The Meaning of Seal of the Prophets (part 2 of 3)

Abú-Jalál

27 March 2026

(4) The Meaning of Seal of the Prophets

Kaaba of Mecca

‘SAY to them: O men! Verily I am God's apostle to you all; Whose is the kingdom of the Heavens and of the Earth! Therefore believe on God but He! He maketh alive and killeth! Therefore believe on God, and his Apostle – the unlettered Prophet - who believeth in God and his word. And follow him that ye may be guided aright.’ 

- Qur’ān 7:158

The next topic that must be addressed is the term ‘Seal of the Prophets’ (khātam-u n-nabīyīn)—a much misunderstood and misinterpreted term that is often used as a veil to obstruct the truth, an obstacle between the seeker and the object of his desire, a barrier between the wayfarer and God, and a baton with which to attack the true Faith of God. For traditional Muslims, it is a term which bespeaks the finality and completeness of the religion of Muhammad, that the door of revelation has closed, that God’s hands are tied up, and that there will be no further Prophets or Messengers of God. For the Bábīs and Bahá’ís, it is a term whose true meaning has now been revealed and which now shines resplendent as the day, manifest for all those who seek after truth. It is a true title of Muhammad (peace be upon Him) and it is a phrase full of inner mystery, potency and light, which, when revealed to mankind, bespeaks both the greatness and majesty of the Prophet Muhammad and His uniqueness. 

Muhammad is a peerless and pre-existent Light, an eternal and glorious Figure, and a pure Mirror of the Countenance of God. He is a Primal Mirror of that eternal King, mirroring forth and manifesting in His Person all the Names and Attributes of God in the utmost splendour. Possessing the Most Great Infallibility, the Prophet Muhammad was the Revealer of God’s Word. His every action was divine, His every Word was God’s Word, His every movement was God’s movement, and, in His Being, as the Perfect and Primal Mirror of God, one can see only God Himself. Thus is Muhammad the Manifestation of both the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the Eternal Logos or Word of God made flesh, as we find it described in the Gospel of John, ‘In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not’.  These words speak as truly of Jesus Christ as they do of Muhammad, who was the Light of the World and had the same essential nature, attributes, quality and authority as Jesus Christ (and hence was the Return of Christ in spirit). Therefore, as Muhammad is the Manifestation of the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, so also is He the Seal of the Prophets. He is the First Prophet, and He is the Last Prophet, as there is neither beginning nor end, first or last, in the realm of God. We will look at this point in more detail below. 

The phrase khātam-u n-nabīyīna appears once in the Qur’ān, at Qur’ān 33:40. In that verse, God says: mā kāna muḥammad-un ’abā ’aḥad-in min rijāl-i-kum wa-lākin rasūl-a llāh-i wa khātam-a n-nabīyīna wa-kāna llāh-u bi-kull-i shay’-in ‘alīm-an (‘Muḥammad has not been the father of anyone of your men, but He is the Messenger of God and the Seal of the Prophets and God is, over all things, Knowing’ [my translation]).  The context of the verse is this: God is clarifying that, as no male child of the Prophet lived until puberty, He is not the biological father of any son. His wife, Khadījah, bore Him three sons: Al-Qāsim, At-Tayyib, and At-Tāhir, but they all died in childhood. He had several daughters with Khadījah, i.e. Fātimah, Zaynab, Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthūm. The Prophet also had an adopted son called Zayd. This verse confirmed that Zayd was no longer permitted to call himself ‘Zayd bin Muhammad’, as father or son refer to biological relationships only.  The first part of this verse is thus clear (i.e.  mā kāna muḥammad-un ’abā ’aḥad-in min rijāl-i-kum). The next part, wa-lākin rasūl-a llāh-i ‘But [He is] the Messenger of God’ is also clear. This means that He is the Messenger of God for His Day and age. This is immediately followed by wa khātam-a n-nabīyīna ‘and the Seal of the Prophets’. This is a unique phrase, as it appears nowhere else in the Qur’ān. It is thus mutashābih ‘ambiguous’—the Qur’ānic verses are divided into those that are muḥkamāt ‘clear, perspicuous’ and those which are mutashābihāt ‘ambiguous’.  

This is based on the Qur’ānic verse (3:7): ‘He it is who hath sent down to thee "the Book." Some of its signs are of themselves perspicuous [muḥkamāt]; - these are the basis of the Book - and others are figurative [mutashābihāt]. But they whose hearts are given to err, follow its figures, craving discord, craving an interpretation; yet none knoweth its interpretation but God. And the stable in knowledge say, "We believe in it: it is all from our Lord." But none will bear this in mind, save men endued with understanding’.  The Book here refers to the Qur’ān as well as previous scriptures. The verses in the ‘Book’ are divided into two categories, muḥkamāt ‘clear, perspicuous’ and mutashābihāt ‘ambiguous’, here translated as ‘figurative’, i.e. metaphorical. The key point here is that, in relation to the mutashābihāt, God says: wa-mā ya‘lam-u ta’wīl-a-hu ’illā llāh-i wa r-rāsikhūna fi l-‘ilm (‘and no one knoweth the interpretation thereof but God and the well-grounded ones/firmly established in knowledge’ [my translation]). In other words, the phrase ‘Seal of the Prophets’ has a hidden meaning, which no Islamic scholar can definitively interpret. The rāsikhūna fi l-‘ilm refers to those who truly understand God’s Word, e.g. figures such as Imām ‘Alī or Imām Husayn. As Bahá’u’lláh writes: 

‘Even as thou dost witness how the people of the Qur’án, like unto the people of old, have allowed the words “Seal of the Prophets” to veil their eyes. And yet, they themselves testify to this verse: “None knoweth the interpretation thereof but God and they that are well-grounded in knowledge.”  And when He Who is well-grounded in all knowledge, He Who is the Mother, the Soul, the Secret, and the Essence thereof, revealeth that which is the least contrary to their desire, they bitterly oppose Him and shamelessly deny Him. These thou hast already heard and witnessed. Such deeds and words have been solely instigated by leaders of religion, they that worship no God but their own desire, who bear allegiance to naught but gold, who are wrapt in the densest veils of learning, and who, enmeshed by its obscurities, are lost in the wilds of error.’ 

