Although the author has a useful discussion on the topic, which is sufficient for fact finders, but we add a bit more substance to enhance believer’s faith in this subject and answer some of the questions raised by its opponents.

Determination Of Raj’ah’s Meaning And Its Role In The Region

The functional meaning of Raj’ah was that when Imam Al-Mahdi (‘a) would make his appearance, Prophet Muhammad (S) and some of the other Prophets, Imams Ma’sumin, ideal believers along with some of the hard-core hypocrites and infidels will also be returned to the planet so that the household of the Prophet could rule the world, and take revenge from the murderers of the Prophets and Imams. Therefore, God said in the Qur’an,

وَلَنُذِيقَنَّهُمْ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَدْنَىٰ دُونَ الْعَذَابِ الْأَكْبَرِ

“We shall make these people to taste a slight castigation before the major punishment [of the hereafter]” (32:21).

Believers would feel blissful at the sight of these despots and murderers of Imams being punished and tormented. This thought was among the essential concepts of the Shiism, and its denier would be excommunicated from the faith, as emphasized by strong narrations issued on the authority of Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, which stated that the one who had disbelieved their return was not among them.

Allama Al-Majlisi wrote in his Risala al-Itiqadiyah, “It is essential that you should have faith in the concept of Raj’ah, as it is among the key principles of Shi’a faith that are derived from the practices of Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, as recognised by the Sunni School of thought. It is narrated from our Imams that anyone who denies Raj’ah is not from one of us.”

The Proof Of Raj’ah

Apart from the unanimity of Shi’a school of Islamic thought, many Ahadith, the Qur’anic Verses and authentic traditions provided a reliable proof for its existence. Opponents of Shi’a school used this concept to ridicule Shi’a faith without a basis.

The concept of Raj’ah had no ambiguity by any standard of logic and practicality. It would happen because the happening was rationally possible and within God’s potential. If this was denied then by the same quirk of reasoning, the existence of Day of Judgement would have to be denied. The strongest argument in its favour was that this phenomenon had taken place with previous nations and the news of its future occurrence had been provided by the truthful reporters (Mukhbareen as-Sadiq) i.e. Prophets and Imams. So, there was no ground left for anyone to deny it.

The Proof Of Raj’ah In The Light Of Qur’an

Several Qur’anic Verses could be quoted in support of Raj’ah. Five or six Verses had already been cited by the author with reasons for their mention. Although, much more can be said about those Verses, but in view of conserving time we quote few more Qur’anic Verses to prove the concept of Raj’ah.

First Qur’anic Verse

God said in Surah At-Tawbah:

هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْمُشْرِكُونَ

“He is the God, Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and true religion so that it overpowers the other creeds, even if polytheists might dislike it” (9:33).

It was clear that so far, the promised triumph had not been achieved. However, no Muslim could have any doubt about the accuracy of Qur’anic message. Therefore, a time would necessarily come, when Islam would have a definite prevalence over the other religions. This was the time of Raj’ah that had been mentioned by many Sunni commentators, who clearly wrote, “This promise will be discharged at the time of the appearance of Imam Al-Mahdi (‘a) and descending of Jesus (‘a) from the Heavens. Follower of every other religion will accept the message of Islam.”1

This explanation cleared that the prevalence, which was talked about in this Verse did not simply mean the apparent majesty of Islam, but it meant complete demolition of all other religions in physical terms and not as a philosophical argument.

Second Qur’anic Verse

God said in the Surah Aali Imran,

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ اللَّهُ مِيثَاقَ النَّبِيِّينَ لَمَا آتَيْتُكُم مِّن كِتَابٍ وَحِكْمَةٍ ثُمَّ جَاءَكُمْ رَسُولٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَكُمْ لَتُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِ وَلَتَنصُرُنَّهُ

“Remember the time, when God took a covenant from Prophets (and said), I give you the book and knowledge (on the condition) that when a Messenger reaches you, who confirms what you hold with you, then you must accept him and support him” (3:81).

He subsequently asked them, if they had agreed to it and accepted the responsibility of His burden. All of them unanimously affirmed it. God then said, let all of you witness (this covenant) and He would be a witness too.

