Mushrikun Mujadids?
page-template,page-template-full_width,page-template-full_width-php,page,page-id-19613,page-child,parent-pageid-18213,bridge-core-1.0.6,do-etfw,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-18.2,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_top,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.13.0,vc_responsive

Mushrikun Mujadids?

This article is in response to a anti Ahmadi article full of falsehood, called “The Mushrikun Mujadids”. Firstly, it upsets me that they have put the word mushrikun next to the word mujadids, but this is not new. They have not only mocked mujadids, but also the Prophets of Allah. May Allah Guide them to the truth, Ameen.


The Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw stated:


إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَبْعَثُ لِهَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ عَلَى رَأْسِ كُلِّ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مَنْ يُجَدِّدُ لَهَا دِينَهَا


Meaning, “Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years, the one who will revive the religion” (Sunan Abi Dawud, Hadith #4278)


The mujadids of Islam were all amazing Muslims, accepted by Ahmadi Muslims as well. However, even within the mujadids there is dispute on some matters. One should not compare a mujadid with a Prophet of Allah, rather they are only sent to remove some innovations, but not all. For example, the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw gave the title of Just arbitrator to the Promised Messiah and not any mujadid. It is obvious that the Messiah would revive the faith completely, in comparison to the mujadids who would have a much smaller task. Hadhrat Ahmadas was the mujadid of the 14th century, who was to be the Messiah and Mahdi as well.


The mujadids of Islam were all amazing Muslims, accepted by Ahmadi Muslims as well. However, even within the mujadids there is dispute on some matters. One should not compare a mujadid with a Prophet of Allah, rather they are only sent to remove some innovations, but not all. For example, the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw gave the title of Just arbitrator to the Promised Messiah and not any mujadid. It is obvious that the Messiah would revive the faith completely, in comparison to the mujadids who would have a much smaller task. Hadhrat Ahmadas was the mujadid of the 14th century, who was to be the Messiah and Mahdi as well.


The writers of the “Mushrikun Mujadids” have stated many false things in their article. Firstly they stated that all of those who believe that Hadhrat Isaas is alive in the heavens are polytheists. This is completely false.


I would like to begin by making something clear. As Ahmadi Muslims, we believe that no mujadid was a mushrik. The writers of this article misquote Hadhrat Ahmadas by writing, that he said:


“It is rude to say that Isaas didn’t die, it is indeed shirk al-akbar [major polytheism]” (Ruhani Khazain, Volume 22, Haqiqat-ul-Wahi, Page 660)


This is completely out of context, and this will be proven. Before this is proven, I will quote a passage of Hadhrat Ahmadas from Dafi’ul Bala. He stated:


“It is the height of ignorance to look toward the heavens now to see when ibn Maryam shall descend. However, the ulema before me who held that ibn Maryam shall descend from the heavens due to their faulty interpretation are blameless in the sight of God, and they should not be criticised. There was no flaw in their intentions; rather, it was a misunderstanding on account of human weakness. May God forgive them, because they were not granted knowledge.” (Defence Against the Plague, Page 26)


Not only were the mujadideen forgiven, but all those scholars who were not granted the knowledge.


The Haqiqatul Wahi page which is misquoted, states the exact same thing. If we read a few lines after, Hadhrat Ahmadas excludes all those from shirk, who were not given the knowledge from him, nor were presented the arguments. It is shocking that a person has the courage to make a article titled with a complete lie. Never did any Ahmadi call any mujadid a mushrik.


Next the article quotes some mujadids to say that they believed that Hadhrat Isaas was alive in the heavens. Before I provide proofs from mujadids showing that Isaas has died, I would like to quote a reference from a tafseer of the non Ahmadi Muslims:


Next the article quotes some mujadids to say that they believed that Hadhrat Isaas was alive in the heavens. Before I provide proofs from mujadids showing that Isaas has died, I would like to quote a reference from a tafseer of the non Ahmadi Muslims:


إنما احتاج المفسرون إلى تأويل الوفاة بما ذكر لأن الصحيح أن الله رفعه إلى السماء من غير وفاة كما رجحه جمع من المفسرين، واختاره ابن جرير ووجه ذلك أنه صح في الأخبار عن النبي نزوله وقتله الدجال


Imam Shaukani has explained that the reason for the scholars have interpreted the death of Hadhrat Isaas, is because they read the word nazul for him the traditions of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw.