What, therefore, does ‘Seal of the Prophets’ mean? The term is often associated with the mistaken concept of the ‘finality of Islam’. In previous religious dispensations (see below for a definition of ‘dispensation’), Prophets had often been succeeded by their firstborn son or chosen son, e.g. Abraham (upon whom be peace), was succeeded by Isaac, with whom He had made a covenant. Isaac was, in turn, succeed by His chosen son, Jacob (Israel), the father of the Israelites. The spiritual heir of Jacob was Joseph. Abraham was a Greater Prophet or ‘Prophet endowed with constancy’,  who brought a ‘Book’ and founded a religion.  Although this ‘Book’ was not written down, His Teachings are recorded in the Book of Genesis. Isaac, Jacob and Joseph were all Lesser Prophets, who confirmed the revelation of their Ancestor. They represent a chain of succession, from one prophet to another. Other examples include David, who was succeeded by Solomon—both Lesser Prophets, and Zechariah, who was succeeded by John the Baptist—both Lesser Prophets. Other Prophets were succeeded by appointed Prophet-successors, e.g. Elijah was followed by Elisha. Moses, a Greater Prophet, was contemporary with His brother, Aaron, who was a Lesser Prophet, and the first High Priest of the Israelites (and ancestor of the Cohens). Moses was also succeeded as leader of the Israelites by Joshua. This is important to bear in mind when understanding the term ‘Seal of the Prophets’ or the ‘Last/Final Prophet’ or ‘Last Messenger of God’. 

The word khātam comes from the Arabic verb khatama ‘to seal’, which is a synonym of ṭaba‘a which means to seal, impress, to impress with a stamp, seal or signet, print, etc.  It thus relates to the physical act of sealing something, imprinting something or setting a seal or signet upon something, e.g. a letter or something which is sealed up. Think of Tutankhamun’s tomb, which was sealed up for more than 3,000 years. The meaning of khatama includes the meanings of to seal off, close, make impervious or inaccessible. In the context of the phrase khātam-a n-nabīyīna, ‘Seal of the Prophets’, this can mean the Best or most perfect of the Prophets, the embellishment or ornament of the Prophets, or, alternatively, the last of the Prophets.  Jalālu d-Dīn as-Suyūtī (c. 1445 – 1505) reported that Imām ‘Alī said that khātam must be read as khātam, thus conveying the meanings of ‘ring’ or ‘ornament’ rather than khātim, which conveys ‘end’ or ‘finality’.  as-Suyūtī  also quotes a tradition from ‘Ā’ishah bint ’Abī-Bakr (c. 614 – 678), the wife of the Prophet, who said: “Say ‘khātam an-nabiyyin’, and do not say ‘there is no prophet after him’”.  The famous commentator, at-Tabarī, in his commentary on the Qur’ān, states that ‘Seal of the Prophets’ means ‘that he [Muhammad] has sealed prophethood and placed his mark upon it (ṭaba‘a ‘alay-hā) and so this is not open to anyone after him until the coming of the [Last] Hour’.  This interpretation appears to be correct, as it (a) makes it clear that no Prophet would follow Muhammad within the Muhammadan Dispensation, and (b) that Prophecy and Revelation could continue after the Last Hour, meaning that there is no finality of religion. In other words, there could be no further Prophet within the time-period in which the laws and teachings of Muhammad are applicable, i.e. His Dispensation. Depending on the meaning of the ‘Last Hour’, a new Prophet or Messenger of God could come after that event has occurred. The Hour, Judgment, Last Day and Resurrection are themselves mutashābihāt, i.e. metaphorical terms which refer not to physical events but spiritual concepts with greater inner meanings.  

Further clarification of this point is found in numerous other commentaries, including those of Abu’l-Qāsim Mahmūd az-Zamakhsharī (1074 – 1143), a Mu‘tazilite scholar and theologian of Persian descent, who writes: ‘”And” he is the “Seal of the Prophets” – which means that had he (Muhammad) had any son who reached the age of manhood, he (the son) would have been a prophet and he (Muhammad) would not have been the ‘Seal of the Prophets’; for it is related of him (Muhammad) that he said concerning Ibrahim (Muhammad’s son) when he died: “had he lived, he would have been a prophet”’.  Ibrahim was the Prophet’s son by His wife (or concubine) Maria the Copt,  but he died at the age of two years’ old. In other words, ‘Seal of the Prophets’ here does not mean that there could never be a future Prophet or Messenger of God. Rather, it means that Muhammad had no son, and, therefore, His immediate successor would not be a Prophet. This is confirmed by the Persian polymath, Fakhr ad-Dīn ar-Rāzī (c. 1149 - 1209), who writes: ‘And so [Allah] Almighty has denied his [Muhammad] being the father of any son in the proof that He gives establishing certain aspects of fatherhood. And so He says: “rather he is the Messenger of Allah”, For the Messenger of Allah is like a father to his people in his compassion towards them and in the respect they owe him… Furthermore He informs us about the greater compassion on his part and the greater respect they owe him in His words “Seal of the Prophets”. And this is because a prophet is [usually] one who is followed by another prophet, so that if he omits any advice or explanation, this can be rectified by the one who follows him. But the one who does not have a prophet coming after him is more compassionate towards his people, and must guide them better and give them more.’  In other words, the term only relates to Muhammad’s immediate successor not being a Prophet. Only a very literalistic interpretation of the Qur’ān and hadiths, therefore, can make one believe in the finality of Islam. In reality, this verse does not preclude the coming of future Messengers or Prophets, especially after the Last Hour or Judgement. 