It is a fact that the covenant, which God took from the Prophets had not yet materialized. All other Prophets had neither helped the Prophet nor apparently showed their faith in him, although the fulfilment of this covenant remained a must for them. Otherwise, their trustworthiness or even their Prophethood would be at risk. The explanation of this Verse had been provided by the Prophet. It told us that this promise would be accomplished on the day of Raj’ah. Jesus (‘a), in the company of all other Prophets, as their representative, will fulfil these two responsibilities by helping the true legate of the Prophet2.

Third Qur’anic Verse

God spoke in Surah Al-Qasas,

وَنُرِيدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى الَّذِينَ اسْتُضْعِفُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ الْوَارِثِينَ

“We desire to favour those who have been undermined in the world that We make them leaders and recipient (of power in the world)” (28:5).

Humanity has known no one other than our Imams, who have been most undermined in this world. However, the promise that God made with them to be the leaders of the world has yet to be materialized. Therefore, there must be a time to comply with that promise. The traditions from the Imams would tell us that this promise will be fulfilled during the period of Raj’ah.

Fourth Qur’anic Verse

It is God’s command in Surah Al-Noor,

وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَىٰ لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّن بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِي لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ

“Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them rulers in the earth as He made rulers those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall serve Me, not associating aught with Me; and whoever is ungrateful after this, these it is who are the. Transgressors” (24:55).

It remained a fact that this promise had not yet been delivered. It was narrated by Mofazzal that he told Imam As-Sadiq (‘a) that enemies of Imam Ali (‘a) said, that this Qur’anic Verse was revealed for such and such persons. Imam listened to his words and said, “God may not steer the hearts of Imam Ali’s enemies, when during their time God’s appointed religion did not attain that promised majesty, such that peace and tranquillity had prevailed throughout the Islamic domain, or fear and doubts had disappeared among them. We have seen that they continued with warfare throughout the period of their rule”3. The promise that has been made with some selected personalities would require considerable time to happen and that period was the period of Raj’ah.

Fifth Qur’anic Verse

God had said in Surah Al-Anbiya,

وَحَرَامٌ عَلَىٰ قَرْيَةٍ أَهْلَكْنَاهَا أَنَّهُمْ لَا يَرْجِعُونَ

“And there is a ban upon any community which We have destroyed: that they shall not return” (21:95).

This Verse could not be applied to the Day of Judgement because on that day everyone would be resurrected, even if they had died naturally, or as a result of punishment as mentioned in the Qur’an,

وَحَشَرْنَاهُمْ فَلَمْ نُغَادِرْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًا

“…and We will gather them and leave not any one of them behind” (18:47).

This returning of the dead must be for some other time, and that would be for the period of Raj’ah.

Raj’ah According To The Ahadith Of Ma’sumin

A number of Ahadith on Raj’ah have been reported. Allama Naimatullah Jazairi wrote in Anwar al-Naumania, “There are many authentic Ahadith about the return of Imam Al-Husayn (‘a) and Hazrat Ali (‘a) and same is true for the rest of the Imams”.

Our great scholars such as Allama Al-Majlisi, mentioned almost two hundred narrations offered by at least forty Mohaddasin that had been collected from at least fifty authentic books, including Bihar Al-Anwar. Allama Shabbar’s – Haqq Al-Yaqin had devoted more than forty pages to cover a single Hadith.

Admission Of Simple Belief On Raj’ah Is Sufficient

As far as the details of the Hadith were concerned, either all of the Ma’sumin, including the Prophet (S) would return or some of them would return. The subsequent facts associated to the period of their governance were varied. In view of these differences, scholars have suggested that a simple belief in the phenomenon of Raj’ah was sufficient, while leaving the details of the process to Imams and Ma’sumin.

Allama Shabbar wrote in Haqq Al-Yaqin, as a word of caution, “From the literature, you would have learnt that the notion of Raj’ah is correct and there is no doubt in its happening, and the one who contradicts it is excommunicated from the religion, because this concept is one of the essentials of Shi’a Faith”.

Traditions that were available on the subjects of Sirat, Mizan, and other concepts of hereafter were no more in numbers and authenticity than those that were available for Raj’ah. The difference in the features of Raj’ah did not in any way affect the significance of this ideology, just as the differences in the issues of Mizan and Sirat did not alter the importance of these subjects.

A simple belief in Raj’ah stated that some of the pure believers and hardened infidels and hypocrites would return to witness God’s promise on an appointed day before the Day of Resurrection. The rest of the details was left to the Ma’sumin Imams. The return of Imams and its relevant details should also be left to them.”

