The Jewish tradition, as is well known, contains expectations of a figure called the Messiah, who in Christian tradition is identified with Jesus. For the Jews, this figure is yet to come but even in Christianity the Messiah, although he came two thousand years ago in the person of Jesus, will accomplish his expected work in a future time upon his return. Thus the expectation of a future activity of the Messiah is common to Judaism and Christianity. In this article I discuss Islamic view of this expectation. As always, any discussion about Islam needs to be done at two levels: 1) in the light of the teaching of the Prophet as contained in the Qur`an and authentic ahadith and 2) in the light of other Muslim traditions.The Idea of the Messiah
The expectations about the Messiah are so varied that it seems impossible to construct a coherent picture that can be realized in real time. No wonder then that in Christianity the Messiah comes only to go away without fulfilling his main role.For the purpose of this article it is convenient to divide the views about the Messiah as follows:The word “messiah” means “anointed one” and refers to the practice of anointing individuals for a divinely ordained role such as a king1 or a priest2 or a prophet3 and gives three pictures of the expected Messiah.
The Return of Jesus
We now look at the belief in the return of Jesus in the light of the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (the Qur`an and authentic ahadith) and the Muslim traditions.THE QUR`ANThe Qur`an has no clear reference to the return of Jesus. An implicit reference is seen by some in two verses.1) In Surah 43 we find passages about Abraham, Moses, and Jesus in that order. In the passage about Jesus it is said:wa inna hu la ‘ilm al-sa‘ah, “surely he is (a means) of knowledge for the hour”.In opinions attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid, ‘Ikramah, Qatadah, Suddi, Dahhak, Abu al-‘Aliah and Abu Malik this is understood to refer to Jesus’ return before the Hour as its sign: he is a means for the knowledge for the Hour in the sense that upon his return people will know that the Hour is surely coming. To support this interpretation some have read ‘alam (sign) instead of ‘ilm (knowledge). A related shi‘ah interpretation, also held by some sunnis under shi‘ah influence is that the verse refers to the coming of al-Mahdi, who may or may not be identified with Jesus (Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, al-Sawa`iq al-Muhriqah).But the interpretation that sees in the verse a reference to the return of Jesus or the coming/return of al-Mahdi is only one of several interpretations. Thus some early authorities, e.g. Hasan Basari and Sa‘id bin Jubayr take hu (which could mean “he” or “it”) to refer to the Qur`an. That is: the Qur`an is the source of knowledge for the Hour.Still others interpret the verse as a reference to Jesus’ miracles – virgin birth, raising the dead – which show that resurrection is a real possibility.A fourth possible interpretation is that Jesus is a means of knowledge for the hour in its very simple sense that he taught belief in the hour, giving it a very important place in his preaching and spreading this belief in the world more successfully than any other prophet or teacher before him. His teaching, as summarized in Mark 1:14 and Matthew (4:17), centers around the proclamation: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near”. When the disciples are sent on a mission, they too preach the same message (Matthew 10:7, Mark 6:12, Luke 10:9). And before the end of his ministry he talks at length about the hour and its signs (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, John 14-17). As a result the belief in the hour became a firm and central element in Christianity, through which it spread far and wide.This fourth interpretation is preferable because it simply builds on the words “knowledge for the Hour” without importing references that are not found in the verse or anywhere else in the Qur`an. In the time of the Qur`anic revelation it was probably widely known that the belief in the hour had a very prominent position in the religion founded by Jesus.2) In 4:159, after denying that the Jews killed or crucified Jesus and after stating that God raised him to himself, the Qur`an says:wa in min ahl al-kitab illa la yu`minanna bi hi qabla mawt hi (And there is none of the people of the book but will believe in him before his death).These words also can be and have been interpreted in different ways, depending on how the pronouns are understood.One interpretation takes “his death” as “Jesus’ death” and “believe in him” as “believe in Jesus” That is, before Jesus dies all people of the book, i.e. the Jews will have come to believe in him. This assumes that Jesus has not yet died, for which support is found in the statement that God raised him to himself.A second interpretation again takes “believe in him” as “believe in Jesus” but takes “his death” as “death of one of the people of the book”. That is, none of the people of the book – sometimes taken to refer to Jews, since the Christians already believe in Jesus – dies without first coming to faith in Jesus as the true messenger of God. Ibn ‘Abbas said that even if a Jew dies by beheading (unexpectedly) his soul does not depart from the body till he believes in Jesus. Ibn ‘Abbas was asked what if someone among the people of the book dies by falling from a wall. He replied that he will believe during the fall. In addition to Ibn ‘Abbas this opinion is attributed to Muhammad bin Sirin, Dahhak and Juwayriah. The interpretation also produced an alleged variant reading of the Qur`an: instead of mawt hi (his death), Ubayy is alleged to have read mawt him (their death, i.e. the death of the people of the book). One reason given to prefer this interpretation over the first one is that it allows the verse to be applied without exception to all generations of the people of the