/ , , , , , , , , / Myth of ijma’ on the alleged death of ‘Eisa (AS)

Myth of ijma’ on the alleged death of ‘Eisa (AS)

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani claimed that the first ever Ijma’ of the Ummah was on the death of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him. (See Tuhfa Ghaznawiya pp.55-61 included in Rohani Khazain volume 15) 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s contention

His contention remains that as Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- recited Qur’an 3:144 to make the companions believe that Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- had died, it is an evidence for the death of all the earlier Prophets.
He then quoted (Tuhfa Ghaznawiya p.48, Rohani Khazain vol.15 p.581) a passage from al-Shahristani’s work al-Milal wal Nahl to convey that ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him- has also died. 

Qur’an 3: 144 reads: 

ูˆَู…َุง ู…ُุญَู…َّุฏٌ ุฅِู„َّุง ุฑَุณُูˆู„ٌ ู‚َุฏْ ุฎَู„َุชْ ู…ِู†ْ ู‚َุจْู„ِู‡ِ ุงู„ุฑُّุณُู„ُ ุฃَูَุฅِู†ْ ู…َุงุชَ ุฃَูˆْ ู‚ُุชِู„َ ุงู†ْู‚َู„َุจْุชُู…ْ ุนَู„َู‰ ุฃَุนْู‚َุงุจِูƒُู…ْ

‘And Muhammad is but a messenger, there have been messengers before him. So, if he dies or is killed, would you turn back on your heels?’
 
And the words from al-Shahristani go as; 

shahristani milal wal nahl

The highlighted words when translated mean; 

“’Umar bin al-Khattab said, Whoever said that Muhammad has died I will kill him with this sword of mine and he has been raised to the heavens as was raised ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him.” (al-Milal wal Nahl p.9) 

More narrations

Muhammad bin Sa’d quoted more narrations on the issue: 

ุนู† ุฃุจูŠ ุณู„ู…ุฉ ุจู† ุนุจุฏ ุงู„ุฑุญู…ู† ู‚ุงู„: ุงู‚ุชุญู… ุงู„ู†ุงุณ ุนู„ู‰ ุงู„ู†ุจูŠ، ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู…، ููŠ ุจูŠุช ุนุงุฆุดุฉ ูŠู†ุธุฑูˆู† ุฅู„ูŠู‡ ูู‚ุงู„ูˆุง: ูƒูŠู ูŠู…ูˆุช ูˆู‡ูˆ ุดู‡ูŠุฏ ุนู„ูŠู†ุง ูˆู†ุญู† ุดู‡ุฏุงุก ุนู„ู‰ ุงู„ู†ุงุณ؟ ... ู„ุง ูˆุงู„ู„ู‡ ู…ุง ู…ุงุช ูˆู„ูƒู†ู‡ ุฑูุน ูƒู…ุง ุฑูุน ุนูŠุณู‰ ุจู† ู…ุฑูŠู…، ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู…

Narrated Abu Salamah bin ‘Abd al-Rahman: The people rushed to the Prophet, may Allah bless him, in the apartment of ‘Aisha to look at him. They said: “How can he die since he is a witness to us and we are witnesses to other people? … No! by Allah! He has not died; but he has been raised as ‘Eisa ibn Maryam was made to ascend.(Tabaqat al-Kubra 2/271) 

The narration at first place proves that not merely ‘Umar but other companions too referred to ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him and be pleased with them all. 

It further proves that at the back of their minds the blessed companions had the idea that ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him- was alive and has been raised to the heavens and will return. 

A query killed

Lest one say, ‘Eisa’ –may Allah bless him- ascension was not physical because the companions said that while the body of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- was present in front of them, the response is that they said it out of the shock and inability to believe in the death of the Holy Prophet.
We read:
ูู„ู… ูŠุฒู„ ุนู…ุฑ ูŠุชูƒู„ู… ، ุญุชู‰ ุฃุฒุจุฏ ุดุฏู‚ุงู‡

“’Umar continued speaking till the edges of his mouth were filled with foam.” (Kanzul ‘Ummal, Hadith 18773) 
 
This was surely due to him being much affected by the tragedy. 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also said: 

kal majanin

“And due to the sorrow he (‘Umar) was like the people who lose senses.” (Tuhfa Ghaznawiya p.55 –R.K. vol.15 p.588) 

Moreover ‘Umar and other companions alluded to ‘Eisa’ –may Allah bless him- ascension to contend against the death of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- which also shows they belief in the life of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him. 