Clarification Of Some Doubts

First Doubt And Its Reply

What is the use of the concept of Raj’ah? Why should we believe in it?

The biggest benefit outlined in this concept would be that the rule of Muhammad and Aali Muhammad (‘a) would be established in accordance with the terms of God’s design for this world.

Infidelity, polytheism and atheism would be eliminated. Islam would be the predominant religion, and the eyes of Shi’a would be pleased to see the grandeur of their Imams. Apart from humans, jinns and Angels would be included their victorious army.

Love would prevail instead of animosity, all through the living domain. Earth would bring forth its treasures. It would rain regularly and the food shortage would be eliminated. People would have ample resources and it would be difficult to find those who required charity.

Friends of Muhammad and Aali Muhammad (‘a) would find their senses enhanced and the earth would be filled with Justice and equity. Jesus Christ would descend from the Heavens to aide and help the Imam and offer his prayer behind him.

Second Doubt And Its Reply

It was possible that infidels and hypocrites might seek forgiveness for their past sins. How could they then be avenged?

Raj’ah was a minor form of Qiyamah, so the chapter of repentance would be closed and their appeals for forgiveness would not be heard. This was in line with the Qur’anic text:

يَوْمَ يَأْتِي بَعْضُ آيَاتِ رَبِّكَ لَا يَنفَعُ نَفْسًا إِيمَانُهَا لَمْ تَكُنْ آمَنَتْ مِن قَبْلُ أَوْ كَسَبَتْ فِي إِيمَانِهَا خَيْرًا

“…On the day when some of the signs of your Lord shall come, its faith shall not profit a soul which did not believe before, or earn good through its faith” (6:158).

The interpretation of this Verse was related to the event of Raj’ah.

People would not be resurrected during Raj’ah to be entrusted to perform in accordance with the Shariah of Islam, but they would be raised to receive punishment. Therefore, their acts of remorse would have no meaning.

Repentance was never accepted at the verge of punishment, as seen in the case of Pharaoh and Qaroon.

It was just possible that their inner animosity with God and His religion might be so strong that after coming to life again, they might not be allowed to seek pardon. God had told us about such people in the Qur’an. After seeing the punishment], they will request to be sent to the world again, so that they could do equitable deeds, but (they are told) that they would do the same, what they have done earlier4.

It was mentioned about such people that Satan would influence them and make them believe that they were born free and they were not subject to any outside conditions. So, they would not repent.

Third Doubt And Its Reply

The ultimate result of Raj’ah was transmigration of soul. Therefore, this notion of return was unacceptable. The answer to this doubt had adequately been provided in the previous pages.

During his arguments on Raj’ah, the inference that the learned author took about Jesus (‘a) from the Qur’anic Verse, pointed to his death, which was against the established belief of Muslim Ummah. A vast majority of scholars on both sides (Shi’a and Sunni) were of the opinion that Jesus was alive with God’s commands in the heavens and he would return to earth during the period of Raj’ah, and then he would die his natural death. The narrations in this respect were numerous and in the category of Tawatur (with continuous chain of authority), except one odd recount, which informed that he had died. This report was superfluous on logical grounds, which suggested that the odd report was a redundant postulation.

The life and death of Jesus in the past was never given any significance, until a local prophet of Punjab, and his followers gave it undue importance and made it a hotly debated issue. In our opinion, any discussion on this topic would be a wasteful exercise, because life and death of Jesus had nothing to do with the Prophethood of another claimant.

If we accepted Jesus as being alive or dead, he would certainly be sent to the earth alive and well, and it had nothing to do with the home-grown prophethood of Punjab. The necessary methodology for the recognition of a prophet would be discussed when we discuss the topic of the seal of Prophethood. Anyhow, Muslims should be aware of the deceptions of this new group.

To prove a thesis, three essential lines of argument were needed i.e. its relevance, a supportive argument or an obligatory need for it. Qadiyanis ought to tell which one of the three routes proved the Prophethood of Mirza Sahib? The life or death of a person could not be a ground for another person’s prophethood - standards for such claims were totally different.

Rebuttal Of The Reasoning Given To Justify Jesus’ Death

Those who advocated Jesus’ death, use the Qur’anic Verse,

إِذْ قَالَ اللَّهُ يَا عِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا

“And when Allah said: O Isa, I am going to terminate the period of your stay (on earth) and cause you to ascend unto Me and purify you of those who disbelieve” (3:55).