This clearly shows us that many of the scholars knew that the death of Hadhrat Isaas has clearly been mentioned in the Qur’an, but since they believed that he would descend, and did not completely understand those ahadith, they were forced to believe that heas is alive.


As mentioned earlier, there is a clear difference on the issue of the death of Isaas and no consensus, on him being alive. The mujadideen have differed on this issue.


Firstly, the sahaba all believed in the death of Hadhrat Isaas. Allah States:


وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ ۚ أَفَإِنْ مَاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انْقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَىٰ أَعْقَابِكُمْ ۚ وَمَنْ يَنْقَلِبْ عَلَىٰ عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَنْ يَضُرَّ اللَّهَ شَيْئًا ۗ وَسَيَجْزِي اللَّهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ


And Muhammad is only a Messenger. Verily, all Messengers have passed away before him. If then he die or be slain, will you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels shall not harm Allah at all. And Allah will certainly reward the grateful. (Chapter 3 verse 145)


Allah has made it extremely clear, that all Prophets before the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw have passed away.


There were false reports being spread during the Battle of Uhud, that the Holy Prophetsaw was killed. This verse refers to this incident and makes it clear that the rumor was false. However, the verse also tells us that even if the Prophet Muhammadsaw was killed, you should not lose your faith. Allah Made it clear that the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw was only a Prophet; and as other Prophets before him had died, so would he. But the God of Islam Lives forever.


We see from the above verses, that all verses support our view, rather than that of our opponents. Furthermore, the very first ijma of the sahaba which occurred during the death of our master, Hadhrat Muhammadsaw, not only proves that Hadhrat Isaas has died, but also that khalat means nothing other than death here:


حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ بِلاَلٍ، عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ عُرْوَةَ، عَنْ عُرْوَةَ بْنِ الزُّبَيْرِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ زَوْجِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَاتَ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ بِالسُّنْحِ ـ قَالَ إِسْمَاعِيلُ يَعْنِي بِالْعَالِيَةِ ـ فَقَامَ عُمَرُ يَقُولُ وَاللَّهِ مَا مَاتَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم‏.‏ قَالَتْ وَقَالَ عُمَرُ وَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَ يَقَعُ فِي نَفْسِي إِلاَّ ذَاكَ وَلَيَبْعَثَنَّهُ اللَّهُ فَلَيَقْطَعَنَّ أَيْدِيَ رِجَالٍ وَأَرْجُلَهُمْ‏.‏ فَجَاءَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَكَشَفَ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَبَّلَهُ قَالَ بِأَبِي أَنْتَ وَأُمِّي طِبْتَ حَيًّا وَمَيِّتًا، وَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ لاَ يُذِيقُكَ اللَّهُ الْمَوْتَتَيْنِ أَبَدًا‏.‏ ثُمَّ خَرَجَ فَقَالَ أَيُّهَا الْحَالِفُ عَلَى رِسْلِكَ‏.‏ فَلَمَّا تَكَلَّمَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ جَلَسَ عُمَرُ‏.‏ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ وَقَالَ أَلاَ مَنْ كَانَ يَعْبُدُ مُحَمَّدًا صلى الله عليه وسلم فَإِنَّ مُحَمَّدًا قَدْ مَاتَ، وَمَنْ كَانَ يَعْبُدُ اللَّهَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ حَىٌّ لاَ يَمُوتُ‏.‏ وَقَالَ ‏{‏إِنَّكَ مَيِّتٌ وَإِنَّهُمْ مَيِّتُونَ‏}‏ وَقَالَ ‏{‏وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ أَفَإِنْ مَاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انْقَلَبْتُمْ عَلَى أَعْقَابِكُمْ وَمَنْ يَنْقَلِبْ عَلَى عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَنْ يَضُرَّ اللَّهَ شَيْئًا وَسَيَجْزِي اللَّهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ‏}‏ قَالَ فَنَشَجَ النَّاسُ يَبْكُونَ ـ قَالَ ـ وَاجْتَمَعَتِ الأَنْصَارُ إِلَى سَعْدِ بْنِ عُبَادَةَ فِي سَقِيفَةِ بَنِي سَاعِدَةَ فَقَالُوا مِنَّا أَمِيرٌ وَمِنْكُمْ أَمِيرٌ، فَذَهَبَ إِلَيْهِمْ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ وَأَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، فَذَهَبَ عُمَرُ يَتَكَلَّمُ فَأَسْكَتَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَكَانَ عُمَرُ يَقُولُ وَاللَّهِ مَا أَرَدْتُ بِذَلِكَ إِلاَّ أَنِّي قَدْ هَيَّأْتُ كَلاَمًا قَدْ أَعْجَبَنِي خَشِيتُ أَنْ لاَ يَبْلُغَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ، ثُمَّ تَكَلَّمَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَتَكَلَّمَ أَبْلَغَ النَّاسِ فَقَالَ فِي كَلاَمِهِ نَحْنُ الأُمَرَاءُ وَأَنْتُمُ الْوُزَرَاءُ‏.‏ فَقَالَ حُبَابُ بْنُ الْمُنْذِرِ لاَ وَاللَّهِ لاَ نَفْعَلُ، مِنَّا أَمِيرٌ وَمِنْكُمْ أَمِيرٌ‏.‏ فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ لاَ، وَلَكِنَّا الأُمَرَاءُ وَأَنْتُمُ الْوُزَرَاءُ هُمْ أَوْسَطُ الْعَرَبِ دَارًا، وَأَعْرَبُهُمْ أَحْسَابًا فَبَايِعُوا عُمَرَ أَوْ أَبَا عُبَيْدَةَ‏.‏ فَقَالَ عُمَرُ بَلْ نُبَايِعُكَ أَنْتَ، فَأَنْتَ سَيِّدُنَا وَخَيْرُنَا وَأَحَبُّنَا إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم‏.‏ فَأَخَذَ عُمَرُ بِيَدِهِ فَبَايَعَهُ، وَبَايَعَهُ النَّاسُ، فَقَالَ قَائِلٌ قَتَلْتُمْ سَعْدَ بْنَ عُبَادَةَ‏.‏ فَقَالَ عُمَرُ قَتَلَهُ اللَّهُ‏.‏



Narrated ‘Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) died while Abu Bakr was at a place called As-Sunah (Al-‘Aliya) ‘Umar stood up and said, “By Allah! Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) is not dead!” ‘Umar (later on) said, “By Allah! Nothing occurred to my mind except that.” He said, “Verily! Allah will resurrect him and he will cut the hands and legs of some men.” Then Abu Bakr came and uncovered the face of Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ), kissed him and said, “Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you, (O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)), you are good in life and in death. By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, Allah will never make you taste death twice.” Then he went out and said, “O oath-taker! Don’t be hasty.” When Abu Bakr spoke, ‘Umar sat down. Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said, No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die.” Then he recited Allah’s Statement.:– “(O Muhammad) Verily you will die, and they also will die.” (39.31) He also recited:–


“Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed all Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful.” (3.145)


