Mahdi and ‘Eisa are not same

In a certain program[1] of MTA channel one Ahmadi ‘scholar’ presented few arguments in a bid to uphold his religious belief that Mahdi and ‘Eisa Ibn Maryam are two references to the same personality.

Argument 1

The first argument that the Ahmadi ‘scholar’ presents goes as;

A certain narration says that Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, said:

كيف تهلك أمة أنا في أولها وعيسى في آخرها

‘How can that Ummah be destroyed in whose beginning is me, in whose end is ‘Eisa.”

Ahmadi ‘scholar’ contends that in this narration there is no mention of ‘Imam Mahdi’ hence it proves, in his good belief, that there is no separate person as Imam Mahdi.

While this is true that the report is given as such in Tarikh Damishq of Ibn Asakir but elsewhere the full report not only kills his argument but also exposes the gimmicks of the Ahmadiyya intellectual elite. The complete narration says;

لن تهلك أمة أنا في أولها وعيسى ابن مريم في آخرها ، والمهدي في أوسطها

“That Ummah cannot be destroyed in whose beginning is me, in whose end is ‘Eisa and in whose middle is al-Mahdi.”

(Kanzul Ummal 14/266 Hadīth 38671 cf. Kitabul Mahdi of Abu Na’im, Classified as Hasan by Al-Azizi in Siraj Al-Munir Sharah Jami’ Saghir 3/196)

Al-Manawi in his exegesis to this Hadith writes;

أراد بالوسط ما قبل الآخر لأن نزول عيسى لقتل الدجال يكون في زمن المهدي ويصلي عيسى خلفه

“By أوسط ‘before the end’ is meant for the descent of ‘Eisa (AS) to kill Dajjal will take place during the time of al-Mahdi and he (‘Eisa) will pray behind him.” (Faidh Al-Qadir 5/383 Hadith 7384)

This simply kills the twisting of Murabbis.

Argument 2

Next he uses the following narration to meet his end.

عن أبي هريرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم قال : يوشك من عاش منكم ان يلقى عيسى بن مريم إماما مهديا وحكما عدلا فيكسر الصليب ويقتل الخنزير ويضع الجزية وتضع الحرب أوزارها

Narrated Abu Huraira (RA) that Prophet, may Allah bless him, said: “It is near that one who lives from amongst you shall meet ‘Eisa bin Maryam. He will be a rightly guided (imaman mahdiyyan] leader and a just ruler …”

Ahmadis argue that as ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, has been called ‘imaman mahdiyyan’ in this Hadith it means he will be Imam Mahdi spoken about in other Hadith narrations.

Let’s take this absurd argument to task.

What is “Mahdi”?

What? The heading says, ‘What is Mahdi?’ not, ‘Who is Mahdi?’ Yes, indeed that is what needs to be understood in the very first place.

Mahdi is an attribute/characteristic which means ‘rightly guided.’ And it is used for so many people in various Hadith narrations. With a quick look I could find that following people have been called so;

Abdullah bin Jarir (RA):

In Sahih Bukhari we read that Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, prayed for Sayyidina Jarir bin ‘Abdullah, may Allah be pleased with him;

اللَّهُمَّ ثَبِّتْهُ وَاجْعَلْهُ هَادِيًا مَهْدِيًّا

“O Allah! Make him firm and make him a guiding and a rightly-guided man [mahdiyyan].”(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2809)

Mu’awiya (RA):

According to Jami’ Tirmidhi, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, prayed exactly the same way for Sayyidina Mu’awiya, may Allah be pleased with him;

اللهم اجعله هاديا مهديا

“O Allah! Make him a guiding and a rightly-guided man [mahdiyyan].” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Hadith 3842. Classified as Hasan by Tirmidhi and Sahih by Albani)

‘Ali (RA):

In one Hadith the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, addressing the people said about Sayyidina ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him;

تجدوه هاديا مهديا يأخذ بكم الطريق المستقيم

“You will find him a guiding and a right-guided person [mahdiyyan] who will take you on the right path.” (al-Isaba fi Ma’rifatil Sahaba 2/271. Hafiz Ibn Hajr said, its chain is good [jayyad])

All the Pious Caliphs:

A famous Hadith uses the word for all the pious Caliphs. It read;

فعليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء المهديين

“You must then follow my sunnah and that of the rightly-guided [mahdiyyeen] caliphs.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4607. Classified as Sahih by Albani)

The word ‘mahdiyyeen’ is plural of ‘mahdi.’