They translated the word ‘Mutawaffa’ as death. So, the translation read like this: “O! Jesus I am about to make you die and raise you to Myself, so as to purify you from those who committed infidelity”.

First Reply

The word ‘Tawafa’ was the root of Bab al-Tafaul. The word Bab meant door or entrance and in Arabic language various words were derived from different Bab or entrances whose base or foundation was - Wafa, which meant to complete, just as the meaning of ‘eefa’ was to fulfil a commitment. Therefore, all words derived from this root would carry this basic meaning. It may be wafi, yuwafi, tawaffaita or tawafa, yatawaffa and towaffiyun. They would all bear the same meaning - “To take or to give complete control.” For example, in Surah Al-Maryam it was said,

إِنَّمَا يُوَفَّى الصَّابِرُونَ أَجْرَهُم بِغَيْرِ حِسَابٍ

“Those who persevere will be given full reward” (39:10).

On this basis, the meaning of ‘Tawafa’ would be “to take complete control”. Jews thought that they had crucified Jesus, his body would remain here, and the maximum that could happen now was that his soul might be uplifted. Therefore, God, in order to make His Prophet unruffled said that he would be lifted completely. In the light of this clarification by the Qur’an, it was a matter of great defiance to consider Jesus as dead.

Second Reply

It was just mentioned in the previous section that the meaning of “Tawafa” was either complete takeover or handover, therefore on this basis the meaning of the Verse could be, “I shall raise you and make you die at the appointed time.”

Therefore, at this moment God was fulfilling His promise of continuing his life and then make him die after his descent from the heavens at the appointed time. Therefore, all the Christians and Jews who would be present at that time would revert to him in truth, as the Qur’anic Verse said,

وَإِن مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ

“There will be no one among the people of the book that has not reverted to him (Jesus) before his death” (4:159).

Third Reply

Another meaning of ‘Tawafa’ was sleep. It was therefore, mentioned in the Qur’an,

وَهُوَ الَّذِي يَتَوَفَّاكُم بِاللَّيْلِ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا جَرَحْتُم بِالنَّهَارِ

“He is the same God, Who provides you with sleep during the night and knows what you do during the day” (6:60).

That is why it was said that sleep was a sister of death. Therefore, in the light of this meaning, the Verse related to Jesus could be translated as, “O Jesus! I shall make you asleep, and then raise you (to the heavens) in that state.”

It was mentioned in various traditions that Jesus (‘a) was lifted to the heavens, while he was asleep.

Fourth Reason

Keeping aside the meanings quoted above, if for a moment we assumed that the meaning of ‘tawafa’ was death, even then it did not prove the death of Jesus, because in the Verse – “Mutawaffika wa rafiuka” - according to the grammarians the connective ‘wa’ did not keep one to one relationship with its connection.

For example, when it was said, “Jaa-a Zaid wa Umar” - Zaid and ‘Umar came, then it did not mean that Zaid came first and ‘Umar came later. There was a possibility that this might be true and there was also an equal possibility that it might not have happened like that, and both could have arrived at the same time or ‘Umar could have come first and Zaid came later. In this case all three possibilities had to be considered equally. Therefore, the implication of this rule might be that Jesus’ ascension to the heavens had taken place initially and his death might take place after that. Anyone who studied these answers carefully would be in a strong position to refute arguments given in favour of Jesus’ death.

Rebuttal Of The Theory Of Transmigration Of Souls

Although, in chapter fifteen the definition of transmigration of souls had been mentioned, it is repeated here once again. According to the specialists, Tanasukh stood for the movement of soul from one body to another body, in this world, as a result of a punishment or a reward. There were three other terms that had been derived from Tanasukh, and those who had a cursory view of things could not differentiate between these terms.

• Tanasukh was migration of human soul into animal species.

• Tarasukh was migration of human soul into any mineral body.

• Tafasukh was migration of human soul into any botanical species.

Anyhow, this concept of transmigration of soul, which was the mainstay of Hindu, Aarya Samaj and some other thinkers, was totally against Islamic teachings. This was so because it involved the concepts of eternity of soul and negation of the Day of Judgement. There were several grounds to reject this idea. A few arguments are presented here to rebut this concept.

First Argument

The centrepiece of tanasukh was the denial of the Day of Judgement and eternity of the soul. When it had been proved with irrefutable arguments that the Day of Judgement was definite, then its negation automatically annulled the idea of Transmigration of souls.