book that arose after Jesus, whereas the interpretation which takes “his death” as the death of Jesus would apply only to the generation that lived at the time of Jesus’ return and death.Another interpretation attributed to ‘Ikramah, takes “believe in him” as “believe in Muhammad” and “his death” in the sense of “the death of the people of the book”. This gives the same meaning as the first interpretation except that the faith attained by the people of the book before dying is faith in the Prophet Muhammad.Thus there is no Qur`anic verse that clearly refers, or is generally believed by commentators to refer to Jesus’ return. Moreover, there are verses that call into question the traditional picture of Jesus being taken to heaven alive only to return from there at some future time. Thus 3:55 talks of the death of Jesus as if it had already taken place, for, it reads: “And when God said, ‘O ‘Isa! I am going to cause you to die and raise you towards myself …’”. This suggests that Jesus died before being raised, in which case his raising is in some spiritual sense and not in a bodily sense, as is often assumed. In 19:31 Jesus says: God “has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah for as long as I am alive (hayy)”. The command to pay zakah (poor-rate) as long as one is alive fits much better with the picture of Jesus dying like other human beings during his stay on this earth rather than with the picture of his bodily ascension without death and his being alive in heaven. A couple of verses later in 19:33 Jesus says: “So peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die and the day I am raised to life”. This is best understood as the usual Qur`anic sequence of birth, death, and resurrection through which all human beings must pass. This explanation is further supported by the fact that exactly the same statement is made concerning John the Baptist earlier in 19:15: “And peace on him the day he was born, the day he dies and the day he is raised to life”. One may also note the parallel between the following two verses, one about Jesus and the other about Muhammad:And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; messengers have already passed away before him … (3:144)Al-Masih, son of Mary is no more than a messenger; messengers have already passed away before him … (5:75)MUWATTAThis, earliest extant collection of Hadith, compiled by Imam Malik (died 179 H) contains no reference to the return of Jesus. This may be explained by saying that Muwatta is primarily concerned with law and is not like the other more comprehensive collections. But this argument is only partially valid in view of the following:
Muslim traditions about the return of Jesus
Books of ahadith written in the third century do contain several traditions about the return of Jesus. In view of the above considerations it is doubtful that these traditions go back to the Prophet of Islam. They should be rather regarded as the views of some early Muslims, which, as we shall see later, nevertheless have some value and validity.BUKHARI AND MUSLIMOn any subject the traditions considered most reliable are usually those that are recounted by both Bukhari and Muslim. Such a tradition is called muttafaq ‘alay hi (agreed upon). There are two agreed upon ahadith about the return of Jesus.FIRST HADITH COMMON TO BUKHARI AND MUSLIMAbu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of God said: “How will you be when the son of Mary descends amongst you and your imam (is) from amongst you (wa imam kum min kum)?”The Arabic is identical in Bukhari and Muslim. The words “your imam from amongst you” can be understood in two ways: a) Jesus will descend as your imam; b) when Jesus will descend, you will have your own imam other than Jesus. The two interpretations seem to have given rise to other versions of the hadith, not agreed upon (muttafaq ‘alay hi). Thus we read in Muslim:Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of God said: “How will you be when the son of Mary descends amongst you and will be your imam (fa amma kum)?”In this hadith the interpretation a) is given a clear expression. When it is said that Jesus will be the imam of the Muslims it is understood that he himself will be a Muslim. This is clarified in the following version:From Abu Hurayrah: “The Messenger of God said: How will you be when the son of Mary would descend amongst you and would lead you as one amongst you (fa amma kum min kum)?” So I (Walid bin Muslim) said to Ibn Abi Dhi`b that al-Awza‘i related to us from al-Zuhri from Nafi‘ from Abu Hurayrah the words: “Your leader amongst you (wa imam kum min kum)”. Ibn Abi Dhi`b said: “Do you know what the words: ‘He would be your leader from amongst you (amma kum min kum) mean?’” I said: “Explain these to me.” He said: “He would lead you according to the book of your Lord and the Sunnah of your Messenger” (Muslim).The interpretation b), where Muslims have their own imam during the second coming of Jesus, finds expression in the following hadith:Jabir bin ‘Abd Allah is reported to say: I heard the Messenger of God say: “A section of my people will not cease fighting for truth and will prevail till the Day of Resurrection.” He said: “Jesus son of Mary would then descend and their (Muslims') commander (amir) would ask him to come and lead them in prayer, but he would say: ‘No, some amongst you are commanders over some (amongst you).’” This is the honor from God for this Ummah (Muslim).Whether Jesus himself will be imam of the Muslims or Muslims will have their own imam, there is consensus on the belief that Jesus will return as a follower of the Qur`an and Sunnah. This belief proceeds from two Islamic doctrines:
Important differences between the Christian and Muslim view of Jesus’ return