Moojan Momen (2000), a Bahá’í scholar who had studied this issue, also concludes that ‘There is much historical evidence that there was no general agreement among the early Muslims that the phrase ‘Seal of the Prophets’ meant that there would be no prophets after Muḥammad. Certainly up to the middle of the 3rd Islamic century there is a great deal of evidence from literary and historical sources for this. It is thought that the doctrine of Muḥammad being the final prophet was adopted as official Islamic doctrine in the early years of the 4th Islamic century (late 10th century AD), mainly as a counter to the numerous revolts that had occurred and were still occurring against the caliphate in the name of various persons claiming to be prophets. By making the doctrine of the finality of prophethood in Muḥammad a central tenet of Islam, the Muslim authorities were able to stem the tide of revolts so successfully that in the centuries since that time there have been only a handful of such claimants.’  Momen cites examples of commentaries prior to the 3rd century which do not refer to the concept of finality. Moreover, the concept of the finality would contradict other parts of the Qur’ān, as discussed below. As the Qur’ān says (2:85): ‘Believe ye then part of the Book, and deny part?’ To conclude this question, therefore, ‘Seal of the Prophets’ has many meanings, as it is a metaphorical and ambiguous term. However, it is clear that none of these meanings imply that God will no longer reveal his Word and will not send future Prophets or Messengers. 

(5) The Finality of Islām and Religion

The Temple of Solomon, Jerusalem

‘‘And this to his children did Abraham bequeath, and Jacob also, saying, "O my children! truly God hath chosen a religion for you; so die not unless ye be also Muslims." Were ye present when Jacob was at the point of death? when he said to his sons, "Whom will ye worship when I am gone?" They said, "We will worship thy God and the God of thy fathers Abraham and Ismael and Isaac, one God, and to Him are we surrendered (Muslims)."’ 

- Qur’ān 2:132 – 133 

I have discussed above various examples of religious claims that each Book is complete in itself and cannot be added to or subtracted from. In a literal sense, this is the finality of religion. Zoroastrians believe that there will be three Messianic Figures who will appear in the end of times, but they do not believe their religion will be changed or altered. Rather, they believe that the Message of the Prophet Zoroaster (peace be upon Him) is complete in itself and cannot be changed or altered, subtracted from or added unto. There is no scope for further prophets to appear who will add new laws, abrogate the existing laws of Zoroaster, or change in any way His Teachings. Likewise, the followers of Moses, i.e. the  Jews and Samaritans, believe that Moses revealed the Torah (or Pentateuch as it is called in Greek) for all time, that the law of the Torah cannot be changed or altered, and that it is the final Book of God which cannot be altered or changed, subtracted from or added unto. Like Zoroastrians, Jews believe that there will be a Messiah. In fact, as I point out in my article on the “The Meaning of the Return of Jesus Christ”,  the Jews at one time expected that two or three Messianic Figures would appear. They expected the Return of Elijah (according to the prophecy of the Prophet Malachi),  who had bodily ascended to heaven according to a literal reading of the Biblical narrative,  as well as the coming of the Messiah, who would be a kingly figure.  The Essenes believed that there would be both a Priestly Messiah (from the line of Aaron)  and a Davidic Messiah (from the line of David and the Royal House of Judah).  The Sadducees believed that the Torah was all that Jews needed, and they rejected the Prophets and the concept of the Last Day and the Resurrection.  The Pharisees believed that the Messiah would come, but emphasised, as we read from Maimonides above, that the Torah could not be changed. The Messiah would be a king who ruled according to the law of the Torah. This was despite the fact that the Torah predicted the coming of a Prophet ‘like unto’ Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15  - 19), i.e. a Law-giver who reveals a Book similar to that of Moses.  

Christianity likewise suffers from the same belief in its own finality. Even though the main objection to the coming of Jesus of Nazareth was that He did not literally fulfil the prophecies of the Torah and the Neviim (Prophetic Books) in the Old Testament, nevertheless Christian theologians and priests throughout the ages have clung to a literal interpretation of the Gospels and New Testament writings to assert that the Christianity itself is final and immutable.  This is due to the belief that Jesus Christ died on the cross, was resurrected on the third day,  and that His death atoned for the sins of mankind, including the original sin of Adam.  Thus, whoever believes that Christ died for their sins and was resurrected on the third day is saved from hellfire and damnation. As Adam sinned and condemned all of mankind to damnation, so did Jesus bring salvation from death,  for the wage of sin is death (Romans 6:23),  and death is associated with hellfire and damnation.  If all men must be punished for their sins, and those sins began with Adam, then a new perfect Adam would be needed to redeem mankind from those sins. Therefore, God sent His only-begotten (monogenē) Son  in the form of Jesus of Nazareth,  who was both divine and human. Christian theology from the third century confirmed the belief that Jesus and the Father are one in essence (which is called, in Greek, homoousion, meaning ‘of the same essence’ or consubstantial).  

If Jesus’s sacrifice was once and for all time, and He was the only-begotten Son of God while being both God and man, then that would put Him on a station that is higher than Moses or any of the other Prophets,  and would also mean that His coming was once and for all time, unique and final—so there could be no significant Prophet after Him. Likewise, the prophecies of Jesus refer to the coming of the Last Day, and the writings of Paul and the other New Testament writers also reference the Last Day and Final Judgement, and they do not refer to the coming of a Prophet on a par with Jesus Christ or in any way like Jesus Christ. Thus, from the Christians perspective, Christianity is the final religion and Jesus Christ is all that anyone needs for salvation. It is important for Muslims, and others, to understand this perspective, because it explains why Christians reject Islam, the Qur’ān and the Prophet Muhammad, as well as any other Prophets that came after Him. 

