End Times in Islam: The Return of Isa (as) - Shaykh Asrar Rashid

Added: 2026-05-26

[00:00:00]Salvation is only with Allah.

[00:00:03]Even of the messenger of Allaham, we do not call this ultimate salvation.

[00:00:09]Why? Because the people he shall intercede for people of monotheism. So salvation is with whom? With Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala. No one is claiming salvation at the hands of Isaam.

[00:00:26]No salvation is only with whom? with Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala.

[00:00:32]So a a point made regarding Abuur that his narrations in Bkari relating to the descent of Isaam they contain Zuhari and according to this person was a person who forged hadith according to him even though uh no real proof is given for that and even if the person does attempt to give any proof uh we can refute ute that but is Abu is his narration solely from the answer is no because if you check the narration of Abu in other works like the imuslim you have a chain of narration which does not contain this is the problem for the reformist why is this a problem because when you 31 companions and now he has selected Abuhurah. Just examining the hadith of Abuhur. He will say this hadith is forged because was a forger of hadith even though this is rejected in terms of hadith.

[00:01:49]But the problem he will have is that not only Zori relates this from Abuah, there are other narrators who narrate this also. So how many narrators is he going to declare as being forggers forggers of hadith? So the narration from Abuer alone he's unable to establish as being forged. Never mind the narrations from 31 companions. And remember with mutaw hadith alone there is no authenticating there is no weakening because it is once a hadith is declared as being mutawat yes he can critique an individual chain but even with those individual chains there will be so many different chains he would have to catch and he would be he would he would be be unable to catch all the chains and make them all forgeries.

[00:02:42]Speculation will not work. Meaning what is speculation? Saying Alim Malik did not write this in the hadith in the ma maybe because of this this and this.

[00:02:52]This is an orientalist method of speculation. Orientalists do this all the time. For instance, uh the hadith in Bkari which mentions that no nation is successful that place places a woman to rule them. Some of them speculate that the companion that narrated this said this because he was a misogynist while speculation. Speculation does not work here.

[00:03:18]The points were they rational? The answer is no. Meaning which point the point of the the kingdom of these points are not rational points. We know killing of the swine and destruction of the cross is a kinaya.

[00:03:34]What is ginaya? A metanym for the destruction of Christianity. In what way? That Christians shall leave Christianity after seeing Isaam. When they shall see is they shall accept Islam. And that is proven from the Quran.

[00:03:56]the verse that no one from the people of the book except that they shall believe in him prior to his passing away.

[00:04:05]So there is no way that this hadith can be declared forged. So I have a challenge for any one of the reformists who still is adamant that the hadith is forged and they may attempt to bring weak rational arguments, weak rational arguments because uh if you listen to those arguments anyone with a mind who is trained they will be able to answer all those so-called rational objections.

[00:04:34]But the task would be the following.

[00:04:36]From those 31 hadith we okay we realize it is a difficult task to go through all 31 companions 100 hadith 31 companions let's make the task easy the task will be made easy by just go through the narrations of bbin Abd Uh, sorry. Abdman Abu number four Abdullah number five and number six and number seven companions I've named it leave 31 maybe it is too much it will take too much time the narrations of these Seven. And before you go on to textual criticism, meaning criticizing the text of the hadith, attempting to make rational so-called rational objections, in reality, those objections are not rational at all. I am surprised people who claim to have adopted modernity and modern education and science still lack any uh rational critique. I mean what n r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r rational critique do they possess really if you listen to their arguments the narrations of these seven companions the challenge is delineate for us who were those Christians who because we know in the biographies of all the narrators they mention this person was a Christian he accepted Islam do they not me mention that yes with everyone this person was a Christian he accepted Islam tell us who was this intelligent Christian who accepted Islam and forged the hadith and placed this belief and was able to forge the hadith to such an extent that it was narrated by 31 companions in over aundred narrations and not only that it exceeded the hadith on the seven the seven letters it exceeded that unless the person rejects that hadith also and of course we know that the modern reformists do reject so many mutawat hadith. But why do they uh reject those hadith?

[00:07:14]I will say as a Sunni Muslim that we do not even reject meaning if a hadith comes with an authentic chain of narration one authentic chain and the text is fine that there is nothing wrong with the text it is from the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam we do not rush to reject that text what happened with the reformists they ended up rejecting some hadith where they were found to be rung. How? There is a famous hadith famous in the sense that it is mentioned by many people but it counts as what do we mean by solitary report different toaw one person may have narrated it.

[00:08:01]The hadith is that the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam said if you have a drink and a fly falls in the drink immerse the fly into the drink and then drink the drink. Why? because the fly carries uh a disease and its cure.

