The concept of the “Appearance of Mahdi” or “Imam Mahdi” is one of the significant beliefs of the Muslim Ummah, which is typically classified by our traditional scholarship under the category of faith (Aqeedah). There is no disagreement that this belief is entirely based on hadith, some of which are authentic, while others are graded as good (hasan), weak (da’if), or even fabricated (mawdu). The Qur’an, however, remains silent on this subject and contains no direct references or indications. Nevertheless, irrespective of whether this belief should be included in matters of faith, the broad outlines of the concept do emerge from the relevant Ahadith. Hence, it would be neither entirely appropriate to reject the belief outright nor reasonable to insist that every detail is accurate and exhaustive.
Before delving into a discussion of this belief, two preliminary points must be kept in mind:
1. Evidence exists in reality, and it is through the combination of this evidence that we formulate theories. This principle holds true not only in the realms of the natural world and the self but also
[This column, “Nuqtah-e-Nazar,” is dedicated to the writings of various thinkers. The publication of articles in this space does not necessarily reflect the views of the institution.]
in history and literature. Thus, it is entirely possible that the same body of evidence, when assembled one way, may lead to one theory, and when combined in another way, may lead to a different theory. It is important to understand that a theory is merely an interpretation of evidence, created by applying principles formulated by the theorist, and therefore, despite the validity of the evidence, the theory itself may still be subject to strengths, weaknesses, and the potential for error.
2. Muslims are not the first nation to be chosen by Allah. The Jews and Christians underwent a similar selection process before them. In fact, when the Muslim Ummah was established, this reminder was given right at the beginning so that the mistakes of previous nations could serve as lessons and prevent them from being repeated. Just as errors occurred in matters of faith and law among these earlier communities, similar mistakes also occurred in the realm of prophecies. By analyzing these, we can gain wisdom on how to understand prophecies and how to identify their fulfillment.
Therefore, we can observe that by combining different prophecies concerning Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them both), the previous communities created “dramatic” scenarios that neither matched reality nor ever will; they remain in anticipation of their fulfillment to this day. The case of Imam Mahdi in the Muslim is not vastly different from this.
Without going into too much detail, the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah regarding Imam Mahdi can be summarized as follows:
“In the end times (1), there will be a leader or caliph (2) among the Muslims (3). He will be from the family of the Prophet (pbuh) (4), and his name will be the same as that of the Prophet (peace be upon him) (5) (and his father’s name will also be the same as the Prophet’s father). He will fill the earth with justice and fairness just as it was filled with oppression and tyranny. His reign will last 7-9 years (7), during which time Islam will prevail (8), there will be economic prosperity, and he will be extremely generous. He will be the one to whom Jesus (peace be upon him) will defer to lead the prayer upon his descent (9).”
Although people might already be aware, it still seems beneficial to provide a reminder that this entire theory has not been derived from a single narration. Rather, it has been constructed by gathering partial information from multiple narrations. So, let us take a closer look at the individual components that, when combined, give shape to the theory of Mahdi, in order to better understand the discussion ahead.
1. Original Phrases: “Aakhiruz-Zaman” (the last era), “Aakhir Umati” (the last of my Ummah), “Lo lam yabq min ad-dahr / al-dunya illa yawm/laylatun” (if not more than a day/night remained of this world), “la tadhhab/tanqadi al-dunya” (the world will not end). In traditional understanding, these phrases, which appear in different narrations, are often interpreted in a very limited sense, meaning “in the final days” or “in the last part of the Ummah,” leading to the conclusion that these pertain to the generations immediately preceding the Day of Judgment. This interpretation is incorrect. Whether it is the word “Aakhir” or the phrase “the world will not end,” they contain a broader meaning that has often been overlooked. When the Prophet (peace be upon him) referred to the entire time from his own era until the Day of Judgment without specifying a particular period, he would use such phrases and expressions. This expansiveness is present in the word “Aakhir” as well as in the phrase “the world will not end.” Therefore, the time implied could be any period after the Prophet (peace be upon him), not just the few generations before the world’s end.
2. Original Phrases: “Ummah” and “Arab.” Sometimes the term “Ummah” (nation) is used, and other times “Arab.” This indicates the possibility that the ruler mentioned could be either the ruler of the entire Muslim Ummah or just of the Arab lands.
3. Original Phrases: “Amir,” “Khalifah,” “Malik,” “Rajul,” “Imam.” These different terms are used to convey the idea of a political leader. Although the word “Imam” has religious connotations in our context, in Arabic, it is commonly used to mean simply a ruler or leader. Furthermore, the term “Imam” does not even appear in most of the relevant narrations, with other terms being used instead.
4. Original Phrases: “Minni,” “min ahl bayti,” “Min Itrati.” These phrases mean “from me” or “from my family and lineage.” Although some narrations contain just the term “Ahl al-Bayt” (the Prophet’s household), other narrations express uncertainty about whether the phrase was “from me” or “from my household.” Thus, the expression “from me” introduces a broader meaning that goes beyond the restriction of “Ahl al-Bayt.”
5. Original Phrases: “His name will be after my name” and in some narrations, “and his father’s name will be after my father’s name.” Although these two details appear together in some narrations, many narrations suffice with “his name will be after my name,” and only in a few do we find the mention of the father’s name. This is why I placed the second phrase in parentheses.