Thus we find that all of these great men and many others were ‘Mahdi’ i.e. rightly-guided ones. And by following the Ahmadiyya line of argument we end up with so many Mahdis instead of reaching the conclusion that ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, alone is ‘mahdi’.

The fact however, is simply that Ahmadiyya try to play with the innocent minds that do not know the Arabic language and have been basically made to think of ‘mahdi ‘as a noun and not an adjective.

A person from the lineage of the Prophet due to appear near the End of Times:

Just like all these people and many others, near the End of Times will appear a person from the lineage of the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, whose being ‘mahdi’ i.e. rightly-guided is testified in original sources of Islam.

The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, said;

المهدي من عترتي من ولد فاطمة

“The Mahdi (lit. rightly-guided) will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4284. Classified as Sahih by Albani and others)

But even he is referred to as ‘Mahdi’ not because it is his name but because he will be a rightly-guided person.

About his name, another Hadith says;

رجلا مني أو من أهل بيتي يواطئ اسمه اسمي واسم أبيه اسم أبي

“A man who belongs to me or to my family whose name is same as my name and whose father’s name is the same as my father’s name.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4282. Classified as Sahih by Ibn Qayyim, Albani and others)

Why generally only a particular person is referred to as ‘Mahdi’?

Now naturally the question arises, if so many people were given the title of ‘Mahdi’ why only one person is referred to as such? The answer is simple. ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, is basically a Prophet, Pious caliphs and other companions themselves are praised much by the Qur’an so they have much greater references to be known with. However, the personality known and revered as ‘Imam Mahdi’ is so referred to as it will be his greatest position and as such makes him stand out among all other humans after the Prophets and their companions. And that is the reason we always, retain the word Mahdi when translating the narrations about him. And looking at the subtleties let me say that this contention of ours springs from the very wording of the Hadith and a comparison of various narrations.

Please note, in the narrations using the word ‘mahdi’ (as singular adjective) for ‘Eisa, may Allah bless him, and various companions it is simply ‘mahdi’ i.e. without the article ‘al’ i.e. ‘the’ while the narration about the person to appear near the End of the Times is ‘al-Mahdi’ which makes him stand out among all those for whom this word is used. This is, let me reiterate, because his being rightly-guided is an honor for him greater than any other status of him.

Argument 3

His third argument is about the famous narration that Ahmadis often quote.

لا مهدي إلا عيسى

“There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa.”

He says that one of its narrators Muhammad bin Khalid al-Jundi is a trustworthy narrator and that ‘Yahya bin Mu’in’ [sic.] graded him as trustworthy.

Firstly Hafiz Ibn Hajr, who has been recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadis, after careful scrutiny of the various opinions, graded him as ‘Majhul’ i.e. unknown. See al-Taqrib 2/71.

Imam Hakim also classified him as ‘Majhul’ see Tahzib al-Tahzib 9/126

Let’s not forget Imam Hakim is also recognized as Mujaddid by Ahmadiyya.

As to what is attributed to Imam Yahya bin Ma’in (its Ma’in not Mu’in as Ahmadi ‘scholar’ speaks) al-Mizi quotes Abu al-Hassan al-Abri to have said, “If they mention what is said to come from Yahya bin Ma’in, it is not known to the experts among the people of knowledge and reporting.” (Tahzib al-Kamal 25/149)

Infact the narration has multiple issues. Shaykh Albani (in Silsala Da’ifa, Number 77) has mentioned three problems in this.