[00:08:18]The modern reformists because of an inferiority complex meaning living in countries like Egypt where there are many flies, Okarachi where there's many flies and flies fall into the food and people practice this hadith and then the British came in a cold country. They come from cold countries where there are not many flies and they found this habit to be distasteful and the hadith they rejected it. So the modern reformists with the inferiority complex this is a psychological reason why this is happening they rejected the hadith also later on what did actual scientific evidence show not pseudocience I'm not quoting pseudocience like in media or other pseudociences people claiming that they can survive without food and drink this is pseudo science real science has shown that a fly carries an antidote to bacteria. This is real science. Go and check this. So the reformists when this came to light, the reformists dropped this. They they do not discuss this anymore.

[00:09:27]But they rushed to reject the hadith.

[00:09:30]Likewise another famous example which I always cite is the hadith in Bkari which Maris Bouel. Have you heard of the author Maris Buchel? the author of the Quran, the science and the Quran, the B Bible and modern science famous work.

[00:09:48]He accepted Islam but he was unable to comprehend some hadith for instance but he was not the first to reject this. The hadith states that every day the son is under the throne of Allah and pro prostrates and takes divine permission to rise every day. He said this does not conform with science and what we observe and he rejected the hadith. What was the problem here? The problem was not the hadith. The problem was what we call which means what? How you read the text.

[00:10:27]How you read the text. And I've explained this in other lectures. The hadith states the sun is under the ar.

[00:10:34]Would this be factual? The answer is yes. How the arsh is the creation of light that encompasses the known universes and the galaxies. It encompasses everything that we observe.

[00:10:44]So the sun is already under the arch.

[00:10:47]Does the sun prostrate?

[00:10:50]The the mistake the person is making in reading the hadith. He thinks the sun is prostrating like a human being. So the way a human being prostrates with placing his face on the ground and his two hands and his knees they are expecting the ball the gaseous ball of the sun to bend down and observe this the gaseous ball bending down or if we say a tree prostrates or a flower prostrates. What does this mean? It means that creation is prostrating to Allah in a way that befits that creation unobservable to us. So if I say this bottle is a is frustrating to Allah, it doesn't mean the bottle will bend as this modernist reformer would think. He would think this is what we are saying.

[00:11:33]No, it means the bottle is prostrating to Allah meaning submissive to Allah under the divine command of Allah.

[00:11:41]Prostrating in a way that befits its creation. So the sun is prostrating at all times. And what does it mean? It takes permission meaning it does not rise on a horizon except with the divine will and the divine power of Allah. So if someone had understood the text, they would not have rejected the hadith. This hadith is not mutaw.

[00:12:04]This hadith is not it is narrated by maybe one companion. I have not checked how many companions have narrated it but it is definitely not.

[00:12:16]So rejecting even a person who cannot understand whose epistemology is flawed and this is why I emphasize what is your method in understanding the Quran and the Sunnah. What is your method you employ? This is very important to delineate this at the beginning.

[00:12:37]Then such a person would not have rejected the mutawat miracle of the tree trunk that the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam would recline upon the miracle that occurred when the the companions heard a sound coming from the tree trunk. Of course like I said the critical methodology relating to mutawat needs to be applied to that also but these reformists are known to reject numerous hadith. A last final point relating to consensus.

[00:13:17]The reformer says that the meaning of consensus is everyone in the ummah of the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam must agree on a point otherwise it is not.

[00:13:28]Is this a correct understanding of the answer is no. The correct understanding is that if the mahid imams what do we mean by mutah imams in the time of the sal the likes of im malik al imm ahmed bin hal imbuif the famous four imams but other scholars also so many of them Abdullah Mubaraki these ims if they agreed on something then we would term that as being consensus. This is what we mean by the reformer would say this is impossible.

[00:14:19]The answer is this is not impossible because the imams in each era were known.

[00:14:25]Meaning you had in Egypt. You had yet they met and discussed. You had in Kufa. You had Sufy in Alufa. You had Sufyan in the Hij. You had different scholars who were known as Much the imams. If they concurred on a legal ruling or a matter that would be termed as being consensus, but the objection which I placed upon the rejector of was how do you reconsolidate this with the caliphate of when there was civil war or the caliphate of the only source you have is concern consensus of the group of people known as al- the people of consultation. They agreed upon a leader and they elected him as a leader.

[00:15:24]this group of people.

[00:15:27]But the person would say this was a need that was a need at the time that they needed in order to reconsolidate the um of unify the um but this is saying this is like saying that the um of the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam makes its own laws as it goes by. When we say has its roots in the Quran and the Sunnah, this is a point for a a discussion for a different lecture on itself amongst the companions of the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wasallam from 124,000.

[00:16:03]When we say Sahabah, is it necessary every sahab he has a statement? The answer is no. It can sometimes even be a few companions agree on something. The rest remain silent. Even 20, even less than 20. If they agree on something, the rest remain silent. This would be called. In every era, there have been issues which there has been.

