Intro
In 1893, MGA called At-Tabari as the chief of the Mufassireen (See “Ainah Kamalate Islam”, page 147). This is ironic since At-Tabari has the “substitution-theory” in it and no other alternative story for Eisa (as)’s escape from the cross. Ironically, Abu Jafar al-Tabari, the father of Quranic exegetists, claimed that Esa (as) hasn’t died yet. Also, check out Praise for Tafsir al-Tabari from Great Scholars of the Past herein.
The mufassirūn are in agreement that Jesus did not die, that instead he ascended to heaven body and soul while someone else died in his place. Their principal disagreement is only whether God cast the image of Jesus on a number of people, from whom the Jews chose one to crucify, or whether God cast the image of Jesus only on one specific person. (Reynolds, 2009: 41), See Upal, “Moderate Fundamentalist” (2017).
Imam Tabari and the substitution theory, Tabari (d. 839–923/ 224–310 AH) divided the early reports regarding Jesus’ (as) crucifixion into two groups. According to the first, one of Jesus disciple’s volunteers to take the form of his master and is crucified (substitution theory). According to the other, the Jew mistakenly carried only an empty resemblance to the cross. (See Robinson, Neal [1991]. “The Crucifixion – Non-Muslim Approaches”. Christ in Islam and Christianity: The Representation of Jesus in the Qur’an and the Classical Muslim Commentaries. Albany, New York: SUNY Press. pp. 106–140. ISBN 978-0-7914-0558-1. S2CID 169122179. Retrieved 5 January 2021).
In Jan-2025, via a recent debate between Bro Imtiaz and a 16-year old Qadiani-Ahmadi from Israel (Nur, @Ahmadi_Muslim on TikTok). The Qadiani-Ahmadi alleged that Tabari had agreed that “Khala” was translated as death (in 5:75 and 3:144). However, Bro Imtiaz pointed out how Tabari’s conclusion was that Eisa (as) hadn’t died yet and thus it is dishonest for an Ahmadi to quote him. Moreover, remember, MGA called At-Tabari as the chief of the Mufassireen. Lastly, Tabari also commentated on 43:61 and told the world that Eisa (as) was physically returning.
Ironically, the 16-year old Qadiani-Ahmadi from Israel (Nur, @Ahmadi_Muslim on TikTok) admitted that this was a contradiction (and academically dishonest)(18:21) time stamp). He also admitted that Al-Uthaymin also believed like Tabari, however, the Qadiani-Ahmadi doesn’t care. In 2025, this issue was discussed again with the same Nur. Check out Brother Omar explaining how Ahmadi’s translate of “Al-Rusul” in 3:144 is different from “Al-Rusul” in 5:75 (See the clip on TikTok and Twitter), in fact, Zafrullah Khan gave the same translation in his version of the Quran.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Aina-e-Kamalat-e-Islam, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 5, page 168
“Ainah Kamalate Islam”, page 147, online English edition
“….Ibn Jarir At-Tabari, who is the chief of the Mufassireen….”.
Scan
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Links and Related Essay’s
Ibn Abbas is the main source for the substitution theory – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
Praise for Tafsir al-Tabari from Great Scholars of the Past – ahmadiyyafactcheckblog
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Tags
#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #messiahhascome #ahmadiyyat #trueislam #ahmadianswers #ahmadiyyamuslimcommunity #ahmadiyya_creatives #ahmadiyyatthetrueislam #ahmadiyyatzindabad #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiyyamuslim #mirzaghulamahmad #qadiani #qadianism
1 Pingback