1. Tadlis of Hassan al-Basri

2. Muhammad bin Khalid al-Jundi being Majhul.

3. Difference in the chain. At another place Muhammad bin Khalid narrates from Aban bin Abi Ayyash instead of Aban bin Salih and he is ‘Matrook’ i.e. rejected. See Tahzib al-Tahzib 9/126

It is for this reason; Imam Ibn Taymiya, al-Saghani, al-Shaukani, Ibn Qayyim, al-Dhahbi, al-Qurtubi, Azimabadi etc. and recently Albani and Shu’aib Arnaut all have graded this narration as dubious.

And it is precisely for this reason Mullah Ali Qari in his commentary to Mishkat al-Masabih writes;

ثُمَّ اعْلَمْ أَنَّ حَدِيثَ: لَا مَهْدِيَّ إِلَّا عِيسَى بْنُ مَرْيَمَ ضَعِيفٌ بِاتِّفَاقِ الْمُحَدِّثِينَ

“Then I learnt the Hadith: There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa, is weak by the consensus of the scholars of Hadith.” (Mirqat al-Mafatih 8/3448)

Infact Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself accepted that this report is not authentic. He wrote;

 

 

 

 

 

 

“And as to Ahadith about the arrival of Mahdi you know they are all Da’if and problematic contradicting one another so much so that in one narration in Ibn Majah and other books says, ‘There is no Mahdi except ‘Eisa, so how can one rest is his case on such kind of narrations with so much difference and contradictions, weakness and criticism on their narrators, as is not hidden from the scholars of Hadith?”

(Humamtul Bushra pp.148-149 included in Rohani Khazain vol.7 pp.314-315)

Please remember in Sirat al-Mahdi vol.1 p.91 Mirza Bashir Ahmad on the authority of Maulvi Sher Ali quotes Mirza to have said that all his Arabic writings are only a kind of revelation.

So Mirza Ghulam Ahmad himself accepted this narration as weak and unreliable. Whatever he said certainly applies to this narration. However his contention about the other narrations is faulty.

Mullah Ali Qari discussing the ‘No Mahdi except ‘Eisa’ narration, writes;

قَالَ الطِّيبِيُّ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ: الْأَحَادِيثُ عَنْهُ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – فِي التَّنْصِيصِ عَلَى خُرُوجِ الْمَهْدِيِّ مِنْ عِتْرَتِهِ مِنْ وَلَدِ فَاطِمَةَ، ثَابِتَةٌ أَصَحُّ مِنْ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ، فَالْحُكْمُ لَهَا دُونَهُ

“Taybi, may Allah have mercy on him, said; And the narrations from the Prophet, may Allah bless him, about Mahdi emerging from his progeny and from the children of Fatima, are proved and authentic than this narration, and their status is different than it.” (Mirqat al-Mafatih 8/3448)

Also note scholars like Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Qayyim, Albani and Shu’aib Arnaut who have graded the ‘No mahdi except ‘Eisa’ narration as weak authenticated the other narrations about al-Mahdi.

So we find all the claims of Murabbis are not only erroneous but also show how common Ahmadis are fooled into misleading beliefs risking their life in the Hereafter.

May Allah bring all Ahmadis back to the fold of religion of His Last and Final Messenger, on whom be the peace and blessings of Almighty Allah.

Indeed Allah knows the best!


[1] Last accessed on May 27, 2011. In case they removed it, kindly intimate we shall upload it for reference.

Be Sociable, Share!

23 thoughts on “Mahdi and ‘Eisa are not same

  1. Brother Waqar just killed it

    Thanks for the wonderful contribution
    May ALLAH help Ahmadies see the truth and how Jammat try to trick common ppl

  2. Nice work Waqar. And Ahmadis wonder why they were declared as Kafir in 1974??? How about incessant lying? How about gross negligence? How about cursing the mothers of prophets? How about cursing the innocent?

    Ahmadis need to realize that Mirza sahib was fit for a straight jacket. And this is the conclusion of the entire world who have read his books.

    • Just to re-emphasize, not that it bothers us, but Mullah Mirza Ghulam and Mullah Mirza Bashir was the first to declare us kaafir – and even Lahoris and some other Qadian-Ahmadis.

      • Well – Farhan, that’s just not true now is it?

