Allah knows best its reality (Ma’ani al-Quran; v.2, p.130):

In other words, according to the logical explanation of al-Zajjaj, the idea that 4:159 means the People of the Scripture will believe in Jesus during his second advent when he slays the Antichrist is far-fetched, because 4:159 emphasizes the fact that all of the People of the Book will believe in him, whereas the People of the Book, Jews and Christians, who will presumably be alive during the second advent and believe in Jesus, are only a fraction of the entirety of the People of the Book, the vast majority of whom will have died before Jesus returns.

Add to this the fact that even during the time of the second coming, the Jews who will follow the Antichrist will not believe in Jesus but oppose him and his followers, and as a consequence of that opposition, the Muslim army shall exterminate them.

When Caesar Dies There is No Caesar After Him

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على سيدنا ومولانا محمد

وبارك وسلم وصلى عليه

Sayyidina Abi Hurairah رضى الله عنه narrated the following prophecy from the holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

إِذَا هَلَكَ كِسْرَى فَلاَ كِسْرَى بَعْدَهُ وَإِذَا هَلَكَ قَيْصَرُ فَلاَ قَيْصَرَ بَعْدَهُ وَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ لَتُنْفِقُنَّ كُنُوزَهُمَا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ

When Chosroes dies there is no Chosroes after him and when Caesar dies there is no Caesar after him. By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, you will spend their treasures in the path of Allah

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was referring to the Chosroes (Persian emperor) and Caesar (Roman emperor) of his time, namely, Khosrow II (d. 628 CE) that is Khosrow Parviz son of Hormizd IV, and Flavius Heraclius (d. 641 CE).

However, historically speaking, when Khosrow II was executed after a coup that enthroned his son Sheroe or Kavad II, there were several successive Persian emperors, beginning with Kavad II, then his son Ardashir III, then Shahrbaraz, then Boran daughter of Khosrow II, then finally the last Sasanian emperor was Yazdegerd III.

Likewise, Heraclius was not the last Byzantine emperor.

How then do we understand the prophecy “When Chosroes dies there is no Chosroes after him and when Caesar dies there is no Caesar after him”? The classical scholars and exegetes explained this apparent difficulty. For instance, Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani said:

وَقَدِ اسْتُشْكِلَ هَذَا مَعَ بَقَاءِ مَمْلَكَةِ الْفُرْسِ لِأَنَّ آخِرَهُمْ قُتِلَ فِي زَمَانِ عُثْمَانَ وَاسْتُشْكِلَ أَيْضًا مَعَ بَقَاءِ مَمْلَكَةِ الرُّومِ وَأُجِيبَ عَنْ ذَلِكَ ‌بِأَنَّ ‌الْمُرَادَ ‌لَا ‌يَبْقَى ‌كِسْرَى ‌بِالْعِرَاقِ ‌وَلَا ‌قَيْصَرُ ‌بِالشَّامِ ‌وَهَذَا ‌مَنْقُولٌ ‌عَنِ ‌الشَّافِعِيِّ

As for the difficulty in that the Persian Empire remained and their last [emperor, Yazdegerd III] was killed in the time of Uthman, and likewise the difficulty with the remaining of the Roman Empire, the answer to that is the meaning [of the Hadith] is Chosroes will not remain in Iraq and neither Caesar will remain in the Levant, and this is the statement of ash-Shafi’i (Fath al-Bari; v.6 p.625, published by Dar al-Ma’rifah)

Ibn Hajr also quoted the explanation of al-Khattabi:

قَالَ الْخَطَّابِيُّ مَعْنَاهُ فَلَا قَيْصَرَ بَعْدَهُ يَمْلِكُ مِثْلَ مَا يَمْلِكُ

Al-Khattabi said: It means there will be no Caesar after him who will rule as he ruled (ibid; p.626):

And this Hadith is relevant to the controversy around the finality of Prophesy. The Hadith with similar wording “there is no Prophet after me” should not be interpreted literally just as the Hadith “when Caesar dies there is no Caesar after him” should not be interpreted literally. Rather, as al-Khattabi explained, when Caesar dies there is no Caesar who will rule as he ruled, and likewise, after the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم there is no prophet who is like him, in the sense of being a prophet delegated with legislative authority.

