Malfuzat - Volume VIII — Page 154
Malf uza t - English translation of Urdu Volume 8 154 When God Himself presents these verses as proof of the prophethood of the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, then why is it forbidden for us to base our ijtih a d [reasoning] upon them? Now, among these scriptures is that of the Prophet Malachi, which forms a part of the Bible. It promises that the Prophet Elijah shall come again before the coming of the Messiah. Thus, when the Messiah, son of Mary, finally came, he was confronted with the question about the second coming of Elijah as per the prophecy of the Prophet Malachi. Jesus’ verdict on the issue was that that Promised One had already come in the form of John [the Baptist]. Thus, a verdict has already been delivered by the court of Jesus himself on the interpretation of the Second Coming, in which John the Baptist was not described as the like of Elijah but was called Elijah himself. So this reasoning also supports me. I keep citing precedents, whereas my opponents do not. Some people, who are found wanting at this stage of the argu- ment, are wont to say that these scriptures have been tampered with and interpolated. It is a pity that the objectors forget that the Holy Prophet, may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and the Companions used to rely on these very books. Most distin- guished scholars, including Imam Bukhari, believe that biblical distortion is distortion only in sense and meaning. Moreover, the Jews and Christians are mortal enemies and have their own separate scriptures. They [the Jews] still believe that Elijah will come again. Had this question not been there, would they not have accepted Jesus? I have a book by a Jewish scholar who asserts with great conviction and makes an appeal that if he were confronted with this question, he would produce the book of the Prophet Malachi where it was promised that Elijah would come again.