        Kufr was imputed to Hadrat Masih al-Ma’ud (as) way before – by his opponents in his own time – the fatāwa of kufr from the middle east came after the instigation of the indian clergy in Qadian and elsewhere.

        What’s happened to your historical method? Have some integrity brother.

        • Mullah Mirza Ghulam’s statement was that unconditionally anyone and everyone who doesn’t believe in him as the Messiah is a kaafir. He made no qualifications of this only referring to people who deemed him as such.

          Mullah Mirza Bashir was calling all Lahori-Ahmadis kaafir – He even called other Qadian-Ahmadis kaafir who didn’t accept Mirza Ghulam as the Messiah. He even called people who never heard his name kaafir. In the process, he called all Muslims kaafir.

          He even said the effect of “even those who do not style him as a kaafir are still kaafir” Without a doubt amongst both categories include those who are not even aware of Ahmadiyya – they just follow Islam.

          My suggestion to you: First and foremost, be honest with yourself.

        • @ Farhan

          Ibn Ghulam is referring to the year 1891. This was the year wherein Mirza sahib claimed to be Esa (as) (nauozobillah) (May allah forgive him for his insanity).

          MGAQ was unanimously declared as a Kafir by the Ulema of India in 1891. There is no doubt in that. I am confident that the Ulema of India made the proper decision.

          Farhan is referring to the year 1906, this was when MGAQ wrote the private letter to Dr. Khan wherein his true thoughts and motives were revealed.

          And Ibn Ghulam..remember we are well versed in all the events in the life and times of MGAQ. It was after 1901 when MGAQ found a keen and secretive way to call Muslims kafirs. He began to say that whomever called MGAQ a Kafir…they themselves became Kafir as per the hadith of Muhammad (saw) that states that if a Muslim calls a Muslim a Kafir, the declaration of Kufr reverts to the sender. This was the “keen-method” that MGAQ had set upon (and the LAM uses this ideology circa 1914-ish). MGAQ psychologically needed to find a way to call Muslims as Kafirs. He then used a hadith to solve his problem.

          Technically speaking…if we use this method of MGAQ as stated above…the entire population of Pakistan become Kafirs circa 1974, according to the logic of MGAQ.

          The Rash aka The Ahmadiyya Almanac

  3. If you are so eager and serious about the Israilite messiah by all means do so, as for us Ahmadi muslim, we are only interested in the muslim messiah whom would be chosen from amongst the followers of The Holy Prophet(SAW) himself.

    • there is 1 messiah, not 2
      his name is ‘Esa bin Maryam (AS)
      You have no right to give that title to anyone else.

      • Funnily enough – neither do you – Allāh will bestow the title of Masih and Mahdi to whom he pleases and, this may shock you – but He will not confide in the members of the Cult.info before deciding the recipient of these titles!

        • True, Allah does as he pleases…

          But, what Allah told us differs from Ahmadiyya. Through the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, he told us Al-

          Al-Mahdi is named Muhammad ibn Abdullah from the Tribe of Qahtan, from the Ahl al-Bayt, and will be in Makkah and Madinah.
          Al-Maseeh is ‘Esa bin Maryam عليه السلام

          Per the Qur’an or the statements of Saydina Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم, no other person was consigned these two titles. Mirza went against this.

          This is not my decision, this is what our prophet said. Or do you think Mirza knew better than the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم?

          • @ Farhan

            The problem with the Ahmadiyya psyche is that they believe that only their prophet and Khulafa have been enlightened properly in the ummah. With this type of brainwashing…it makes getting through to Ahmadis a difficult endeavor.

            Because of this paradigm…Ahmadis are blocked from the light. They are totally in the dark when it comes to the relevant hadith in terms of the “Mahdi”. They are not even taught to read all the hadith about the Mahdi. They are brainwashed to focus on the data that has been embedded into their psyche.

            I know firsthand….

  4. My researches are leading me to believe that ALL hadiths concerning second comings of Isa (as) and Mehdi are fabrications.

    Even Mr Mirza himself thought that they were fake in his early writings as you showed above. He seems exactly like the boy who cried wolf to me.