One important difference between the Christian and Muslim view of Jesus’ return is of course that in the Muslim view he will return as a follower of the Prophet Muhammad and will very closely relate with the Muslims. This is by no means unreasonable. For, if the returned Jesus will be anything like the Jesus of Nazareth who came to this world two thousand years ago, then it is natural to think that he will be neither acceptable to committed Christians nor to committed Jews – Christians, because Jesus is nothing like the second person of the Christian trinity, the Son of God who comes to be crucified for the salvation of the world; and Jews, because he was not acceptable to them during his first coming and nothing suggests that he will be acceptable to them during his second coming. But someone like Jesus of Nazareth can be easily backed by the Muslims.Another important difference between the Christian and Muslim views is that in the Muslim view Jesus’ return takes place in history as we know it, before the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment. Even in traditions in which Jesus’ return is a sign for the coming of the hour, the return does not play any role in bringing the hour nor does Jesus perform any special function in the hereafter. In the Christian tradition Jesus is presented as the eschatological “judge of the living and the dead”. But in Islam the final judge is God himself. In fact, Jesus, like other messengers (7:6), will himself be judged and questioned. The Qur`an even gives the interrogation of Jesus that will take place before God as the final judge:And when God will say, O ‘Isa son of Maryam! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides God, he will say: Glory be to you, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, you would indeed have known it; you know what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in your mind, surely you are the great knower of the unseen things.1 did not say to them aught save what you did enjoin me with: That serve God, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when you did cause me to die, you were the watcher over them, and you are witness of all things. If you should chastise them, then surely they are your servants; and if you should forgive them, then surely you are the Mighty, the Wise. God will say: This is the day when their truth shall benefit the truthful ones; they shall have gardens beneath which rivers flow to abide in them for ever: God is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with God; this is the mighty achievement. God’s is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is in them; and he has power over all things (5:116-120).Some questions raised by the belief in the return of Jesus
I have been asked the following question by some non-Muslim friends: Does the Muslim belief in Jesus’ return mean that Jesus is superior to Muhammad?As part of the answer, it should be first noted that in Islam there is a certain reservation to occupy oneself with the question, who is the greatest prophet? There are two reasons for this: 1) In the past, because of the tendency to glorify the founders of their religions and other great individuals, people have been misled to deify and worship them. This is particularly clearly seen in case of Jesus, since from history we can actually witness the stages of Jesus’ glorification that finally culminated in his widespread deification and worship. In order to avoid such errors, Islam stresses that God is the greatest and discourages too much glorification of human figures. 2) Islam wants to bring together different peoples into a single brotherhood/sisterhood under one true God. Too much preoccupation with the question as to who is the greatest prophet will create rivalries among different religious communities, which would unnecessarily hinder the process of bringing them together.In line with the above tendencies the Qur`an says that the Prophet and his followers “make no difference (nufarriqu) between any of his messengers” (2:285). This does not mean that all prophets are equal in status and rank but that all true prophets form a single brotherhood engaged in the same work and Muslims honor them all.Elsewhere the Qur`an says that God has favored some messengers above others and raised some in ranks (2:253, 17:55). Although, the Qur`an does not clearly say so, there is no doubt that the role given to the Prophet Muhammad makes him the greatest prophet. He is the prophet of God for all humanity (7:158, 10:57, 21:107, 25:1, 81:27 etc) and as the last prophet (33:40) he is also the prophet for all future time. He completes and perfects (5:3) the revelation given to earlier prophets.The two tendencies found in the Qur`an are also found in the Hadith except that the Hadith lacks the consistency of the Qur`an. Thus there are ahadith in which the Prophet tells his followers not to consider him superior to some other prophets.The Prophet said, "None of you should say that I am better than Yunus (i.e. Jonah)." (Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 624)The choice of Jonah here is significant. Jonah is a relatively minor prophet who is known to have made a terrible mistake. The idea probably is that Muhammad is not to be raised evenabove Jonah.A person came to God's Messenger and said: “O, the best of creation”; thereupon God’s Messenger said: “He is Ibrahim.” (Muslim, Book 030, Number 5841.)In another tradition, a Jew swears “by him who gave Moses superiority over all human beings!" A Muslim slaps him, whereupon the Jew goes to the Prophet and complains. The Prophet was angry with the Muslim and said:“Don't give superiority to any prophet amongst God’s prophets, for when the trumpet will be blown, everyone on the earth and in the heavens will become unconscious except those whom God will exempt. The trumpet will be blown for the second time and I will be the first to be resurrected to see Moses holding God’s Throne. I will not know whether the unconsciousness which Moses received on the Day of Tur has been sufficient for him, or he has got up before me.” [This may give the impression that Moses is superior to all the other prophets. In order to counter this impression, in some versions the Prophet adds:] “And I do not say that there is anybody who is better than Yunus bin Matta.” Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 626, Muslim Book 030, Number 5853).But despite this, traditions leave little doubt that God has appointed the Prophet as leader of humanity till the judgment day. Thus we read that when the Prophet was transported from the sacred mosque in Makkah to the site of the sacred mosque in Jerusalem, he met all the prophets and led them in prayer. Also, it is stated that if Moses were to come back to life, he will have the religious obligation to follow Muhammad. Likewise, when Jesus will return he will come as Muhammad’s followers. The spirit of the Qur`an and Hadith therefore is that while we should not be too occupied with glorifying the Prophet Muhammad above other prophets, as for example, the Christians are occupied in the glorification of Jesus, it is necessary for us to believe that the Prophet is the God-appointed leader and messenger for all humanity and for all times to come, for, otherwise he cannot perform his mission.As for Jesus’ rank among the prophets, he appears in the Qur`an and Hadith as one of the major prophets, but he is not the greatest of all the prophets after the Prophet Muhammad. Thus Jesus is included among the prophets whom the Prophet Muhammad meets during his ascension to heaven, but he is not the one who is found in the highest heaven. That place is sometimes given to Abraham and sometimes to Moses. The Qur`anic statements that God has favored some messengers or prophets above others is followed in one case by a reference to Moses (2:253) and in another case by a reference to David (17:55), although Jesus is also mentioned in one of them (2:253).It is thus not surprising that the return of Jesus is never understood by Muslims to imply his superiority over other prophets, much less over the Prophet Muhammad. This is not unlike the situation in Judaism. For most Jews Moses is the greatest of all prophets. Yet it is Elias or Elijah whose return in the end time is expected. To be sure Moses’ return is also sometimes expected but this expectation is relatively of late origin, is not found in the Old Testament, and is probably nowhere as widespread as the expectation of Elijah’s return.Which figure is expected to return usually depends not on his superiority but on the way his ministry ended. If his ministry ends suddenly, leaving the mission somewhat incomplete or if he disappears mysteriously, there develops a belief in his return. Thus mystery surrounds the final fate of Elijah and this seems to have led to the idea of his ascension and return. Likewise, among the shi‘ah there is the belief in the occultation and return of the 12th imam. It so happens that after the age of 6 the whereabouts of the imam were a secret shared only by a very few people and his final fate was no better known. This led to the belief in his occultation and return. The case of Jesus was probably similar. In order to escape the hostile authorities he hid himself and then disappeared. The tradition of his crucifixion probably arose as one explanation of what happened to him. Another explanation was that he ascended to heaven whence he will come back to complete his messianic work.In case of the Prophet Muhammad no belief in his return developed because his life and death were very public events. Also, he accomplished the mission that he was ordained by God to accomplish, as is in fact declared in the Qur`an (5:3). Finally, his return is not needed because he did not really leave the world. Through the well preserved words of the Qur`an and his Sunnah he has assumed a permanent authentic presence in the world. This is also why he is the last prophet: Through the Qur`an and Sunnah prophecy has become an ever-present reality. According to Muslims this cannot be said of earlier prophets because their words were not meant for all people and for all times and they were not preserved with the same degree of faithfulness as the Qur`an and the Sunnah.There is yet another reason the belief in Jesus’ return is not seen in Islam as a basis for his superiority over the Prophet of Islam is that the Muslim tradition views this return as taking place in the service of Islam. As a follower of the Prophet Muhammad and he will bring Christians and Jews under the fold of Islam by overcoming factors that have so far prevented this. In case of Christians, these factors are: the doctrine of redemption through the cross, Trinitarian conceptions of God, and Pauline rejection of the law. In case of the Jews these factors are: beliefs that make them see their nation, their ancient land, and their ancient Davidic kingdom much more important religiously than they actually are. Jesus upon his return will drive home to Christians the Islamic message that he was no more divine than Moses and other prophets, that his blood had nothing to do with man’s salvation and that the law is not nailed on the cross but is only adapted to changing circumstances. To the Jews he will drive home the Islamic message that although in the history of revelation and salvation some nations may be more important than others and God may even at times favor some above the others, as indeed he did in case of the children of Israel (2:47-48, 122-123, 7:138-141), neither the Jewish nation nor any other nation is permanently and unconditionally given a favored or chosen status (5:54, 62:6).Why could this message not be conveyed to Christians and Jews by the Muslims? Well, Jews and Christians have to find their way to Islam through their own internal developments. The return of Jesus represents those internal developments.Another question raised by the belief in the return of Jesus is: Does the return of Jesus mean that the Prophet was not the last prophet? How can it be said that there is no prophet after Muhammad when according