Prophet's Name al-Aqib صلى الله عليه وسلم

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والعاقبة للمتقين

One of the distinctive names of our holy Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is al-Aqib. He said:

لِي خَمْسَةُ أَسْمَاءٍ أَنَا مُحَمَّدٌ، وَأَحْمَدُ، وَأَنَا الْمَاحِي الَّذِي يَمْحُو اللَّهُ بِي الْكُفْرَ، وَأَنَا الْحَاشِرُ الَّذِي يُحْشَرُ النَّاسُ عَلَى قَدَمِي، وَأَنَا الْعَاقِبُ

For me are five names: I am Muhammad, and Ahmad. I am al-Mahi through whom Allah effaces unbelief. I am al-Hashir after whom the people are gathered, and I am al-Aqib

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

In another version of this Hadith, there is the additional wording:

وَأَنَا الْعَاقِبُ الَّذِي لَيْسَ بَعْدَهُ أَحَدٌ

I am al-Aqib after whom there is none

(Sahih Muslim)

And in yet another version, there occurs the additional wording:

وَالْعَاقِبُ الَّذِي لَيْسَ بَعْدَهُ نَبِيُّ

and al-Aqib is he after whom there is no prophet

(Sahih Muslim)

This additional wording in which the name al-Aqib is explained to mean ‘he after whom there is no prophet’ is not found in any report collected by Imam al-Bukhari in his Sahih, but rather occurs in a version collected by Imam Muslim in his Sahih. The great Hanafi scholar Ali al-Qari has explained that this additional wording is not in fact from the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم but is commentary on the name al-Aqib by either a Sahabi or someone after:

الظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ هَذَا تَفْسِيرٌ لِلصَّحَابِيِّ أَوْ مَنْ بَعْدَهُ وَفِي شَرْحِ مُسْلِمٍ قَالَ ابْنُ الْأَعْرَابِيِّ ‌الْعَاقِبُ الَّذِي يَخْلُفُ فِي الْخَيْرِ مَنْ كَانَ قَبْلَهُ

It is obvious that the words ‘and al-Aqib is he after whom there is no prophet’ have been added as a commentary by a companion or someone afterwards. Ibn al-A’rabi states that al-Aqib refers to someone who succeeds another person in goodness (Mirqat al-Mafatih; v.10, p.49):

Imam Muhammad Tahir al-Fattani: Meaning of No Prophet After Me is No Prophet Who Abrogates Shariah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The great Imam and scholar, Muhammad Tahir al-Fattani al-Gujarati (d. 986 H), accepted the statement attributed to Mother of the Believers A’ishah سلام الله عليها which I previously quoted “do not say there is no prophet after him” and explained that the Hadith “there is no prophet after me” means:

وعن عائشة قولوا إنه خاتم الأنبياء ولا تقولوا لا نبي بعده وهذا ناظر إلى نزول عيسى وهذا أيضًا لا ينافي ح لا نبي بعدي ‌لأنه ‌أراد ‌لا ‌نبي ‌ينسخ ‌شرعه

And it is narrated from ‘Ā’ishah: ‘Say that he is the Seal of the Prophets and do not say: There will be no prophet after him’. This aims at the decent ‘Īsā, and this also does not contradict the Hadīth ‘There will be no prophet after me’, because he meant that no prophet will abrogate his sharī‘ah.” (Takmilah Majmaʻ bihar al-anwār fī gharāʼib at-tanzīl wa-latāʼif al-akhbār; v.5, p.464):

Imam al-Razi: Ascension of Jesus in Rank not Place or Direction

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Those Muslims who insist Jesus of Nazareth was raised to Heaven alive in his body quote from the Quran, Surah 3:55:

اِذۡ قَالَ اللّٰہُ یٰعِیۡسٰۤی اِنِّیۡ مُتَوَفِّیۡکَ وَ رَافِعُکَ اِلَیَّ

When Allah said, ‘O Jesus, I will cause you to die and raise you to Myself’

Firstly, it should be noted that the rafa (ascension) of Jesus is to occur after his wafah (death), and that clearly indicates a spiritual ascension, when the soul is taken from the body by the Angel of Death and he ascends with it into Heaven.