6. Original Phrases: The term “Al-Ard” is used, which means “the land” or “the earth.” It is generally understood to refer to the entire planet, leading to the conclusion that Imam Mahdi will be a global ruler. However, in Arabic, this word is often contextually limited, so translating it as “the part of the land he rules over” is not only acceptable but more accurate and preferable.
7. Original Phrases: Some narrations mention “seven years,” others “nine years,” and still others mention “eight.”
8. The dominance of Islam is mentioned in some narrations but not as frequently as other phrases. Moreover, in traditional scholarship, we find excessive elaboration on the extent of this dominance, much like the interpretation of “Al-Ard,” which has a weak basis.
9. The Imam mentioned in the narrations about the conquest of Constantinople, the descent of Jesus (peace be upon him), and the Dajjal. Readers can see a deliberate full stop before this phrase, separating it from the earlier phrases. This is because this sign belongs to an entirely different set of narrations that contain no mention of the signs listed in the previous narrations, and vice versa. What has happened is that early scholars combined these two different sets of information to formulate a single theory. In reality, these are so distinct that they should never have been merged into one.
The word “Mahdi” does not appear in most narrations. However, there is no reason to object to the central role that this word has come to play in the overall theory. This is because the leader referred to in the narrations was considered to be guided by Allah, which is signified by the word “Mahdi.” There is no issue with this, but over time, the term “Mahdi” has gained an almost mystical significance in our culture, even though it was originally a common word used for the rightly-guided caliphs as well. The same kind of confusion that the term “Messiah” caused in the knowledge of the People of the Book has occurred with the term “Mahdi” in our tradition. The reality was likely simpler: when a ruler was to be described as righteous and obedient to the Sunnah, the term “Mahdi” was used, and that was all.
Note: The idea that “there is no Mahdi except for Jesus (peace be upon him)” is a weak narration. Similarly, the hadith about the twelve Imams is highly debated, which is why they have not been included in this summary.
Now that the moving parts of this theory have been clarified, and the possible different interpretations of these phrases have been explored, it should be easier to understand the components of the alternative theory of Mahdi presented below:
1. The various scattered signs found in the narrations actually refer to at least two Mahdis or rulers, not just one. One is the one prophesied to be the ruler of the Arabs, who would be generous and fill the land with justice after it had been filled with oppression. The other is the one mentioned in the narrations regarding the conquest of Constantinople, the Dajjal, and Jesus (peace be upon him).
2. The signs of the first type were mostly, if not entirely, fulfilled in the person of Abdullah ibn Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with him). He was born to Zubayr ibn al-Awwam (may Allah be pleased with him) and Asmabint Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her), close companions of the Prophet (pbuh). He was given the Prophet’s blessing at birth, did not pledge allegiance to Yazid, migrated from Medina to Mecca, was given allegiance at the Kaaba, faced armies from Syria sent to kill him, ruled as the leader of the Arabs for nine years, and his era saw prosperity. Thus, most of the major signs appear to have been fulfilled in him.
3. The second conqueror of Constantinople was Sultan Muhammad al-Fatih, who captured the ancient capital of the Roman Empire in a historic battle, permanently ending any chance of its recovery and causing the remnants of the Roman Empire to crumble forever.
4. The names of both of these figures are also noteworthy. One had the same name as the Prophet’s father, and the other had the same name as the Prophet (pbuh) himself. Thus, if the narrators confused the two, it would not be surprising to students of history. It is entirely possible that the Prophet (peace be upon him) referred to each of these individuals at different times, but the narrators, and later scholars, combined the two sets of signs into one person.
However, despite the fact that most of the signs were fulfilled, there are still signs that were not fulfilled, and these too require an explanation, which is as follows:
1. The sign of being from the Ahl al-Bayt or a descendant of Fatimah was not fulfilled in these figures. A possible reason for this has already been hinted at above—namely, that some narrations contain the phrases “minni” (from me) or “min ahl bayti” (from my household). It is possible that the narrators were confused between “from me” and “from my household,” and the original meaning might have been “from me,” while the “Ahl al-Bayt” version became more widespread later. As mentioned earlier, insisting on the fulfillment of one or two specific signs when the majority of the signs have been fulfilled is an incorrect approach, and we can see from the history of the People of the Book how this approach led to errors in their interpretation of prophetic figures.
2. The signs regarding the appearance of the Dajjal and the descent of Jesus (peace be upon him) did not occur during the reign of this leader. The reason for this is that these events have not been properly understood. A superficial reading of the relevant narrations gives the impression that this same leader—whom we have interpreted as Muhammad al-Fatih—would supposedly confront the Dajjal and, at the same time, be honored by the descent of Jesus (peace be upon him). However, this interpretation is incorrect. Since this point relates to the identification of the Dajjal and Jesus (peace be upon him), which is a complex matter in itself and requires a detailed separate discussion, we are compelled to postpone the discussion of this point until the next part. Other than this point, however, the discussion on the remaining signs is complete .
In summary, the narrations related to the appearance of Mahdi actually pertain to two different rulers, not just one. The first set of narrations refers to Abdullah ibn Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with him), while the second set refers to Muhammad al-Fatih. Therefore, both events have already occurred, and for the Muslim community to continue awaiting them is merely a repetition of the same old mistake made by the People of the Book in identifying the figures of Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them both).
[1] Further discussions on this and other signs of the Day of Judgment are ongoing on the author’s YouTube channel, and related articles are also being published on Patreon. Those seeking more details can refer to those platforms to explore the discussions.