The Qur’ān rejects the man-made Christian theological concept of homoousion, making a clear distinction between Jesus of Nazareth and God.  It also states that Jesus and Muhammad are both Messengers and Prophets of God and are thus the same in their nature. There is a different nature that Jesus of Nazareth possessed that the Prophet Muhammad or Moses did not possess. As we have already quoted above, God states that (2:285): ‘we make no distinction between any of His Apostles’ (mā nufarriqu bayna ’aḥad-in min rusul-i-hi).  Apostle here is meant in the original Greek sense of the word to mean ‘Messengers’ (rusul in the Arabic plural form). God does not distinguish between Abraham, Moses, Jesus or Muhammad, nor even between Zoroaster, Noah or Adam. They are all Messengers and Prophets of God. Jesus confirms this concept in the Gospels, where He says (John 5:46 – 47): ‘For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?’  He also makes it clear that, as I noted in my article on the Meaning of the Return of Christ,  that He would be followed by another Person who would reveal a greater measure of truth than was revealed in the Gospels, i.e. the Spirit of Truth. I wrote: 

‘Secondly, Jesus did not just prophesy His second coming, He prophesied two things: firstly, that He would be followed by a Figure known as the Comforter (Paraklētos) or Spirit of Truth (Pneuma tēs Alētheias),  and, secondly that He would Return in the Glory of His Father (Doxē tou Patros Autou).  There are thus two Beings or Persons that Christians are told to expect, who will appear after Christ. Moreover, there are two Witnesses,  and three Woes,  referred to in the Book of Revelation, indicating two or three Figures who would appear.’ I moreover explained that, in the original Codex Sinaiticus, the coming of the Spirit of Truth is not equated with the Holy Spirit. Rather, He is clearly referenced as a person who will reveal things which the Twelve Apostles were not capable of hearing at the time. Thus, while the ordinary Christian interpretation is that this prophecy was fulfilled on the Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Christians, the reality is that this is not related to the coming of the Spirit of Truth, who is also called the ‘Comforter’. 

The Spirit of Truth is another Prophet or Messenger of God who would come after Jesus Christ and would reveal things which Christians could not bear to hear in their own generation. This indicates and confirms the concept of progressive revelation, i.e. that each revelation from God is more potent than the last and reveals a greater measure of truth. Thus, while, in His day and age, Jesus of Nazareth was the ‘way, the truth and the life’, in the time of the Spirit of Truth, the same would apply to the Spirit of Truth and the Comforter. This means that, in each day and age, that religion and that Messenger of God who came in that day and age is the only path to God for that time, and that, after Him, when the next Messenger of God appears, that new Messenger is the only path to God in His time. Each Messenger of God is essentially the same as the Messengers of God who came before Him. 

(6) The Meaning of the Last Prophet

Wadi Feiran (Paran)

‘Set forth to them the instance of the people of the city when the Sent Ones came to it—when we sent Two unto them and they charged them both with imposture - therefore with a Third we strengthened them: and they said, "Verily we are the Sent unto you of God."’ 

- Qur’ān 36:13 - 14

What then of the hadiths regarding Muhammad being the ‘Last Prophet’ and ‘Last Messenger’? If the term ‘Seal of the Prophets’, as demonstrated above, does not relate to Muhammad being the Final Prophet, and if the concept of Muhammad being the final Prophet only arose sometime after the 3rd century of the Islamic Era, what of the hadiths and other evidence that He is the Final Prophet and Messenger? And, as mentioned above, does this contradict other parts of the Qur’ān (48:23), which state that: ‘Such is God's method carried into effect of old; no change canst thou find in God's mode of dealing’.  Let us look at several of these, and then some Hadiths which contradict them. One of the most famous of these (Jami`at-Tirmidhi 3730) is where the Prophet (peace be upon Him) said to ‘Alī: ’anta min-nī bi-manzila-t-i hārūn-a min mūsā ’illā ’anna-hu lā nabīy-a ba‘dī [‘thou art from Me in the position that Aaron is from Moses, except that there is no Prophet after Me’ (my literal translation)].  Here, manzilah means degree, grade, rank; position, status, standing, or dignity.  This tradition is important in several respects. Firstly, it establishes that ‘Alī’s role, with respect to Muhammad, was in the same degree, grade or rank as that of the Prophet Aaron in relation to Muhammad. In other words, ‘Alī’s authority was divinely established, and He was second in rank only to the Prophet Himself. It also establishes that ‘Alī possessed an authority and rank bestowed by God and was thus higher in rank than any other Muslim. As Aaron was the spokesperson and second-in-command to Moses (peace be upon Him), ‘Alī was Muhammad’s appointed successor, deputy and viceregent (walī). Secondly, and most importantly in the context of this essay, it states that, literally, ‘there is no Prophet after Me [ba‘d-ī]’. However, a more appropriate translation might be ‘there is no Prophet immediately after Me’, since ba‘d means ‘then, thereupon; afterwards, later, after that, in the following; still, yet’ and thus implies that there would be no Prophet, as a successor, immediately after Muhammad. Instead, He appointed ‘Alī to be His deputy and successor, similar to Aaron in relation to Moses (peace be upon Him). The point of this Hadith is not, therefore, the finality of Islam, but the successorship and rank of ‘Alī, who, though not a Prophet, was nevertheless on a rank and authority similar to that of the Prophet Aaron. Thus, although Muhammad did not specifically leave a will or testament, He verbally appointed ‘Alī as His immediate successor—the first of the Twelve Imāms. 

What of more explicit traditions about the finality of Islam? However many one may find, none of these Hadiths actually speak of the finality of Islam. Again, as above, Muhammad says (Sahih al-Bukhari 3455): kānat ban-ū ’isrā’īl-a tasūsu-hum-u l-’anbiyā’, kullamā halaka nabīy-un khalafa-hu nabīy-un, wa-’inna-hu lā nabī-yun ba‘dī ‘The Children of Israel used to be guided by Prophets; whenever a Prophet died, another one would take over His place, and, verily, no Prophet is after Me’, i.e. Muhammad would not be succeeded by a Prophet-successor.  Instead, He says: wa-sa-yakūnu khulafā’-u fa-yakthurūna [‘and there will be deputies/successors, and they will increase (in number)’].  The verb khalafa here means to succeed, follow, come after, replace or take the place of; khulafā’ is the plural of khalīfah, usually translated as ‘caliph’, which means a vicar, deputy, or successor. 