An interesting narration:

Another narration says: 

Anas bin Malik –may Allah be pleased with him- reported: 

ู„ู…ุง ุชูˆููŠ ุฑุณูˆู„ ุงู„ู„ู‡، ุตู„ู‰ ุงู„ู„ู‡ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ูˆุณู„ู…، ุจูƒู‰ ุงู„ู†ุงุณ ูู‚ุงู… ุนู…ุฑ ุจู† ุงู„ุฎุทุงุจ ููŠ ุงู„ู…ุณุฌุฏ ุฎุทูŠุจุง ูู‚ุงู„: ู„ุง ุฃุณู…ุนู† ุฃุญุฏุง ูŠู‚ูˆู„: ุฅู† ู…ุญู…ุฏุง ู‚ุฏ ู…ุงุช، ูˆู„ูƒู†ู‡ ุฃุฑุณู„ ุฅู„ูŠู‡ ูƒู…ุง ุฃุฑุณู„ ุฅู„ู‰ ู…ูˆุณู‰ ุจู† ุนู…ุฑุงู† ูู„ุจุซ ุนู† ู‚ูˆู…ู‡ ุฃุฑุจุนูŠู† ู„ูŠู„ุฉ

When the Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- died, people wept. Thereupon ‘Umar bin al-Khattab stood as a preacher in the mosque and declared, “I should not hear anyone saying that Muhammad was dead. He has only been summoned (by Allah) as Musa ibn ‘Imran had been summoned and he had remained away from his people for forty nights …” (Kanzul ‘Ummal, Hadith 18772)

Can one say that even Musa Ibn ‘Imran was summoned to Mt. Sinai (al-Tur) for forty days only spiritually or metaphorically?
 
These narrations are solid evidence that companions had firm belief in the ascension of ‘Eisa ibn Maryam very much like in the fact of Musa Ibn ‘Imran being summoned by Allah to Mt. Sinai –may Allah bless them both. And it was just the overwhelming moment of shock that was making them to relate these things with the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him. 

Abu Bakr’s speech and Qur’an 3:144:
 
Question remains as to the intent and implication of Abu Bakr’s speech on the occasion. Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- recited Qur’an 3:144 on this occasion. 

ูˆَู…َุง ู…ُุญَู…َّุฏٌ ุฅِู„َّุง ุฑَุณُูˆู„ٌ ู‚َุฏْ ุฎَู„َุชْ ู…ِู†ْ ู‚َุจْู„ِู‡ِ ุงู„ุฑُّุณُู„ُ ุฃَูَุฅِู†ْ ู…َุงุชَ ุฃَูˆْ ู‚ُุชِู„َ ุงู†ْู‚َู„َุจْุชُู…ْ ุนَู„َู‰ ุฃَุนْู‚َุงุจِูƒُู…ْ

‘And Muhammad is but a messenger, there have been messengers before him. So, if he dies or is killed, would you turn back on your heels?’ (Qur’an 3:144) 

Ahmadiyya allege that what he meant was to convey that all the prophets before the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless them all- had died and similarly he also died. And they contend, it implies according to him ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him- was also dead. 

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad argued that in the above verse the word ุฎَู„َุชْ (khalat) means death and he maintained that taking to mean otherwise was simply absurd. 

The fact of the matter, however, remains that his argument itself is totally absurd as it defies both the dictionary meaning and other usage of the word in the Holy Qur’an. 

Meaning of ‘khalat’ according to dictionary

Here the actual Arabic word is 'khalat' which comes from the word 'khala'. 