The people wept loudly, and the Ansar were assembled with Sad bin ‘Ubada in the shed of Bani Saida. They said (to the emigrants). “There should be one ‘Amir from us and one from you.” Then Abu Bakr, Umar bin Al-Khattab and Abu ‘baida bin Al-Jarrah went to them. ‘Umar wanted to speak but Abu Bakr stopped him. ‘Umar later on used to say, “By Allah, I intended only to say something that appealed to me and I was afraid that Abu Bakr would not speak so well. Then Abu Bakr spoke and his speech was very eloquent. He said in his statement, “We are the rulers and you (Ansars) are the ministers (i.e. advisers),” Hubab bin Al-Mundhir said, “No, by Allah we won’t accept this. But there must be a ruler from us and a ruler from you.” Abu Bakr said, “No, we will be the rulers and you will be the ministers, for they (i.e. Quarish) are the best family amongst the ‘Arabs and of best origin. So you should elect either ‘Umar or Abu ‘Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah as your ruler.” ‘Umar said (to Abu Bakr), “No but we elect you, for you are our chief and the best amongst us and the most beloved of all of us to Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ).” So ‘Umar took Abu Bakr’s hand and gave the pledge of allegiance and the people too gave the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr. Someone said, “You have killed Sad bin Ubada.” ‘Umar said, “Allah has killed him.” (Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith #3667, 3668)


Hadhrat Umarra believed that the Prophet Muhammadsaw did not die, and the verse quoted by Hadhrat Abu Bakrra to prove the death of the Prophetsaw, was Chapter 3 verse 145, which uses khalat. If Hadhrat Umarra or any other companion believed that Hadhrat Isaas was alive in the heavens, they would have brought this up as a response to Hadhrat Abu Bakrra. No one said anything of such sort, which proves that none of them had such a belief after this ijma.


The very first consensus of sahaba proves both that Hadhrat Isaas has died, and also that the meaning of khalat means nothing other than death in this context. Hadhrat Umarra was so devastated that he was unable to compose himself and fell to the floor.


It is narrated:

فَعَقِرْتُ حَتَّى مَا تُقِلُّنِي رِجْلَايَ وَحَتَّى أَهْوَيْتُ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ حِينَ سَمِعْتُهُ تَلَاهَا ، عَلِمْتُ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَدْ مَاتَ ” .

“I became afraid. Both my legs began to tremble, so much so that when I heard that the Holy Prophet Muhammadsaw had passed away, I fell to the ground” (Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith #4452, 4453)


Furthermore, we see that Hadhrat Umarra had a similar belief in regards to the Holy Prophetsaw as the Muslims have today of Hadhrat Isaas. Hadhrat Umarra stated that The Prophet Muhammadsaw would return and kill the hypocrites, which was of course said only because of him being in a state of shock.


Another narration in regards to the same incident states the following:
حَتَّى تَلاَهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، فَتَلَقَّاهَا مِنْهُ النَّاسُ كُلُّهُمْ فَمَا أَسْمَعُ بَشَرًا مِنَ النَّاسِ إِلاَّ يَتْلُوهَا


“…Till Abu Bakr recited it and all the people received it from him, and I heard everybody reciting it” (Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith #4452, 4453)


This further proves that there was a complete ijma on this belief. No companion dared to disagree or raise an objection that “No Abu Bakr! Hadhrat Isaas is still alive in the heavens”. The non Ahmadi Muslims try to quote some sayings but they are all fabricated and disprove their view, even if quoted. The reason is because the narrations (which are not authentic) claim that The Prophet Muhammadsaw has been raised in the same way Hadhrat Isaas has been raised. This would also prove the death of Isaas as the Prophetsaw was on earth rather than physically in the heavens.


Any other tradition attributed to some companions in regards to Hadhrat Isaas being alive in the heavens, have two possibilities only. The first one being that such a belief was held by them only before this ijma, and the second one being that it had happened after but these traditions are not authentic, and contradict not only the Qur’an and other sahih ahadith, but also the ijma of the sahaba.