It is very clear, therefore, that, as we discovered with the term ‘Seal of the Prophets’ above, the idea that there will be ‘no Prophet’ after Muhammad does not mean what the modern teachers and ‘ulamā’ say that it means. The Seal of the Prophets means that Muhammad is the ‘Seal’ of all the Prophets who came before Him, i.e. His revelation fulfilled all the revelations that came before it—He was the Prophet ‘like unto’ Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15),  Shiloh (Genesis 49:10),  the ‘Spirit of Truth’ (John 14:17),  and ‘Comforter’ (John 14:26),  who would come from Mount Paran (Deuteronomy 33:2),  who will bring a new Song (Isaiah 42:10),  in the Valley of Baca (Psalm 84:6),  and whose coming coincided with the first woe (Revelation 8:13),  and was one of the Two Witnesses who prophesied for 1,260 days (Revelation 11:1 – 14).  He was, moreover, Hushedar, the first of the three promised Zoroastrian Messiahs, whose birth was expected between the years 593 to 635 AD.  Moreover, Al-Mas‘údí (c. 896 – 956 AD) cited a prophecy from a lost Avestan book in which Zoroaster foretold the Persian Empire's destruction in three hundred years, and that the religion would last for a thousand years,  i.e. the conquest of Persia by Alexander in 331 BC and destruction of Persepolis in 330 BC (roughly 300 years from the Empire’s founding),  and the revelation of Muhammad (and remaining thousand years) ending in 630 AD with Muhammad’s conquest and conversion of Mecca.  If religion is revealed progressively, including the same central message, but also including a greater measure of truth with each revelation, the coming of Muhammad (peace be upon Him) represented a turning point in the spiritual evolution of mankind. The Qur’ān contains the same kernel of truth and core teaching of all the revelations that proceeded it, i.e. its moral core and the eternal divine virtues, as well as proclaiming the oneness of God, the common origin and brotherhood of mankind, the unity of all the previous religions, the belief in angels, scriptures, the resurrection, Last Day and Judgement, and the Meeting with God. In addition, the Qur’ān confirms some of the laws of previous revelations, while introducing new laws and establishing the basis of a modern nation-state and community. It thus represented the summum bonum or cynosure of religion up until that point in mankind’s evolution. Muhammad had thus sealed the revelations of the past by providing the latest chapter in the eternal Faith of God—Islām. 

At the same time, Muhammad was both the latest in a series of Prophets and Messengers of God ‘endowed with constancy’ who had brought a Book and divine Law, as well as being the return of all the Prophets who came before Him. As I explained in my article on “The Meaning of the Return of Christ”,  the concept of ‘return’ in the scriptures, like the concept of ‘resurrection’, ‘judgement’, ‘ascent’ and ‘descent’, ‘life’ and ‘death’, being ‘born again’ and ‘rebirth’, ‘hellfire’ and ‘heaven’, represents a spiritual concept, and does not refer to the physical realm of existence. Return means return of the quality, authority and type, not a return of individuality and the rational soul. In other words, each Prophet and Messenger of God is essentially one, since they are all Messengers of one King, Prophets from one God, preaching one Message, teaching one Religion, upholding one Faith, and proclaiming one Cause. The Qur’ān says (2:285): ‘The Apostle believeth in that which hath been sent down from his Lord, as do the faithful also. Each one believeth in God, and His Angels, and His Books, and His Apostles: we make no distinction between any of His Apostles’.  This verse is significant, as God says lā nufarriq-u bayna ’aḥad-in min rusul-i-hi [‘We do not distinguish between anyone among the Messengers’ (my translation)]. The verb farraqa (Form II of fariqa) means ‘to separate, part, divide, sever, sunder’ or ‘to make a distinction (bayna between), distinguish, differentiate (bayna between)’.  Thus, God is not just saying that the Messengers are all of one rank or station, but that God does not differentiate, divide or separate them. In other words, the Messengers are all essentially one, just as all the revelations of God are one in Islām. In this respect, each Messenger of God is a return of all the previous Messengers of God, and they are, in quality but not individuality, one person, one being, one Messenger. Although Jesus and Muhammad had separate personalities and rational souls, they were essentially one. Thus, Jesus is Muhammad and Muhammad is Jesus. This is confirmed in the Hadiths, as the Prophet is recorded to have said (Biḥār-u l-’Anwār, vol. 25, p. 16): ’amma n-nabīyūna fa-’anā [‘As for the Prophets, I am (they)’ (my translation)].   

Muhammad promised that two Messianic Figures would appear after Him, i.e. the Mahdī (or Qā’im) who would be a descendant of His Family, and the Return of Jesus Christ. Most Hadiths refer to these as two separate individuals, and they are two separate Figures. However, one of the Hadiths clearly states that the Mahdī and Christ are one and the same (Sunan Ibn Majah 4039): ‘Adhering to religion will only become harder and worldly affairs will only become more difficult, and people will only become more stingy, and the Hour will only come upon the worst of people, and the only Mahdi (after Muhammad (ﷺ)) is ‘Eisa bin Maryam.’  In this Hadith, Muhammad (peace be upon Him) says that wa-lā l-mahdī ’illā ‘īsā bn-u maryam-a [‘…And there is no Mahdi except Jesus Son of Mary’ (my translation)]. There is no doubt that Jesus is a Prophet and Messenger of God, and that His second coming would be after the Prophet Muhammad, so the Islamic prophecies are clear that there will be a Prophet and Messenger of God after the Prophet Muhammad. The above Hadith also confirms that the Mahdī will have the same essential quality, authority and station as Jesus Christ, meaning that the Mahdī is Himself a Prophet and Messenger of God. The Hadiths and Qur’ān also indicate that the second coming of Jesus is separate from the coming of the Mahdi. Therefore, Islamic prophecies clearly indicate that there will be two Prophets and Messengers of God after the Prophet Muhammad. 

