Skip to main content

Family of the Holy Prophet agreed on the Death of Jesus

Besides this unanimity of opinion among the Companions, opinion held in the family of the Holy Prophet also supports the belief that Jesus died in the normal way. Imam Hassan, recounting the events relating to the death of Hazrat Ali, is reported to have said:
"The man who has died today is without an equal in many respects. He had none like him either amongst his predecessors or among his successors. When the Holy Prophet sent him to battle, he had Gabriel on the right and Michael on the left to assist him. He never returned from a battle except as victor. He left seven hundred Derhams as bequest. He had saved this to purchase a slave's freedom. He died during the 27th night of the month of Ramadhan, the same night was the spirit of Jesus raised to Heaven." 
(Tabaqat Ibn Sa'ad, Vol. 3)
From this remark of Imam Hassan it appears that even according to the family of the Holy Prophet, Jesus died in the ordinary way. Unless they believed so, Imam Hassan could not have said that Hazrat Ali died the same night that Jesus' spirit ascended to Heaven.
Besides the Companions of the Holy Prophet and his family, later doctors of religion also have testified to the death of Jesus. They were devotees of the Holy Quran, of the utterances of the Holy Prophet, of opinions held by the Companions and by the family of the Holy Prophet. It seems, the question whether Jesus had died did not strike them as a very important question. Therefore, they did not pronounce on the question as such. Nor have their views on the subject been preserved. But as far as the recorded opinions of the later doctors of Islam go, they leave no doubt that even they believed, Jesus had died. It is recorded in Majma-al-Bahar that, according to Imam Malik, Jesus died in the natural way.
In short, the Holy Quran, the Traditions, the consensus of opinion among the Companions and the family of the Holy Prophet and the opinions of the doctors of Islam are all at one in supporting belief in the death of Jesus. All of them teach that Jesus died like all mortals. It is wrong, therefore, to say that by attributing death to Jesus we dishonour Jesus and that, therefore, by implication we deny the Holy Quran and the Traditions of the Holy Prophet. We do not dishonour Jesus. Instead of dishonouring Jesus, we hold a genuine conception of the Oneness of God and point to the high spiritual rank to which our Holy Prophet belongs. We serve Jesus, because Jesus himself would not have subscribed to a belief which is derogatory to the conception of the Oneness of God; which helps shirk (associating others with God), and detracts from the spiritual status of the Holy Prophet.
Now, dear reader, you can see for yourself who is in the right. We or our opponents? Is it for them to be offended against us, or for us to be offended against them? They set up a man as the equal of God. They propose a belief which entails indignity to the Holy Prophet; they who lend support to the enemies of Islam; they who weaken Islam.

(Dawat-ul-Amir, English translation: Invitation to Ahmadiyyat, First Edition, pg. 21-23, By Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-din Mahmood Ahmad, Khalifatul Masih II)


Popular posts from this blog

If Jesus did not die upon the cross: A study in evidence

The Last Supper This is a small booklet with a very descriptive title, written by an Australian Judge, Ernest Brougham Docker, in 1920. He became a judge of the District Court and chairman of Quarter Sessions for the north-western district in 1881. He retired in 1918 after the passage of the Judges Retirement Act.
He examines the limitations in the so called testimony of the apostles about resurrection in his book. He makes several strong points against resurrection of Jesus, may peace be on him, but one that can be described in a few lines is quoted here:
“He (Jesus) expressed his forebodings to His disciples, I firmly believe; I am equally convinced that He did not predict His rising again. The Conduct of the disciples after crucifixion shows that they had no expectation of a resurrection; and it is altogether incredible that they could have forgotten a prediction so remarkable.”
There are 14 parts of this short booklet by Ernest Brougham Docker, published in 1920. The fifth part concl…

Aloe and Myrrh: modern day analysis of two ancient herbs

By Arif Khan .. Edited by Jonathan Ghaffar
Aloe and Myrrh are mentioned in the Gospel as being present immediately after the body of Hadhrat Isa (Jesus) was tended to by Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea; the presence of these medicinal plants has often been explained by Christian scholars as being part of an embalming process, whereas Hadhrat Masih Ma’ud (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad) in his treatise “Masih Hindustan Mein” (“Jesus in India”) described how they were essential ingredients for an ointment applied to Jesus’ wounds. What role do these herbs play today? Can an exploration of their modern day uses throw light on possible events 2000 years ago?The mention of the herbs appears in the Crucifixion story as it is recorded in the Gospel of John:

وفات مسیح پر حضرت ابن عباس ؓ کا عقیدہ

سیدناحضرت ابن عباس رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ سورۃآل عمران کی  آیت نمبر ۵۶

کا ترجمہ کرتے ہوئے فرماتے ہیں ۔ مُمِیْتُکَ ۔یعنی مُتَوَفِّیْکَ کا مطلب ہے میں تجھے موت دینے والا ہوں ۔