Another important point is that the sahaba gave sermons after this incident and went to the extent of mentioning the death of Hadhrat Isaas by name.
It is stated in Tarikh-e-Tabari:


حدثنا عبيد الله ، قال : أخبرنا عمي ، قال : أخبرنا سيف ، عن إسماعيل بن مسلم ، عن الحسن بن أبي الحسن ، قال… فقالت عبد القيس : لو كان محمد نبياً لما مات ؛ وارتدوا ، وبلغه ذلك فبعث فيهم فجمعهم ، ثم قام فخطبهم ، فقال : يا معشر عبد القيس ؛ إني سائلكم عن أمر فأخبروني به إن علمتموه ولا تجيبوني إن لم تعلموا . قالوا : سل عما بدا لك ، قال : تعلمون أنه كان لله أنبياء فيما مضى ؟ قالوا : نعم ، قال : تعلمونه أو ترونه ؟ قالوا : لا بل نعلمه ، قال : فما فعلوا ؟ قالوا : ماتوا ، قال : فإن محمداً صلى الله عليه وسلم مات كما ماتوا ، وأنا أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمداً عبده ورسوله ، قالوا : ونحن نشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمداً عبده ورسوله ؛ وأنك سيدنا وأفضلنا


Ubaidullah narrated to us, he said: “My uncle said: Saif (bin Umar) narrated from Isma’il bin Muslim, (he) from Hasan bin Abi Hasan, he said: … So the abd Al-Qais said: “If Muhammad were a prophet, why did he die?” and they turned into apostates and this news reached him (Jarud). So, he reached them and gathered them and then addressed them: ‘O people of Abd Al-Qais, I ask you of a matter so answer me if you know it and do not respond if you do not know.’ They said: “Ask of the matter that concerns you!”. He said: “Do you know in the past there have been Prophets from Allah?” They said: “Yes”. He said: “Do you know that or do you just perceive it?” They replied: “No, we know if it”. He said: “What happened to them all?” They said: “They died!” He said: “So if Muhammad died as they (all) died, I testify there is no deity but Allah and Muhammad is his Servant and Messenger.” They said: “And we also testify that there is no deity but Allah and Muhammad is his Servant and Messenger. And you (O Jarud) are our leader and the best of us.” (Tarikh-e-Tabari, Volume 3, Page 302)


It is also stated in the Sirat al Rasul book of Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, a widely respected scholar of Islam:


أنه قال : ما شهادتكم على موسى ؟ قالوا : نشهد أنه رسول الله . قال : فما شهادتكم على عيسى ؟ قالوا : نشهد أنه رسول الله قال وأنا أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا عبده ورسوله . عاش كما عاشوا ، ومات كما ماتوا . وأتحمل شهادة من أبى أن يشهد على ذلك منكم . فلم يرتد من عبد القيس أحد


“He (Jarud bin Ma’la) said (to his tribe); “What is your testimony regarding Moses?” They said: “We testify he was a Messenger of Allah.” He said: “What is your testimony regarding Jesus?” They said: “We testify he was a Messenger of Allah.” He said: “And I testify that there is no other deity except Allah and Muhammad is his servant and Messenger. He lived as they lived, and died as they died. And I imply the testimony on the ones who among you refuses to testify. So no one remained apostate from Abd Al-Qais” (Mukhtasar Siraat Al Rasul, Under 3:145, Chapter on Apostasy of the People of Bahrain)


Having established the ijma of the sahaba, we now move to some mujadids who held the belief that Hadhrat Isaas has died. Many held the view that he had died, but that there would also be a second coming. This is exactly what we as Ahmadi Muslims believe as well. Hadhrat Isaas has died a natural death, but had to have a second coming. That second coming is none other than Hadhrat Ahmadas of Qadian.


Here are the views of some famous mujadids:


It is stated about Hadhrat Imam Malikrh :




“And most have said that Isaas has not died, but Imam Malik said he had died at the age of 33 years.” (Majma al Bahar)


It is also stated in the Sharh of Sahih Muslim:


“In the Utbiyya, it is written that Malik said that Jesus, son of Mary, died”
(Ikmal-al-ikmal, Sharh of Muslim, Volume 1, Page 265)


We find no statement of Hadhrat Imam Abu Hanifa going against this statement of Imam Malik. Hadhrat Imam Malikrh believed in the death of Isaas but also in his latter day descent, in the same way Ahmadi Muslims do.