to some ahadith Jesus, a prophet, will come again?This question has been discussed quite early by Muslims. It is raised and answered by Zamakhshari in his comment on 33:40: “If you ask how Muhammad can be the last of the prophets when Jesus will appear towards the end of the world? I shall reply that the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad means that no one will be endowed with prophethood after him. Jesus is among those upon whom prophethood was endowed before Muhammad. Moreover, Jesus will appear as a follower of Muhammad and he will offer prayers with his face towards the Qiblah of Islam, as a member of the community of the Muslims.” It is probably this question and answer that lies behind a saying attributed to ‘A‘isha, the Prophet’s wife: “Say that he (i.e., the Prophet) is khatam(seal) of the prophets, but do not say, there is no prophet after him.” The attestation of this saying is very late and no early oral authority is known for it. The saying conflicts with earlier traditions in which the Prophet himself says, “There is no prophet after me”, exactly the statement that ‘A‘ishah allegedly tells people not to say. The saying is probably one way to answer the question raised above. It is trying to tell us that while the Prophet Muhammad is indeed the last prophet, it is not quite accurate to say that no prophet will come after him since the return of the Prophet Jesus will take place after him.Reflections in the light of current circumstances
Although the ahadith about the return of Jesus probably do not go back to the Prophet, they are in some way valuable and valid. The very expectation among numerous and powerful followers of the Jewish and Christian religion of the coming/return of the Messiah will produce some figure claiming to be the Messiah. For the very fact that Christians are waiting for the second coming of Jesus and the Jews are waiting for the Messiah is enough to guarantee that some day some one will rise as the Messiah and attract numerous followers. Their will be a willful attempt to “fulfill” the messianic prophecies. This will play havoc in the world because of the number and power of Jews and Christians. The world has already tasted the disastrous results of the willful attempt to create and maintain with violence a Jewish state in fulfillment of Biblical ideas. More comprehensive attempts to fulfill the Biblical prophecies will result in even greater disaster.The figure that Judeo-Christian expectations will produce will not be very close to Jesus of Nazareth. That figure will have to live up to the Christian belief that Jesus was God the Son who was crucified for the salvation of the world. He will have to be the judge who will destroy those who do not believe in these doctrines. He will also in some way try to fulfill the expectations about the restoration of the Temple and of the Davidic kingdom that will rule the earth with a rod of iron.Evangelical Christians and Zionist Jews are already creating out of the Biblical prophecies plans for the future course of history leading to the coming of the Messiah or the return of Jesus and are willfully trying, with considerable power and money, to move events in the direction of those plans. There is an alliance between the Jews and Christians against Islam and Muslims, with a focus on the destruction of the Dome of the Rock even though the Christian plan also involves destroying those Jews that would not accept the crucified Son of God.Because of the willfulness involved and inherent contradictions of the Evangelical/Jewish alliance, the messianic “play” that will be enacted will be based on great deception. The leader presented as the Christ will try to be many things to many people. He will play at once on the traditional Christian beliefs, the Jewish nationalistic beliefs, and even Muslim beliefs. He will talk love and democracy but build and maintain his leadership by coalitions of wars, military might and money.In short, what Judeo-Christian expectation will produce will be the Dajjal (equivalent of Anti-Christ), predictions about whose coming are better attested in the Hadith than that of the return of Jesus. But humanity has an inbuilt ability to correct the evil that it sets in motion. Hence the evil brought by the Dajjal will generate opposition. Another leader will arise to oppose him from within the Judeo-Christian world that produced him in the first place. This leader will remind Jews and Christians of the true teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and lead them on that basis. For this reason he can be called a second Jesus, or, if you like, the returned Jesus, though not literally. While the Dajjal will derive support from powerful people, from military might, and from abundance of money and he will rule by fear even as he talks of love and democracy, “Jesus” will derive support from a vast majority of common people, from fair-minded, truth loving Jews, Christians and particularly Muslims all over the world. He will manage to defeat the Dajjal (mostly through political struggle) and restore some semblance of sanity, real compassion, justice, and prosperity to a world ravaged by the Dajjal. The victory of “Jesus” will necessarily deal a blow to the Christian incarnational and redemptive doctrines and to the Jewish nationalism, the main obstacles in the way of Islam. As these obstacles are removed, the world will be ready and willing to accept Islam. To the extent this “Jesus” will rise from the Judeo-Christian world, will be rejected by traditional Christians and Jews, will be supported by Muslims and will help in the final acceptance of Islam by most of the world, the traditions in Bukhari and Muslim and other books of Hadith have got it exactly right.The following section was added in response to questions from some Muslims:Why the ahadith about the return of Jesus, even the two found in both Bukhari and Muslim probably do not go back to the Messenger of God?