This is confirmed by the Qur’ān itself, which relates that the Jews argued that God could not reveal any further religion, implying that God’s Hand was ‘tied up’. He says: ‘"The hand of God," say the Jews, "is chained up." Their own hands shall be chained up - and for that which they have said shall they be cursed. Nay! outstretched are both His hands! At His own pleasure does He bestow gifts’.  In other words, God cannot be stopped from revealing new revelations. Likewise, as we related above, God’s way does not change, i.e. since God has always sent revelations, He will always send revelations. This is further confirmed by Qur’ān (31:27), where He says: ‘And if all the trees on earth were pens and the ocean (were ink), with seven oceans behind it to add to its (supply), yet would not the words of God be exhausted (in the writing): for God is Exalted in Power, full of Wisdom’.  The Word of God can never be exhausted, meaning that there can be no final revelation or Book, since God’s Word can never be exhausted, completed or finalised. Rather, the Word of God is infinite and eternal. Even if God were to send an infinite number of Prophets and Messengers, there could be no complete record of His Words. The revelation of the Qur’ān, therefore, while being the summum bonum of previous revelations, was not the final Book or revelation from God, for that would contradict the above verses. The continuity of this process is confirmed in numerous divine verses, e.g. (Qur’ān 6:48): wa-mā nursil-u l-mursalīna ’illā mubashshirīna wa mundhirīna (‘And We send not the Messengers except as Bearers of Glad-Tidings and Warners’ [my translation]); (Qur’ān 7:35): yā ban-ī ādam-a ’immā ya’tiyannakum rusul-un min-kum yaquṣṣūna ʿalay-kum āyāt-ī fa-man-i ttaqā wa-’aṣlaḥa fa-lā khawf-un ʿalay-him wa lā hum yaḥzanūna [‘O Children of Adam! When a Messenger surely cometh unto you relating My Verses, then whoever fear God and do righteousness/good works, there shall be no fear upon them, and they shall not grieve’ (my translation)]; (Qur’ān 2:129): rabb-anā wa b‘ath fī-him rasūl-an min-hum yatlū ‘alay-him ’āyāt-i-ka wa yu‘allimūnu-hum l-kitāb-a wa l-ḥikma-t-a wa yuzakkī-him [‘O Our Lord! And send within them a Messenger from them (who) reciteth unto them My Verses and (who) teacheth them the Book and the Wisdom and chasteneth/purifieth them…’ (my translation)]; (Qur’ān 2:87): ’a-fa-kullumā jā’a-kum rasul-un bi-mā lā tahwā ’anfusu-kum-u stakbar-tum fa-farīq-an kadhdhab-tum wa farīq-an taqtulūna [‘For as oft a Messenger cometh unto you with what your selves/hearts desire not, ye swell with pride and a part of them ye accuse of lying/deny, and a part of them ye kill’ (my translation)].  In this latter verse (Qur’ān 2:87), the verb taqtulūna ‘ye kill’ is present indicative (al-muḍāriʿu l-marfūʿ), indicating that it is a continuous and/or future action. Likewise, the verse ’immā ya’tiyannakum rusul-un min-kum uses the nūn of emphasis (nūn-u l-tawkīd-u l-khafīfah) to state that God will certainly send Messengers from among you (Qur’ān 7:35), and wa-mā nursil-u l-mursalīna in Qur’ān 6:48 also uses the present indicative to show that God continuously sends His Messengers. If the Qur’ān is the eternal Word of God, then the meaning of this action has no cessation, and it is a continuous attribute of God, i.e. God is the Sender of the Messengers. According to the Arabic Qur’ān Corpus, the term mursil (‘Sender’), an eternal Attribute of God, appears 4 times in the Qur’ān, two of which are relevant:  

wa-lākinnā kunnā ’ansha’-nā qurūn-an fa-taṭāwala ʿalayhim-u l-ʿumur-u wa mā kunta thāwiy-an fī ahl-i madyan-a tatlū ʿalay-him āyāt-i-nā wa-lākinnā kunnā mursil-īna

‘But We raised up (new) generations, and long were the ages that passed over them; but thou wast not a dweller among the people of Madyan, rehearsing Our Signs to them; but it is We Who send apostles (with inspiration)’ (Qur’ān 28:45);  

’amr-an min ‘ind-i-nā—’innā kunnā mursilīna!

‘By command, from Our Presence. For We (ever) send (revelations)’ (Qur’ān 44:5). 

In both of these verses, God gives us His Name, the Sender (al-mursil), and clearly states that He is the Sender of revelations, that this is an eternal and never-changing attribute of God, and that He will forever continue to send revelations. Here God says ’innā kunnā mursalīna meaning ‘We, verily, are the Sender’,  with ’innā being an emphatic or assertive particle meaning ‘We, verily’ (comprising ’inna ‘verily’ and the -nā ‘we’ suffix) and kunnā, which is used here to describe a state of being (from kāna ‘to be’ and the same ‘we’ suffix). This is the ‘royal’ or ‘divine’ We which is often used in the Qur’ān to indicate the majesty and greatness of God, which is why mursil ‘Sender’ is in the plural form.  The meaning of this verse is clear—Sender is an eternal state of being of God, so God has always been a Sender and will continue to be a Sender. This would not be the case if there were a last or final Prophet. Any interpretation of the Qur’ān or the Hadiths which contradicts this concept is thus null and void. God’s revelation is continuous, never-ending and cannot be final. To say that any one revelation from God is final, or that religion or Islām can be final, would be a grave departure from the clear meaning of these verses cited above. Moreover, there are numerous verses which indicate that people will meet their Lord (i.e. the Meeting with God) in the Day of God, which relates to the coming of the Return of Christ in the Glory of His Father, as promised in the Gospels. We will deal with the meaning of the ‘Meeting with God’ below.