Secondly, Imam Fakhruddin al-Razi has explained that the rafa of Jesus as spoken of in 3:55 is not the rafa of the body, or an ascension in terms of place and direction:

وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الْآيَةَ تَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ رَفْعَهُ فِي قَوْلِهِ وَرافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ هُوَ الرِّفْعَةُ بِالدَّرَجَةِ وَالْمَنْقَبَةِ، لَا ‌بِالْمَكَانِ ‌وَالْجِهَةِ، كَمَا أَنَّ الْفَوْقِيَّةَ فِي هَذِهِ لَيْسَتْ بِالْمَكَانِ بَلْ بِالدَّرَجَةِ وَالرِّفْعَةِ

Know that this Ayah [3:55] proves that his raising, in the saying “And raise you to Myself” is the raf’ah of rank and status, not place and direction (Tafsir al-Kabir; v.8, p.77, published by Darul Fikr):

Sayyidatuna Aishah (RA): Say He is Seal of Prophets But Don't Say 'No Prophet After Him'

 باسمك اللهم

اللهم صلى على سيدنا محمد

The Mother of Believers, sayyidatuna A’ishah سلام الله عليها reportedly said:

قُولُوا خَاتَمُ النَّبِيِّينَ وَلَا تَقُولُوا لَا نَبِيَّ بَعْدَهُ

Say ‘Seal of the Prophets’ but do not say ‘there is no prophet after him’

(Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah; v.14, p.521, published by Dar Kunuz Ishbiliya)

In his checking, Sa’d bin Nasir bin Abdul-Aziz Abu Habib ash-Shathri declared this narration sahih.

But it is argued that if the narration is authentic, the intention of sayyidatuna A’ishah is merely to affirm the second coming of Jesus. Those who make this argument point to the subsequent narration of another companion, al-Mughirah bin Shu’bah رضى الله عنه:

قَالَ رَجُلٌ عِنْدَ الْمُغِيرَةِ بْنِ شُعْبَةَ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ خَاتَمِ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ لَا نَبِيَّ بَعْدَهُ قَالَ الْمُغِيرَةُ حَسْبُكَ إِذَا قُلْتَ خَاتَمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ فَإِنَّا كُنَّا نُحَدَّثُ أَنَّ عِيسَى خَارِجٌ فَإِنْ هُوَ خَرَجَ فَقَدْ كَانَ قَبْلَهُ وَبَعْدَهُ

A man said in the presence of al-Mughirah bin Shu’bah: “Blessing of Allah upon Muhammad, Seal of the Prophets, there is no prophet after him”. Mughirah said: “It is sufficient for you to say ‘Seal of the Prophets’ for we were informed that Jesus shall come, so he is both before him and after him.” (ibid):

Firstly, the narration attributed to al-Mughirah رضى الله عنه is considered weak due to the weakness of the narrator Mujalid.

Secondly, the fanatics of the so-called Khatm un-Nubuwwah movement claim that the second coming of Jesus, a Prophet of God, does not violate the finality of Muhammad’s Prophesy because Jesus was made a Prophet prior to Muhammad عليهما السلام

Yet according to this narration, al-Mughirah bin Shu’bah rejected such a feeble attempt at reconciling the two apparently contradictory doctrines of the second coming of the Messiah and the finality of Prophesy, when he said that Jesus is a prophet both prior to and subsequent to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

From the perspective of the fanatics of the Khatm un-Nubuwwah movement, there is nothing wrong with the man’s statement “blessing of Allah upon Muhammad, Seal of the Prophets, there is no prophet after him”, indeed, this is their very slogan. Then how do they explain Mughirah’s رضى الله عنه correcting of the man and explaining to him that it is sufficient to simply say that Muhammad is Seal of the Prophets without adding ‘there is no prophet after him’?