Hadhrat Imam Ibn Hazmrh stated:



“Jesus, peace be upon him, was neither killed nor crucified, but God caused him to die and then raised him. The Almighty has said: ‘They did not kill him or crucify him’; and ‘I will cause thee to die and exalt thee’; and ‘I (Jesus) was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst cause me to die Thou wert the Watcher over them’ and ‘Allah takes souls (yatawaffa) at the time of death’. Thus there are two kinds of wafat: sleep and death. Jesus in his words ‘When Thou didst cause me to die (falamma tawaffaita-ni)’ was not referring to sleep, but it is correct that by wafat he meant death.” (Mahalli fil Fiqh, Page 23)


In another writing, he has also explained that rafa of Hadhrat Isaas occurred after his death.


These two above quotations refute the so called attributed quote to Abu Al Hassan Ali Ibn Ismail al-Ashari. The writers of the article say that he claimed “There is a consensus among the community of the faithful that Isaas was raised alive to the heavens”. The writer has quoted something published from 1986, and has given no direct link to confirm the reference. However, the above references I have given prove that even if the mujadid did say such a thing, he was mistaken. However, once again, the writer of the article has given no proof at all.


He has also quoted Imam al Shafi, but as we have shown Imam Malik gave a completely different view. This further proves that not all mujadids were united on their belief in regards to Hadhrat Isaas.


The fourth century scholar he quotes is Abu Abdullah Muhammad Ibn Abdullah al Hakim al Nishaburi, but the passage he gives is not authentic. Hadhrat Ibn Abbasra‘s interpretation of 4:159 which is given is not authentic at all.  (Full answer:


The fifth century quotation of Imam al-Ghazali is supporting us.. It is written that Imam al-Ghazali stated:


“…then the Qur’an would be erased from hearts and not a word of it would be remembered; and the people would return to the poetry, songs, and tales of the pre-Islamic period; then the Anti-Christ would go forth and ‘Isa, the blessings and peace of God upon him, would descend to kill him.” (The Secrets of Pilgrimage, p.17)


Firstly, it confirms the hadith that nothing would be left of the Qur’an except its words, which many non Ahmadi Muslims ignore in today’s day and age. Secondly, even if Imam Ghazali had believed in the life of Isaas, we have already shown that Imam Malik had a different view, which proves that there was no united opinion on the life or death of Isaas. The attributed statement to Sayyid Abdul Qadir Jilani is not from any of his own books, rather from a book which claims to have collected his sayings. The answer to the statement of Imam Ghazali applies here as well.


Next, Ibn Taymiyya is quoted. Little does the author know that Ibn Taymiyya believed in the death of Isaas and that is his correct view.




“God has informed, in regard to the Messiah, that he told people only to worship God, ‘my Lord and your Lord’; and he was a witness of them so long as he was among them, but after his death (wafat) only God was the Watcher over them. So if some people have misreported him, or misinterpreted his words, or deliberately altered the religion he brought, the Messiah cannot be held responsible for it, for he was only a messenger whose duty was just the delivery of the message.” (Al-Jawwab as-Sahih )


This itself answers what is attributed to Ibn Taymiyya as the quote of the anti Ahmadis is from an earlier tafseer. Secondly, we do not deny that Ibn Taymiyya believed in the second coming of a messiah, in the same way Ahmadi Muslims do.


Next the article quotes Ibn Hajar al Asaqalani but forget that in his Fathul-Bari he quoted:


وَقَالَ بن عَبَّاسٍ مُتَوَفِّيكَ مُمِيتُكَ


As stated earlier, many understood that Isa‑ has died, but because of the ahadith they were mistaken on the true meaning of the nazul of the Messiah.


Next Imam Suyuti is quoted, who did indeed believe that Hadhrat Isaas would return. However, he also agreed that Mutawaffika does mean death. He quotes in his tafsir:


أخرج ابن جرير وابن المنذر وابن أبي حاتم من طريق علي عن ابن عباس في قوله { إني متوفيك } يقول: إني مميتك.