    May Allah guides us on his path

    • Sir Syed believe that before Mirza Ghulam but common ahmadies are told Muslims believe that and they try to show see about absurd muslims are and stuff like that.

      By the way sir syed called MGA a thug 😀

    • Hadith is not a ‘research science’ – treating it as such will clearly lead you into error – it is not a research essay for college or university.

      There is divine providence in Hadith and only those bestowed with divine guidance can truly enter into its requisite methodologies.

      • As in all Islamic sciences, there is undoubtedly a strong element of divine support. Study, writings, commentary, and poems ultimately gain their success from Allah.

        But, each individual has to also perform his own personal efforts and ijtihad. This comes in the form of in depth research, study, prayer and istikhara – and then the help from God comes.

        It was said after Imam Bukhari stringently checked a hadith for its authenticity, he used to make wudhu, sent salawat upon the prophet (durood shareef), prayed 2 rakahs and then made the istikhara du’a for guidance. Its both.

      • @ Ibn Ghulam…

        I disagree with you strongly. Learning Islam academically will lead anyone to the conclusion that “islamic-thought-process” has always envisioned that Esa ibn Maryam (as) will return someday to work with “The Mahdi” in elevating Islam into global prominence.

        The only reason that you write that divine assistance is required is because your queer views of Islam contradict the basic elements of academics. For example, Ahmadiyya has not been able to trace the disconnect between the view that Esa (as) was never on the cross and written records from Islam. They present a hadith from the death of Muhammad (saw) and give it a queer interpretation. Again, delving into the psyche of Ahmadism is a necessary endeavor that reveals the true nature of the ‘A’.

        To a certain extant I do agree. Divine assistance is required when reading any part of Islam. However, the basic elements of Islamic belief are easily ascertained after an elementery reading of the relevant data.

        Its a shame that Ahmadiyya rejects the academic/archeological aspect of Islam.

    • I would not trust MGAQ when it comes to what he said about return of Isa (a.s) Neither do I believe that the Hadith concerning his return are fabrications.

      Mirza used and abused Isa (a.s) the mighty messenger of Allah at his free will.

      He wrongly abused Isa (a.s) and his mother Mariam (a.s) to such an extent that he wrote:

      “Jesus`s family is not pious and holy. Three of his paternal and maternal grandmothers were adulteresses and his blood is polluted with theirs….”

      Then on the other hand, he claimed that he is the second coming of Isa (a.s) (another lie) to steal his personality and teachings.

      How can MGAQ the son of Chirag Bibi become Isa (a.s) a simple kindergarten student will understand this?

      When it comes to Ahmadis, there are mountains of proof that MGAQ sahib lied and cheated in matters of religion, and how can they not see this. On one hand they claim to be so intelligent and on the other hand they believe in all the nonsense and lies MQAG sahib has stated.

  5. @ Cheema sahib:

    Cheema sahib at the end of your post you wrote:
    “Indeed Allah knows the best!”

    I take by this you mean that you’re ACCEPTING THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU COULD BE WRONG!!!!
    And Promised Massiah and Imam Mahdi could be same person.
    If this is the end result, then why to waste Cyber Space????

    • Fair Mind what kind of childish argument was that???

      Indeed Allah always knows best
      but waqar knows more than ur so called scholars and they have been refuted

    • @ Fair Mind

      You are a victim of those who are selling Islam in an attempt to turn a profit. This Mirza family has made enough money in the last 100 years to quench the thirst of even Jaba the Hut (see Star Wars). Yet, they are lusting for more.

      They remind of the arab princes who have squandered all of the oil money that they made over the last 60 years or so. They remind me of Hosni Mubarak of Epypt who recieved billions of dollars to keep his mouth shut for 40 years or so.

      In the end…I hope that by reading more and more we will finally get through to the Ahmadis that visit this blog and the forum.

  6. Jazak Allah bro…. this is one of the best articles on mehdi that i have ever read , inshallah this will help us a big deal while taking on to qadianis !

    • Please spread is all over so that Muslim can learn
      as this is the core belief of Ahmadies… Bro Waqar is also planning to write one article about Mahdi and Messiah being different personalities

Comments are closed.