How we evaluate the reliability of ahadith depends on how we answer four questions:First, is the process of determining authentic ahadith a human science or is it an act of God inspiration? My answer is that it is a human science. This is also accepted by many scholars. To be sure, there is a story that the Prophet Muhammad used to appear to Imam Bukhari in dream and tell him which hadith he should include in his sahih. But this story is not taken seriously by scholars. In the vast corpus of discussions among Muslim fuqaha and muhaddithun we rarely if ever hear recourse to this story to argue that all ahadith in Bukhari are authentic.Second, if the process of determining authentic ahadith is a human science, has it reached its final development or can it be improved further to a considerable degree? My answer is that it can be improved further to a very high degree. The basis of this is that even in exact sciences such as physics human beings have been proved wrong each time they concluded that a science has reached its final development. The science of Hadith is clearly an inexact science requiring much use of subjective judgments and is therefore all the more subject to errors and hence improvement. This means that we cannot shut the argument about the authenticity of a hadith by appeal to past authorities.Third, do the Qur`an and the Hadith together form the foundation of Islam or is the Qur`an the foundation upon which the Hadith builds by explanation and elaboration and by providing the context? My answer is that the Qur`an alone is the foundation. The basis for this is provided by several Qur`anic verses and several ahadith that clearly state that Qur`an provides complete guidance for humanity. My answer is also based on the fact that only the Qur`an has been preserved with complete faithfulness by a divine act. If the Qur`an and the Hadith were both foundational, they should have both been preserved with equal faithfulness.Fourth, how far the isnad method is reliable? My answer is: not very much and here is my basis for saying so.It is well known that very large number of ahadith were wrongly attributed, either as deliberately fabricated lies or by mistakes of varying degree of innocence. Clearly, if words/actions could be falsely attributed to the Prophet, then isnad could also be falsely constructed. The isnad method tries to avoid this conclusion by requiring that the narrators be “trustworthy” both in terms of character and memory. To elaborate the idea, suppose we have a report like this:“A said that B said that C said that D said that the Prophet said ….”.Suppose also that A, B, C, D are all trustworthy. Since A is trustworthy we can accept the report: “B said that C said that D said that the Prophet said …” Since B is also trustworthy we can accept the report: “C said that D said that the Prophet said …” Continuing this way, we can accept the report: “the Prophet said …”.This approach certainly makes some sense and was worth pursuing. Indeed we should be thankful that our classical muhaddithun pursued this approach, since in the process they have preserved for us a vast amount of data that we can today analyse. But the approach is not without problems and it is easy to see that it has not produced very reliable results.To begin with, very few people are completely faithful to facts, as we can see from what even modern journalists do to the events that they report. In earlier times, especially in the time before our great muhaddithun, objectivity and accuracy in reporting was not even held by most people as an ideal to be pursued. The need to provide isnad was also not felt. Moreover, characterization of people as trustworthy or untrustworthy is not like the distinction between black and white. Even trustworthy people can distort facts under the influence of certain assumptions they have made or certain motivations they feel. For example, Muhammad Muhsin Khan who translated Sahih of Bukhari is trusted person but in many places his translations can be shown to reflect his assumptions and not to faithfully represent the original Arabic. Thus, he translates hadith number 282 volume 6 as follows:'Aisha used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces."Here the reference to "faces" is not at all found in the original Arabic. Living in Saudi Arabia Muhsin Khan has assumed that Islam teaches women to cover their faces and this has influenced his translation. This type of changes in the original are very common both in transmission and in translation.It is therefore not surprising that even for trustworthy narrators we possess negative judgments that calls their credibility to question. Take for example Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri from whom traditions have been reported by almost every muhaddith including of course Malik, Bukhari and Muslim. Yet the following evidence suggests that al-Zuhri did not always conform to acceptable standards of accuracy and objectivity:Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: My situation is totally different from you. Whatever I say, I say it from my own self and you say it on the authority of the Prophet and so you must be careful, and it is not befitting for a person to waste himself [like this]. (Bukhari, Tarikh al-Kabir, vol. 3, Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, pp. 286-7)Rabi‘ah would say to Ibn Shihab: When you narrate something according to your own opinion, always inform the people that this is your own view. And when you narrate something from the Prophet, always inform them that it is from the Prophet so that they do not consider it to be your opinion. (Khatib Baghdadi, Al-Faqih wa Al-Mutafaqqih, vol. 1, Lahore: Dar al-Ahya al-Sunnah, p. 148).Imam Bukhari had the following opinion:Zuhri would narrate ahadith and on most occasions would insert sentences from his own self. Some of these would be mursal and some of them would be his own. (Ibn Rajab, Fath al-Bari, 1st ed., vol. 5, Jaddah: Dar Ibn al-Jawzi, 1996, p. 286)In a letter to Imam Malik, Imam Layth Ibn Sa‘ad writes:When we would meet