Meaning, mutawaffika does mean death. Furthermore, his other proofs are placed as an attempt to keep Isaas alive as he misunderstood the ahadith of his second coming. Regardless of this, Imam Suyuti does not support the anti Ahmadis at all. He made it clear that wahi is still continued, and that the Messiah will receive wahi. At the same time, he explained that the hadith “La nabiyya ba’di” only refers to a law bearing prophet. He also stated:

من قال بسلب نبوته كفر حقا

Meaning, that anyone who says Isaas would lose his prophethood, has done kufr. (Hijajul Karamah)


Next the authors quoted Mujadid Alf Thani who also supported our views on khatme nabuwat. Despite being mistaken on the second coming of Hadhrat Isaas, he supports our view:

پس حصول کمالات نبوّت مر تابعان را بطریق تبیعت و وراثت بعد از بعثت ختم الرسل علیه وعلی آلہ وعلی جمیع الانبیاء والرسل الصلوات والتحیات منافی خاتمیت او نیست علیه و علی آلہ الصلوۃ وسلام فلا تکن من الممترین


‘The rising of prophets after the Khatamar Rasul Hazrat Muhammad, the Chosen One, peace and blessings be upon him, from among his own followers and as a heritage, does not in any way run counter to his status as the Khatamar rasul. Therefore, O reader, do not be among those who doubt.’ (Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Hazrat Mujaddid Alf Thani)


The last mujadid they have quoted is Shah Waliullah Dehlvi, who also believed that Hadhrat Isaas died.


He stated that mutawaffika does mean death:



Now I ask the authors, why they are unable to provide the 13th century and 14th century mujadids? The problem is, they have had no mujadid since the 13th century because Hadhrat Ahmadas was the true one, and now his khulafa continue to protect the true teachings of Islam.


I will now briefly answer all of the misquoted quotations the author has attributed, to Hadhrat Ahmadas.


1) He claims that Hadhrat Ahmadas stated:

“It would, therefore, be a daring invention to say that the bodily ascent of Jesus to heaven and his expected descent has been a matter of consensus.” (Kitab-ul-Bariyyah, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 13, pp. 221 footnote)


There is no allegation which can possibly be raised from this statement. There is absolutely no consensus that Hadhrat Isaas bodily went to the heavens and would bodily descend. In fact, the first ijma of the sahaba was that Hadhrat Isaas and all other prophets before the Prophet Muhammadsaw have died. Secondly, in the very same passage, Hadhrat Ahmadas names Ibn Taymiyya, and Ibn Qayyim as well. He also speaks of the belief of Ibn Arabi, which also supports our view.


2) He claims that Hadhrat Ahmadas stated:


“We have established fully that the belief that Jesus had ascended bodily to heaven is not  supported by the Holy Qur’an and true Ahadith. It seems to be based upon senseless and contradictory speculation… (This horrible translator removed the words, of in this age from Hadhrat Ahmadas‘s works!) If these meaningless speculations were to be presented to the illiterate Bedouins of Arabia, or the inhabitants of the deserts of Africa, or the wild dwellers of the far off islands in the oceans, they might gain some acceptance; but we cannot hope to propagate among educated people such doctrines as are utterly opposed to reason, experience, laws of nature and philosophy.” (Izala-e-Auham, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 3, pp. 235-236)


Hadhrat Ahmadas is clearly explaining this view after he has brought the proofs, rather than speaking about the previous scholars who had made mistakes in their understanding. All of those scholars are forgiven. Secondly, the author lies in his translation and takes out one of the most important parts. Hadhrat Ahmadas clearly says in this philosophical age. He excluded all the past scholars.


3) …How misguided, therefore, are those who are waiting to see Jesus descend from heaven in the company of angels.” (Majmu‘ah Ishtiharat, vol. 3, p.327)


Indeed, all of those who still await for the descent of Isaas from the heavens are completely misguided, and this belief comes from the Christians who were converting into Islam. They had brought this false belief with them.


It is quite sad that an article was written on a complete lie. No Ahmadi ever believed that the mujadids were mushriks. May Allah Guide the Muslims to the true Islam and remove their hatred for His Messiah, ameen.