Second Argument

Tanasukh involved the eternity of soul. We knew that apart from God, everything else was probable. Therefore, tanasukh was a wrong concept.

Third Argument

For those people, who had accepted the idea of transmigration, it was the only way for them through which a soul could be punished or rewarded for its deeds. However, it would be reasonable to say that a person who was punished or rewarded should have its full qualifications or knowledge of his past deeds, otherwise the retribution or recompense would be considered a meaningless act.

However, no one until now had felt within themselves that they were going through the punishment or reward of some particular acts of their past life. If all of them could not remember, then at least there should have be a minor percentage of the total, who would at least be aware of their past deeds that had resulted in their present state of punishment or reward. This told that transmigration of souls was a wrong concept.

Fourth Argument

If tanasukh was an appropriate mechanism then the rate of birth must equal the rate of deaths, but the observations were against this view. Often due to disasters, death was more predominant as compared to births and vice versa. In the first case, when many souls were uselessly available and in other case new souls were essentially created, which was against the principle of transmigration of souls.

Fifth Argument

If the concept of tanasukh was correct then it was essential that millions of humans who were dead earlier must come to life every day because the proponents of tanasukh had no mechanism to tell whether a dead soul must occupy only a newly created body. We were therefore right to assume that according to the postulates of tanasukh, a man who died today must come to life in a dead monkey or a dog according to his deeds and that dead animal must become active and vibrant. Nothing like this had ever been noticed.

Sixth Argument

We have learnt through exhaustive studies that human soul at its birth was devoid of intelligence, but as the body progressed then its sensitivity to its surroundings increased and his intelligence improved and gradually reached its pinnacle. That was why philosophers had divided process of human learning into four stages – images, understanding, practical activity and useful acumen.

When man was a child he learnt through images, when he grew a bit, he then learnt to decipher those images and made a sense of it. During the third stage his memory bank had progressed so that he was fully aware of his capabilities and in the fourth stage he could contribute to the development of his surroundings. We could now say that a soul, which had reached the fourth stage would have to start from the initial stage if he or she had to go through tanasukh. In reality however, the reversal of the learning stages mentioned earlier had not been witnessed in the physical world.

Seventh Argument

The circle of tanasukh had no definite beginning. For a man, it was essential that he should first belong to an inorganic world and then reach the animal stage while, it was essential for the animal and vegetable species to be human first, because tanasukh was based on a progression ladder i.e. it progressed to higher levels for performing good deeds and reverted to lower life for committing evil deeds, and this was an open circle and that was logically impossible.

Eighth Argument

If we accepted tanasukh, then we must accept its circle to be eternal and everlasting as well, and if this circle was perpetual then we would have to admit that those bodies, through which these souls were transmigrating, were also endless or eternal. This rule would then be applicable to the system, in which these souls and bodies were operating, and the universe would be then eternal as well, but scientific discoveries have revealed that this universe was not eternal. It had been created at a certain instant of time.

Ninth Argument

If the next life was a result of our bad deeds, as it was said, the fruit of evil was always bad, then its repetition could not manifest in any form other than malevolence and immorality. This way a soul was bound to degrade further and further down the track, and we could not expect it to elevate itself. This meant that it was possible for a man to become a beast but it was impossible for an animal to become man.

A question that now arose was - what were those good deeds that made this human population to grow, and where had they come from? Is there anyone who could solve this human puzzle?

Tenth Argument

There was no doubt that the concept of tanasukh was better than the model, which suggested that death was end of the road for humanity, since in this concept there was at least a hope that evil would be punished and good would be rewarded.

However, a belief that was against logic and wisdom, and opposed human development could not grip people’s mind indefinitely. It lost its intellectual value due to its final consequence, because once it was known that the circle of tanasukh was on the move, like an automatic machine, then it would produce expected results for given deeds. Therefore, there was no room left for repentance and remorse.

Hence a person would be entangled in an unending circle of evil. So, if he decided that as he was destined for a lower form of life, why should he not enjoy the present human stature to the maximum, without caring for its legal implications or its effects on the society? Who could negate such a proposal.

• 1. Tafsir al-Fath al-Bayan and Ibn Kathir.
• 2. Tafsir al-Safi.
• 3. Tafsir al-Safi.
• 4. Refer to Verse 35:37.