As previously indicated, furthermore, the Muhammadan Dispensation has a beginning, and it has an end. Dispensation (Arabic dawr) here means an era or time period in which the law and teachings of a Revelation apply. Thus, from the Revelation of Abraham in the second millennium BC (1922 BC according to Ussher’s chronology) until the Revelation of Moses, the Law and Teachings of Abraham applied to the Hebrews, which included the Children of Israel (the Israelites). And from the Revelation of Moses on Mount Sinai (which, according to Ussher’s chronology, happened in 1491 BC) until the Revelation of Jesus Christ (i.e. 27 AD according to Ussher, or the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar according to Luke 3:1 – 2, which is roughly 28 – 29 AD) —a period of just over 1,500 years, the law of Moses contained in the Torah was the Law of God for the Israelites (including the Jews and Samaritans). This includes the Ten Commandments, as well as the rest of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) contained in the first Five Book of the Bible (also called the Pentateuch). 

The Revelation of Moses was intended specifically for the Israelites and the Land of Israel, not for other peoples. Therefore, it overlaps with some other Dispensations. For example, the Revelation of Zoroaster occurred, according to Xanthos of Lydia, some 600 years before Xerxes’ invasion of Greece in 480 BC, i.e. in the year 1080 BC.  The Christian Dispensation began circa 28/29 AD and ended in 610 AD. Unlike previous Dispensations, the Gospel of Jesus Christ was intended for all mankind, and, therefore, both the Mosaic and Zoroastrian Dispensations ended with the coming of Jesus Christ. The Prophet Muhammad received His Revelation in the year 610 AD. This brought to an end the Christian Dispensation (c. 29 AD – 610 AD) and began the Muhammadan Dispensation. In a narrow sense, one could also call this the Islamic Dispensation, or perhaps the Qur’ānic Dispensation. Like the Gospels, the Qur’ān was intended for all mankind, and was the second universal Revelation in the history of mankind, as God says (Qur’ān 34:28): ‘And We have not sent thee (O Muhammad) save as a Bringer of good tidings and a Warner unto all mankind [li-n-nās]; but most of mankind know not’;  and (Qur’ān 21:107): mā ’arsal-nā-ka ’illā raḥmat-an li-l-‘ālamīna [‘We have not sent Thee except as a Mercy for [all] the worlds’ (my translation)].  Thus, the Message of Muhammad and the Qur’ān was intended for all mankind (an-nās) and Muhammad Himself was sent as Mercy from God for all beings, and for all mankind. The Qur’ān, likewise, is the Book of God for all mankind, as He says (Qur’ān 14:1): ‘Alif. Lam. Ra. (This is) a Scripture which We have revealed unto thee (Muhammad) that thereby thou mayst bring forth mankind from darkness unto light, by the permission of their Lord, unto the path of the Mighty, the Owner of Praise’.  

The traditions (Hadiths) of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon Him) clearly indicate that the Muhammadan Dispensation has a fixed end-date, i.e. the date after which the laws of the Qur’ān no longer apply and a new Revelation and new Law comes into force, with a new Messenger of God, new Law and new Book. Muhammad emphasised that, just like the Jews and Christians before-time, Muslims would forget the true meaning and purpose of the Qur’ān, saying (according to Sunan Ibn Majah 4048) ‘That will be at the time when knowledge (of Qur’ān) disappears’, noting ‘Is it not the case that these Jews and Christians read the Tawrah and the Injil, but they do not act upon anything of what is in them?’ Thus, it is not that the Qur’ān will no longer be present, but that people will not understand its inner meanings and true Message and, due to scriptural literalism, will reject the Truth when it appears. We should expect, therefore, that the majority of the followers of Muhammad, including the ‘ulamā’ would fail to recognise the Truth.  

As Imām Hasan al-‘Askarī said (Biḥār-u l-’Anwār, vol. 52, p. 363): idhā ẓaharat rāya-t-u l-ḥaqq-i la‘ana-hu ’ahl-u sh-sharq-u wa l-gharb [‘When the banner/standard of the Truth/the True One is made manifest, the people(s) of the East and the West shall curse it’ (my translation)].  In other words, when the Mahdī (or Qā’im) appears, the Promised One of Islām, He will be opposed by the peoples of both the East and the West, including the Islamic world and the ‘ulamā’. Indeed, in the same Hadith, al-‘Askarī says that, in opposing the Qā’im, fa-yata’awwalūna ‘alay-hi kitāb-a llāh-i wa yuqātilūna-hu ‘alay-hi [‘and they will (mis)interpret the Book of God against Him and they will fight Him over it’ (my translation)].  In other words, they will interpret the Qur’ān literally in order to oppose the Qā’im. This implies that the Qā’im will appear in a way that is not expected by Muslims and which does not conform to the standard or literal reading of the Qur’ān. In other words, He will appear, as in previous dispensations, as an ordinary Man, and be opposed for the same reasons that the Jews, Christians and polytheists rejected Muhammad, the Jews rejected Jesus, the karapans (priests of the old religion) rejected Zoroaster, and Pharoah rejected Moses (peace be upon them). 

His proof will not be miracles and a physical sovereignty, but revelation of divine verses and spiritual power. This is made even clearer in the following tradition from Imām Muhammad al-Bāqir (upon whom be peace), who said (Biḥār al-Anwār, vol. 52, p. 354): yaqūm-u l-qā’im-u bi-’amr-in jadīd-in, wa kitāb-in jadīd-in [‘The Qā’im shall arise with a new Cause and a new Book’ (my translation)].  The words ’amr jadīd ‘new Cause’ imply a new ‘Faith’ or new ‘religion’, and kitāb jadīd ‘a new Book’ imply a new Revelation on a par with the Qur’ān. 