About 'khala' Raghib Isfahani says: 

ูˆุงู„ุฎู„ูˆ ูŠุณุชุนู…ู„ ููŠ ุงู„ุฒู…ุงู† ูˆุงู„ู…ูƒุงู† ู„ูƒู† ู„ู…ุง ุชุตูˆุฑ ููŠ ุงู„ุฒู…ุงู† ุงู„ู…ุถู‰ ูุณุฑ ุฃู‡ู„ ุงู„ู„ุบุฉ ุฎู„ุง ุงู„ุฒู…ุงู† ุจู‚ูˆู„ู‡ู… ู…ุถู‰ ุงู„ุฒู…ุงู† ูˆุฐู‡ุจ

"Al-Khullu (the root of khala) is used for both time and space and but as there is a nuance of the past in (its usage of) time so linguists take it to refer to the past." (Mufradaat al-Quran 1/158) .... and then he gives Quran 3:144 and 13:6 as its examples. 

Thus he makes it clear that the verse does not refer to the death of the Prophets before Prophet Muhammad –may Allah bless him. It does not even deal with their being alive or dead rather it only refers to their fact of their having lived in the past. 

Usage in the Qur’an

The word is used at many places in the Qur’an and other instances with this word defy the claim of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. 

In Surah al-Fath we read;
ุณُู†َّุฉَ ุงู„ู„َّู‡ِ ุงู„َّุชِูŠ ู‚َุฏْ ุฎَู„َุชْ ู…ِู†ْ ู‚َุจْู„ُ ูˆَู„َู†ْ ุชَุฌِุฏَ ู„ِุณُู†َّุฉِ ุงู„ู„َّู‡ِ ุชَุจْุฏِูŠู„ًุง

“The consistent practice of Allah that went on since before (qad khalat), and you will never find a change in Allah‘s consistent practice.” (Qur’an 48: 23)

No sane person would ever say that here ‘khalat’ can mean death by any stretch of imagination. 

When used for people:
 
It’s also wrong to say that when used for persons the word khala means death for we read in the Quran: 

ูˆَุฅِู†ْ ู…ِู†ْ ุฃُู…َّุฉٍ ุฅِู„َّุง ุฎَู„َุง ูِูŠู‡َุง ู†َุฐِูŠุฑٌ

“...and there never were a people, without a Warner having lived (khala) among them (in the past)” (Quran 35: 24) 

In relation to Qur’an 5:75
 
In fact the same wording is used in Qur’an 5:75 

ู…َุง ุงู„ْู…َุณِูŠุญُ ุงุจْู†ُ ู…َุฑْูŠَู…َ ุฅِู„َّุง ุฑَุณُูˆู„ٌ ู‚َุฏْ ุฎَู„َุชْ ู…ِู†ْ ู‚َุจْู„ِู‡ِ ุงู„ุฑُّุณُู„ُ

“The Masih, son of Maryam, is no more than a Messenger. There have been messengers before him…”
 
You should not be amazed that Mirza who took strong exception to above like translation of Qur’’an 3:144 himself translated 5:75 likewise. See Jang Muqaddas p.7 –Rohani Khazain vol.6 p.89 

untitled

If the above translation is perfectly valid for Qur’an 5:75 why is it not so for Qur’an 3:144? If I call it sham and hypocrisy then some people might take feel hurt. To such I call on to reflect on this game of double standards and self contradiction. 

Infact it will be logically wrong to say that either Qur’an 5:75 or 3:144 entail death of each and every Prophet before ‘Eisa or Muhammad –may Allah bless them both- respectively. As a matter of fact, while ‘Eisa Ibn Maryam walked this Earth another Prophet Yahya was also alive –may Allah bless them both. 

While it has to be accepted why can then it not be agreed to that while Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- walked this Earth ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him- was also alive? 

A very important point

It is well known that Qur’an 3:144 was revealed about the happenings during the Battle of Uhud which took place in the year 3 A.H. and it was certainly all about the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- alone. In the year 9 A.H. when a deputation of the Christians of Nejran came to the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- during argumentation with them he said. 

ุฃู„ุณุชู… ุชุนู„ู…ูˆู† ุฃู† ุฑุจَّู†ุง ุญูŠّ ู„ุง ูŠู…ูˆุช، ูˆุฃู†ّ ุนูŠุณู‰ ูŠุฃุชูŠ ุนู„ูŠู‡ ุงู„ูู†ุงุก؟

“Do you not know that Our Lord (Allah) is ever living but death will come to ‘Eisa?”
(Tafsir Al-Tabari 6/154 Narration. 6544, Ibn Abi Hatim 9/408. Both have brought it under verse 1 of Surah 3)
 
The verse that Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- was revealed in the year 3 A.H. and in the year 9 A.H. Prophet –may Allah be bless him- said that death had yet to come to ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him. So how on Earth can a true believer dare to stretch the verse to contend what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad suggested? 

For an exposition of Ahmadi gimmicks on the above quoted report see THIS

What did Abu Bakr refute

What was the notion that Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- debunked? This is what is to be considered with due attention. 

‘Umar and other companions in that moment of extreme grief and distress were awestricken and in that mode they make wrong analogies. They tried relating the case of Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- with that of Musa’ visit to Mt. Sinai (al-Tur) and of ‘Eisa’ ascension –may Allah bless them both. So the cases of Musa and ‘Eisa –may Allah bless them both- were the objects of their analogies while Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- was the subject. 

While the verse he recited speaks that there were Prophets before him, it relates death to Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- in person alone. So all Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- wanted to clarify was that the Prophet had died. He showed how the subject itself did not fit into the analogies and this has nothing to do with the object i.e. either the visit of Musa to Mt. Sinai or the ascension of the ‘Eisa –may Allah bless them both. 

Rather, the fact that ‘Umar and other companions –may Allah be pleased with them all- related the happening to ‘Eisa’ ascension itself shows that they held the same belief as is the unanimous belief of the whole Ummah in opposition to the Ahmadiyya. On it they were as certain as about Musa’ visit to Mt. Sinai. 

Had he any reservations about the object of analogy he would have refuted the object of analogy to kill the argument of ‘Umar and other companions–may Allah be pleased with them all. 

This shows even Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- was at par with other companions about the life and ascension of ‘Eisa ibn Maryam –may Allah bless him. He just did not agree that something of the similar had happened to Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him. 

Summary

1. ‘Umar and other companions referred to ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him- which shows they did believe that he was alive and had ascended to the heavens. 

2. The fact that he referred to ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him- while denying the death of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- shows he meant it literally for only physically alive ascension does away with the idea of death. 

3. ‘Umar –may Allah be pleased with him- also referred to Musa’ –may Allah bless him- going to Mt. Sinai (al-Tur) which proves, to him all he referred to including the ascension of ‘Eisa -may Allah bless him- was literal. It refutes the notion of spiritual ascension in ranks. 

4. The word ‘khalat’ in Qur’an 3:144 does not mean death and merely refers to something having been in the past. 

5. Nearly 6 years after the revelation of Qur’an 3:144 Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- confirmed that ‘Eisa Ibn Maryam had not been countered by death. 

6. The incident is rather evidence for the Islamic belief and not that of the Ahmadiyya. 

7. Statement of ‘Umar and other companions and the reaction of Abu Bakr and no further objection on it from any other companion is an evidence of ijma’, albeit a tacit one, on the life of ascension of ‘Eisa –may Allah bless him- as much literal like Musa’ visit to Mt. Sinai (al-Tur). 

I wish this paper helps common Ahmadi folk to develop an understanding of the things and look into the academic tricks of Ahmadiyya ‘intellectual elite.’ 

Indeed Allah knows the best!

For updates/revisions and new articles visit our new website

This article may have been revised. For updates/revisions and new articles visit ICRAA.org . You can find us on social media as well
Previous Post : Go to the previous Post
Next Post: Go to the Next Post

4 comments :

    1. Dear Brother,

      Indeed extremely interesting your points.

      You want to believe that the Israelite prophet Isa Ibn Maryam is still alive in Heavens for the past 2000yrs, a favour that not even the Most Blessed of Almighty Allah's Creatures the Holy Prophet Mohammad (saw) has not been Granted.

      In Sura Maryam Verse 31 the Holy Quran Says:

      "And He hath made me(Jesus) blessed wheresoever I (Jesus) be, and hath enjoined on me(Jesus) Prayer and Charity as long as I(Jesus) live"

      I can believe that in heaven Jesus is Praising The Lord Of All The Worlds but what about Charity. To whom is he making charity??????

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. Refutation of those who disbelieve in miracles

        Chapter 13 verse 38: “And it was not for a messenger to come with a sign except by permission of Allah. For every term is a decree.”
        The Quran informs us about many miracles/evidences (aya/beyyinat) given to previous messengers, as extraordinary evidences for their extraordinary claims. However, many dogmatic sceptics or dogmatic followers of a particular teaching always managed to find excuses to blind themselves to those evidences and are too embarrassed to believe in miracles even though they believe in the hereafter, angels, jinns and revelations. They considered the miracles given to prophets to be magic, tricks, illusions or mythology. Some sects, perhaps because of their lack of appreciation of God’s power, tried very hard to deny the existence of miracles; they tried to transform them into natural events, or symbolic statements. Those who believe in the Quran will have no problem in accepting the examples of miracles given in the Quran. Miracles remove the doubts of those who sincerely seek for truth, and strengthen those who already acknowledged the message of Allah.
        The purpose of the miracles mentioned in the Quran makes sense: to support their missions in their lifetime and to show us the ultimate goals of scientific and technological progress, and to inspire us to repeat them by acquiring the knowledge of divine laws embedded in nature.
        The Quran repeatedly informs us that Allah does not change His Sunnah (law); and sending messengers with supporting miracles/signs has been God’s law.
        Below is a list of miracles/signs mentioned in the Quran:
        • Some of the Children of Israel are resurrected on
        Earth after being killed (2:56).
        • Moses causes 12 springs to gush forth (2:60).
        • A man dies and is resurrected after 100 years (2:259).
        • Abraham kills four birds and brings them back
        to life (2:260).
        • Zechariah’s wife gives birth while infertile (3:40).
        • Mary gives birth while being a virgin (3:47).
        • Jesus heals the blind, lepers (3:49).
        • Angels descend to fight alongside the
        prophet (3:125).
        • God speaks to Moses (4:164).
        • Moses turns his staff into a serpent (7:107).
        • Moses’ hand becomes pure white (7:108).
        The Quran states clearly that isa ibn maryam healed those born blind; hence Isa healed those who were physically born blind because nobody is born spiritually blind!
        So it’s easy for Allah to have raised the messiah alive and return him to earth near the end of time. Never did the Prophet (saw) say someone else by the character of isa will come but rather the messiah isa ibn maryam himself will return.

        Delete
    2. Waqar Akbar CheemaJanuary 3, 2012 at 6:16 PM

      Not a new "twisting" of the ayah fellow!

      First if Allah made something obligatory it does not mean he would be doing it every single moment .. if you say 2000 years have passed and he is in the heavens according to Muslim belief and Zakah (charity) is an annual obligation then i'll say

      Zakah (charity) is obligatory on one who has the amount that makes his subject to laws on zakah .. if you prove he has that amount or SURPLUS money, i'll tell you to whom he gives the charity

      And surely when he will descend, he will obviously give the due in charity as he will become the leader of Muslims and will make conquests

      So you have no argument at all. much more can also be said ... in short, only the one who has surplus money gives in charity, no matter how less he spends himself, bring me the proof that he has enough amount that he should be expected to give charity, then i shall answer you

      Indeed Allah knows the best!

      ReplyDelete
    3. "if you prove he has that amount or SURPLUS money, i'll tell you to whom he gives the charity"

      I don't know about Eesa's surplus money, but your comeback was pure gold, maashallah.

      ReplyDelete