[00:16:28]Of course like the person rejected saying the hadith and the isaw he rejects saying the hadith and the inawi that the hadith and the the descent of numerous hadith scholars. Likewise, this person will reject the sourcing of if you check commentaries of the Quran with the scholars stipulate there is on this issue. There is on the descent of Isaam.

[00:17:05]The only subtle dispute is at the time of being raised was he did he die or did he sleep? But as I mentioned the best fitting statement in accordance with Arabic language and in accordance with the commentaries is that the meaning of mutaf is that he was raised. But the objection the person will have then is if he if we go by the statement that is the soul of Isaam was taken and if we say the body was taken up as well how will he be revived? This is as if the person is rejecting the divine power of Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala. This is why I quoted that Allah regarding Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala took his soul and then revived him on earth. The miracle occurred on earth. And when Hose Alisam was revived, what happened?

[00:18:04]The donkey, the bones, the the donkey had become bones. While Hose Alisam, his body and clothes were fresh because he's a prophet. Because when prophets die, their bodies remain fresh.

[00:18:17]But the fruit that was in the bag remained fresh as a miracle.

[00:18:23]But of course this person would say perceptively he was dead. There is no way of uh again how do you interpret the Quran saying perceptively dead then someone in Queen Elizabeth hospital who may be perceptively dead and a doctor comes a non-Muslim doctor revives him then he's according to you he has performed a miracle when the real meaning of miracle is breaking the norms at this point I will stop and inshallah I believe these points are irrefutable I believe these points are irrefutable utable. But if anyone attempts to refute these points and I believe that the reputation is viable, meaning some something with depth, then inshallah I will respond in written form and release something in written form on each individual point that may be raised regarding what I have said. We will open up for questions and answers. If people have questions um uh I will take questions inshallah.

[00:19:28]when you mentioned he mentioned one that you know the coming dinosaur and stuff if that is done before the shams there's no hadith to suggest that the order of the sign >> there's no there's no hadith authentic hadith to suggest which order they're going to come in But what there is a hadith of maj suggesting that the shams will happen first and so is going to come after what he said the verse that you mentioned about the believers that this will refer to a group of believers who are going to leave in the end time that's impossible that's at the time of his when he was on earth so how do you answer that point >> the question is that mahmud mentioned an objection saying that there is a hadith that states that the sun shall rise from the west first and then Isaam shall descend. So how can people believe after the sun has risen from the west?

[00:20:40]The answer is to Mahmud is that his methodology rejects the rising of the sun from the west.

[00:20:48]So he contradicts himself. Either he rejects the hadith that mentions the rising of the sun from the west or does not take it literally which he didn't take the hadith literally. If you check the views of Muhammad Abdul and Rashida they never took that sign as being literal. They said it means the rising of Islam from the west. So according to them when Islam rises from the west then there is no meaning people are not tasked to believe in Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala. So the hadith itself again that hadith that you mention is one solitary narration but the overall narration it cannot contradict.

[00:21:27]So it he contradicts himself by mentioning this objection.

[00:21:31]>> What do you mean by majority?

[00:21:35]>> When we say we mean all of the imams agree on a given point. If there is one objector, one person who objects, then there is no just then there is majority and minority both opinions would be allowed. But when they all concur on a given point, then it would be considered meaning consensus.

[00:22:01]>> Would that be impossible? If there was no technology this is going to allow reforms and >> again um this object objection is made by the reformists that would this be impossible I would say no why where did come from from Spain where did he go to the main re of the Malik is from is from Spain so this refutes the whole point when goes back to Spain. The whole of Spain knows Albin as a famous scholar.

[00:22:37]They know of Alam Malik. So the scholars were connected. Do not think that the uh times of the califfs were uh times where the uh communications uh were not good.

[00:22:50]They were very good for that standard for the time period. Uh for instance, the announcement of Eid from the Khalifa, how quickly it was dispatched from one side of the caliphate to the other. So this is a misconception of projecting a backwardness in that time because reformists have these con concepts that they believe people in that time were backwards.

[00:23:15]What's the reformist idea in yajj and majj?

[00:23:18]>> Again the reformists they would reject yajj and majj or they would say the yajjud and maj mean reject in the sense of what how we understand yajjud and maj. They would say that the British colonialists and the Europeans are yajj and maj. This was a reformist idea.

[00:23:37]>> I got one question about a particular person you debated. Did he say that has passed away or does he believe that still alive?

[00:23:47]>> The person would have to clarify for himself. So when he responds, he would have to clarify for himself. And by the way, that was not a debate. That was supposed to be a pre-debate discussion.

[00:23:59]And we agreed to debate. And then on Monday, a counter announcement was made even though numbers were exchanged. And when numbers were exchanged, I communicated with the person with no response. And then an an announcement was made not to debate me. Even though the person had left that gathering saying he was not offended, he did not mind the talking over one another but then announced something else to his followers elsewhere. While I am sticking to the same story, One see the