Muhammad (peace be upon Him) also said that the sacred land of Mecca (or perhaps the Hijāz) would remain sacred until the end of the Dispensation. He said (Sunan an-Nasa’i 2874): ‘Allah made this land sacred the day He created the Heavens and the Earth, so it is sacred by the Decree of Allah until the day of Resurrection’.  This implies that, after the Day of Resurrection, Mecca would no longer be ‘sacred’. Similarly, He said (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2202): ‘When the sword is imposed on my Ummah, it shall not be removed from it until the Day of Resurrection’.  This implies that, at the end of the Muhammadan Dispensation, holy war would be abolished. Even more clearly, the Prophet stated (Sahih Muslim 1822a): ‘The Islamic religion will continue until the Hour has been established, or you have been ruled over by twelve Caliphs, all of them being from the Quraish’.  This is a remarkable Hadith, because it is quite clear in saying that the Dispensation established by Muhammad would end. In the Arabic, it says: lā yazālu d-dīn-u qā’im-an ḥattā taqūm-a s-sā‘a-t-u ’aw yakūna ‘alay-kum-u thna ‘ashar-a khalīfa-t-an kull-u-hum min quraysh.  This is a remarkable Hadith because it clearly anticipates the end of the Dispensation of Muhammad, here referred to as ad-dīn (‘the Faith’ or ‘the Religion’). 

Lest there be any confusion, other versions of this Hadith use the terms al-’islām (‘Islam’),  al-’amr (the Cause)  or hādha d-dīn (this Religion). The verb lā yazālu means ‘will continue’ and qā’im-an here means ‘existing, existent’ or ‘evident, visible, conspicuous, established’.  In the context, this implies that the Faith or Religion (i.e. the Muhammadan Faith) will continue to exist or be established ḥattā ‘until’ taqūm-a s-sā‘a-t-u ‘the Hour comes to pass/takes place’. Both qā’im and taqūm derive from the root qāma ‘to get up, stand up; to come to pass, take place’.  The ‘Hour’ here refers to the coming of the Day of Judgement, the Resurrection, and the Meeting with God. This begins with the coming of al-Mahdī (the ‘Rightly-Guided One’) who, as mentioned above, is a Messenger of God and Prophet of the lineage of the Prophet Muhammad (and thus a member of the Quraysh tribe). He is also called al-Qā’im (‘He Who ariseth’). It is clear that the Qā’im will abrogate the law of the Qur’ān and establish an independent and new Revelation, thus beginning a new religious dispensation. 

The phrase ’aw yakūna ‘alay-kum-u thna ‘ashar-a khalīfa-t-an kull-u-hum min quraysh means ‘or there are (upon you) twelve deputies/viceregents/caliphs—all of them from Quraysh’. There were four ‘rightly-guided Caliphs’ following the death of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon Him), followed by 14 Umayyad Caliphs and 37 ‘Abbasid Caliphs, all from the Quraysh, so this cannot be referring to those 3 groups of Caliphs. Rather, the 12 ‘caliphs’ or ‘deputies’ here refer to the Twelve Imāms who descended from the line of Fātimah, beginning with ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib (c. 600 – 661 AD), the son-in-law and cousin of the Prophet Muhammad, and ending with the Mahdī/Qā’im (who was born in 1819 AD). The 11th Imām, Hasan ibn ‘Alī al-‘Askarī (upon whom be peace), died on 1 January 874 AD, or 8th Rabī‘ al-’Awwal 260 AH (i.e. 260 years after the Hijrah of the Prophet Muhammad). God says, in the Qur’ān (32:5): ‘He governs the affair from the heaven unto the earth; then shall it ascend to him in a day, the measure of which is as a thousand years of what ye number’.  In other words, God will guide mankind for a period of time on Earth through the Prophet and His eleven immediate successors, the Imāms, for a period of 260 lunar years. Then ‘shall it ascend to him in a day, the measure of which is as a thousand years of what ye number’,  meaning that the world will be bereft of direct divine guidance for a period of 1,000 lunar years, i.e. from 260 AH to 1260 AH, which is equivalent to 1844 AD. 

The Islamic year 1260 AH would be the year in which the Twelfth Imām, al-Mahdī, or al-Qā’im, would appear from the line of the Prophet, of the tribe of the Quraysh. When He appears, as the Prophet Muhammad indicates above, the Islamic religion (i.e. the Muhammadan Dispensation) would end, the previous Cause of God or Faith of God would no longer be established, and a new Revelation and new Faith would begin. This was fulfilled in the Person of Sayyid ‘Alī-Muhammad Shīrāzī, known as “the Báb”. Two hours and eleven minutes after midnight on Wednesday, 22 May 1844 AD (5 Jumāda l-’Awwal 1260 AH), the Báb inaugurated a new Dispensation, the Bábí Dispensation, by declaring to His first disciple that He was the Gate of God. The Bábí Dispensation lasted 19 years, until the Declaration of Bahá’u’lláh on Wednesday, 22 April 1863 AD (3 Dhu l-Qa‘dah 1279 AD). Bahá’u’lláh is the Return of Jesus Christ. For more information on how Bahá’u’lláh fulfils the Biblical prophecies of the Return of Christ, see my previous article on this topic,  or Thief in the Night: The Case of the Missing Millennium by William Sears.  The Declaration of the Báb and the Declaration of Bahá’u’lláh are both associated with ‘the Hour’ and the ‘Day of Judgement’, and the ‘Resurrection’, all of which have spiritual and symbolic meanings, as they are mutashābihāt ‘ambiguous’ or ‘metaphorical’ concepts. For more information on the inner meaning of these concepts, I would suggest reading the Book of Certitude (The Kitáb-i-Íqán) of Bahá’u’lláh.  

See Part III of the article.

- Abú-Jalál