Ibn Shihab, there would arise a difference of opinion in many issues. When any one of us would ask him in writing about some issue, he, in spite of being so learned, would give three very different answers, and he would not even be aware of what he had already said. It is because of this that I have left him – something that you did not like (Ibn Qayyim, I’lam al- Muwaqqi‘in, vol. 3, Beirut: Dar al-Jayl, p. 85).Imam Shaf‘i, Darqutni and many others have attributed Tadlis to Zuhri. (Ibn Hajar, Tabaqat al-Mudallisin, Cairo: Maktabah Kulliyyat al-Azhar, p. 32-3)It is possible to go beyond the above general considerations and actually demonstrate that isnads got modified/invented during the process of transmission just as the contents of the ahadith did, not only by untrustworthy narrators but also by trustworthy one. Thus the story of the malicious accusation (ifk) against umm al-mu`minin ‘Aishah is narrated by al-Zuhri in Ibn Ishaq, Bukhari and Muslim. In all versions al-Zuhri learns details of the story from four persons. But in Ibn Ishaq one of the four persons is Sa'id bin Jubayr while in Bukhari and Muslim the same person changes to Sa‘id bin al-Musayyab.Another example: In Muwatta we read the following saying of Ibn ‘Umar:Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi’ that ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar used to say that muhrima (a woman in ihram) should wear neither a veil (niqab) nor gloves.But in Bukhari it has become a saying of the Prophet:‘Abd Allah bin Yazid related to us: al-Layth related to us: Nafii’ related to us from ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar who said: A person stood up and asked, “O Messenger of God! What clothes may be worn in the state of ihram?” The Prophet replied, “… the muhrima should wear neither a veil (niqab) nor gloves.” (Bukhari, kitab jaza al-sayd ..., bab ma yunha min al-tayyib li al-muhrim wa al-muhrima)The words “the muhrima should wear neither a veil (niqab) nor gloves” are exactly the same in Arabic as the words attributed to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar in Muwatta. The above hadith from Bukhari is also quoting ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar but while in Muwatta the words are the opinion of Ibn ‘Umar in Bukhari Ibn ‘Umar is attributing them to the Prophet. One naturally asks, Why in Muwatta Ibn ‘Umar does not attribute these words to the Prophet? Ibn ‘Umar lived in Madinah and so did Malik. The knowledge of the Hadith left by Ibn ‘Umar would have been more easily available to Malik than to Bukhari who came much later. Moreover, from Ibn ‘Umar the tradition is being narrated by Nafi‘ in both the Muwatta and Bukhari and Malik personally knew Nafi‘. Had Nafi’ heard from ‘Abd Allah a saying of the Prophet he would have known. This suggests the conclusion that the saying that a muhrima should not wear niqab or gloves existed as an opinion of ‘Abd Allah ibn Umar or someone else, and by the time Bukhari compiled his Sahih the opinion was attributed to the Prophet himself. Further support of the above view is provided by the fact that not all companions of the Prophet agreed with the opinion. It is evident from the following tradition in Muwatta that some companions saw nothing wrong with women using veils during the state of ihram:Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham bin ‘Urwa that Fatima bint al‑Mundhir said, "We used to veil our faces when we were in ihram in the company of Asma bint Abi Bakr as‑Siddiq." (Muwatta, kitab al-hajj, bab takhmir al-muhrim wajhahu).Numerous serious contradictions among ahadith, often found in the same collections, including Bukhari and Muslim, show that the isnad method has not given satisfactory results. For if the chain of narrators used by the muhaddithun were trustworthy in character and memory, why did some of them contradicted so seriously with others in reporting the same event. To illustrate such contradictions I will give here one example.In Bukhari (kitab al-istidhan, bab ayah al-hijab, kitab at-tafsir, bab la tadkhulu ...) and Muslim (kitab as-salam, bab ibahat al-khuruj li an-nisa ...) we read the following explanation of the circumstances of the revelation of the verse of hijab:Ishaq related to me: Yaqub bin Ibrahim inofrmed us: my father related to us from Saleh from Ibn Shihab (al-Zuhri) who said: ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr informed me that ‘A’ishah said: ‘Umar bin al-Khattab used to say that the Messenger of God, “Let your wives be in hijab”. But he did not do so. And the wives of the Prophet used to go at night to al‑Manasi (a vast open place near Baqia at Medina to answer the call of nature). Once Sawdah bint Zam‘ah (the wife of the Prophet) went out and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar bin al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering and said, “I have recognized you, O Sawdah!” (He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verse of al‑hijab may be revealed.) So God revealed the verse of al‑hijab.But in another version of the same story in Bukhari ‘Umar sees Sawdah not before but after the verse of hijab had been revealed:Zakariya bin Yahya related to me: Abu Usamah related to us from Hisham from his father (’Urwah) from ‘A’ishah who said: Sawdah (the wife of the Prophet) went out for her need after hijab had been ordained. She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So ‘Umar bin al‑Khattab saw her and said, “O Sawdah! By God, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sawdah returned while the Messenger of God was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Messenger of God! I went out for a need and ‘Umar said to me so‑and‑so.” Then God inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put it down, he said (to Sawdah), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.” (Bukhari, kitab at-tafsir, bab la tadkhulu buyut an-nabi ... )Some harmonisers may argue that ‘Umar twice saw Sawdah go out, once before the revelation of the verse of hijab and once after. But such an explanation is most unlikely and extremely artificial. It is much more natural to conclude that we are dealing here with two versions of a single story. The contradiction here is significant. In one version the story provides an occasion for the revelation of the verse of hijab while in the other version the verse of hijab had already been in force when the story happened. It is clear that one of Bukhari’s “trustworthy” narrators is either deliberately changing the story or has such a bad memory that he could not remember whether the incident took place after the verse of hijab or whether it provided the very occasion for the revelation of that verse.When we examine numerous examples of such contradictions it becomes clear that the isnad method has not worked very well.Let us now turn to the ahadith about the return of Jesus. My view that these ahadith probably do not go back to the Messenger of God is based on the following arguments already presented in my article in a somewhat different way:
Notes
1Saul was chosen by God and anointed by Samuel (1 Sam 10:1). Later, God chose David to be the king and commanded Samuel to anoint him (1Sam 16:12-13).2The priests of Aaron’s line and other priests were anointed (Exodus 29:7, Num 35:25).3See 1 Kings 19:16, Elisha is anointed as a prophet and Isaiah 61:1-2, where an anonymous person with a prophetic role is anointed by the Lord.4There is not a single saying of Jesus in the gospels that is generally accepted as authentic by critical scholars and that presents him as a Messiah.5N. A. Dahl has noted that to understand Paul “it is never necessary to know that ‘Christ’ is a term filled with content and highly significant. All the statements in the letters make good sense even to those who only know that Christ is a surname for Jesus” (quoted from Hengel, Between Jesus and Paul, p. 68). Thus in the Pauline epistles, Christos is never used as a general term but always as a name of Jesus (contrast Acts 17:3, 26:23); it is never used as a predicate in a statement like “Jesus is the Christ” (otherwise Acts 18:5, 28); never a genitive is added as in “Christ of God.” Paul says “Christ,” “the Christ,” “Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus.” The term “the Christ” is not found in the oldest texts of the epistles (against 1 Cor. 3:11 TR). (Hengel, Between Jesus and Paul, p.72).6There are two passages in the Qur`an in which one can see the idea that Jesus came in fulfillment of earlier prophecy: 3:45 and 3:81. In the first of these passages Jesus is called “a word from God” (see also 4:171), which can be interpreted to mean “a promise from God”, that is, an earlier prophecy from God. But this interpretation is not certain. The second passage, 3:81, talks of a covenant of the prophets by which all prophets are bound to believe in and help when another prophet comes confirming them. One possible interpretation of this verse is that earlier prophets prepare in some way for the coming of the later prophets and this preparation involves prophesying their coming. But this interpretation is not certain and does not particularly apply to messianic figures but generally to the whole series of prophets.7The absence of any clear indications for identifying Jesus with a Messiah in any sense corresponds to a similar absence in Jesus’ own authentic statements, as observed in note 4.8In Qur`an 3:39 the angels give to Zechariah the good news of the birth of his son Yahya (=John the Baptist) “verifying a word from God, outstanding in character, very chaste, and a prophet from among the righteous”. The words “verifying a word from God” are often understood to mean that John will testify to Jesus who is called “a word from God” some verses later. But there are several difficulties with this explanation: a) Verses 3:33-54 form a well-connected passage following a chronological order of the stories of Mary, John the Baptist, and Jesus. In this passage “a word from God” is not used in connection with Jesus until after its use in connection with John. b) If the passage about John is referring to Jesus why he is not referred to by his name? Why, for example, is it not said “musaddiqan bi ‘Isa al-Masih”? In view of these objections a better interpretation may be that “word from God” means an earlier promise from God, that is, John will come in fulfillment of earlier (messianic) prophecy. It is also possible that both interpretations are intended and that is why “a word of God” is used instead of Jesus or al-Masih. The two interpretations are consistent with some earlier Christian traditions. Thus in the Gospels Jesus is presented as the Messiah and John the Baptist as his Elijah-type forerunner. This means that John testifies to Jesus (the first interpretation) and since Elijah-type forerunner himself is promised in earlier prophecy, John himself comes in fulfillment of earlier prophecy (second interpretation). (See, A. Shafaat, Islam, Christianity, and the State of Israel:As Fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecl, American Trust Publication, 1989).9Some Muslim scholars deduced from this hadith that pigs should be killed. This deduction is unsound for the following three reasons: a) The word for pig is in the singular (al-khinzir); b) The time of Jesus’ return will be a special time and what takes place during such a time should not become a general rule; c) there is a vast body of traditions that encourage us to be nice to all animals including dogs, wolves, snakes etc.It should also be noted that not all earlier scholars agreed that the pigs should be killed or that Jesus will kill pigs because they should be killed. Thus in Muwatta we have the following tradition:Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said that Isa ibn Maryam encountered a pig on the road. He said to it, “Go in peace.” Somebody asked, “Do you say this to a pig?” Isa said, “I fear lest I accustom my tongue to evil speech.”
Friday 22 July 2016
Islamic View of the Coming/Return of Jesus (purley information only I don't believe this view at all)!!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment