The well-known Hanafi scholar Maulana Mahmood Hassan believed in the death of Jesus. According to him, there is no clear foundation in the Holy Qur’an for the concept of the second coming of Jesus. Regarding the hadiths about the second coming of Jesus, he considers them to be based on Jewish sources. He writes:
This [belief] is derived from the statements of the Jews and the Sabians, which later became popular among Muslims. After the martyrdom of Uthman (RA), the Ansar of Banu Hashim—who were among the Sabians—spread this idea, and it was further propagated by the Jews who were among the supporters of Ali (RA). They did so not out of love for Islam or Ali, but due to their enmity towards Islam and the Muslims.
… these individuals accepted such narratives and were influenced by them. It is evident that the ultimate source and reference for all branches of Islamic knowledge is the Noble Qur’an. However, there is no verse in the Qur’an that explicitly states that Jesus (PBUH) has not passed away, that he is alive, or that he will descend again—apart from certain inferred arguments and interpretations. These inferred arguments and interpretations, however, are not free from doubt or ambiguity.
How, then, can something so uncertain be used as the foundation for Islamic beliefs? (Translation of Tafsir Ilham al-Rahman, Part 2, Page 49, cited in Aqidah Khatm-e-Nubuwwat aur Nuzul-e-Masih by Qamar Usmani, Pages 53–54)
Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi, in his commentary Ilham al-Rahman, explained under verse 55 of Surah Aale Imran that the meaning of Innī mutawaffīka is to give death. He writes:
The Divine command in verse 55 of Surah Aale Imran in the Glorious Qur’an that reads: At that time when God said: ‘Jesus, I have decided to give you death and lift you up to Myself and I shall purify you from these who have disbelieved in you[122], Innī mutawaffīka, means that I will cause you to die. As for the common people’s notion that Jesus is alive, it is actually a Jewish and Sabian concept that was spread among Muslims after the martyrdom of Uthman (RA) by Iranians and Jews who joined the followers of Ali (RA). The action of the Iranians and Jews was motivated by their hatred towards Islam and Muslims, not because of their love for Ali (RA). They did not want Muslims to continue paying attention to this great and noble verse of the Qur’an in which Allah Almighty has proclaimed that He sent the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) for the express purpose of making Islam prevail over all other religions[123]. They did not wish for Muslims to act on this verse and spread across the entire globe, causing the extinction of Magian, Jewish, and all other non-Islamic religions. Therefore, they introduced the concept of the second coming of Jesus, suggesting that the task of making Islam dominate the whole world will actually be accomplished by Jesus upon his return. So, how can it be correct to work against this decreed fate and attempt to make Islam dominate the world today itself? The truth is that only those who are experts in the field of sociology and are aware of its depths can truly comprehend the meaning and purpose of this great and noble verse. Those who believe in the life and return of Jesus are unable to understand the meaning of this verse. It’s undeniable that the primary source of all Islamic beliefs is the Glorious Qur’an. It does not contain any explicit verses regarding the second coming of Jesus. Whatever people present in this regard are their interpretations, explanations, and clarifications. In such a scenario, how can affirming the belief in the life and return of Jesus as an article of faith and making it the criterion of disbelief and belief be considered correct?
The renowned scholar from Egypt, Allama Mahmood Shaltout, has criticized the narratives related to the second coming of Jesus (PBUH) as confused and contradictory. He comments:
These confused narratives vary so greatly in their words and meanings that reconciling them is not possible. This has been made explicit by the scholars of hadith themselves. Moreover, these are the narratives of Wahb ibn Munabbih and Ka’b al-Ahbar, who were among the People of the Book and had converted to Islam. The status of these narrators in the eyes of the scholars of criticism and appraisal is not hidden from anyone. Another evidence cited by the exegetes is the tradition narrated by Abu Huraira (RA) in which he conveys the news of the descent of Jesus, peace be upon him. Even if this hadith is assumed as authentic, it still remains a solitary report, and there is consensus among the scholars of the Ummah that neither a belief can be established nor can one rightly place reliance on such a solitary report regarding matters of the unseen. (Aqidah Khatm-e-Nabuwwat aur Nazool-e-Masih, Qamar Usmani, pp. 13-15)
The well-known hadith scholar Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Azhar of Meerut (1923-2005) categorically rejects the narratives about the emergence of the Dajjal and the second coming of Jesus. According to him, these narratives are against the concept of the Finality of Prophethood and do not conform to the accepted standards of hadith scholarship. In his work Ahadith-e-Dajjal ka Tehqeeqi Mutala (Research Study of the hadiths of Dajjal), he introduces the subject by writing:
During the era of the Successors (Tabi‘īn) and their followers (Atba‘-e-Tabi‘īn), numerous fabricated narrations and fictional accounts by deceitful and false narrators of reports and hadith flooded the Muslim community with the aim of corrupting their beliefs and practices. Among these were the enemies of truth, the Rawafid, as well as some newly converted People of the Book who had become Muslims hypocritically. There were also those among the masses who sought fame and honor, desiring to be regarded as Imams and great scholars.
The established rulings of Shariah that are proven through mutawatir evidence remained safe from the tampering of these narrators. Similarly, the verbal distortions they attempted to introduce into the Qur’an did not succeed. However, their interpretive distortions gained significant traction through the influence of certain hadith scholars. These wicked-hearted narrators spared no effort in fabricating lies and falsely attributing them to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and the noble Companions regarding matters such as Awaited Mahdi, Ibn-e-Sayyad, the emergence of the Dajjal, and the descent of Jesus.
This book scrutinizes every hadith related to Dajjal and the second coming of Jesus according to the established principles and criteria of traditional (riwayah) and rational (dirayah) analysis, so that people do not fall into and those who are already ensnared can free themselves from the misconception that among the signs of the Day of Judgment is the emergence of the one-eyed Dajjal. He will claim divinity, and in the end, Jesus, son of Mary, will descend from the heavens to slay him. Thereafter, he will rule justly in accordance with the Shariah of Muhammad for years before passing away and being buried.
All these notions are merely fanciful and nonsensical. The truth is that Muhammad (PBUH) is the Seal of the Prophets. He is Allah’s final Prophet, and no prophet is to come after him until the Day of Judgment, neither originally nor as a representative. (p. 135)
According to Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the concept of the second coming of Jesus could only be accepted if it were explicitly mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. Since no such mention exists in the Qur’an, he does not acknowledge it. He writes in one of his letters:
The matter of the second coming of Jesus is an extremely important issue, and had the salvation and felicity of Muslims at any time been contingent upon it, it would have been essential for the Qur’an to state it clearly, just as clearly as it has articulated all significant religious and doctrinal issues. However, it is evident that the Qur’an contains no such explicit statement, so there is no reason for us to be compelled to believe in it. Our belief is that no Messianic figure, neither actual nor metaphoric, is to come. With the arrival of the Qur’an, the religion has been perfected. If you are a seeker of truth, do not get involved in these disputes, nor should you ask questions concerning these superstitions. What we seek is salvation, and if the Qur’an is sufficient for salvation, then those beliefs that the Qur’an has conveyed to us are sufficient. Why should we involve ourselves in anything more? (Published in the daily newspaper Zamindar, Lahore, June 26, 1936)
Maulana Azad characterized the notion of the second coming of Jesus as a Christian belief that has appeared in our books, expressing disbelief in its origin:
It’s astonishing that your unease regarding the second coming of Jesus persists. I had expressed my opinion earlier, but I had referred to the book for detailed reasons and arguments; explaining them without details is not possible. Unquestionably, it has to be admitted that this belief, in its essence, is entirely a Christian one and has appeared in an Islamic form, but how it has emerged is a matter for debate. (Nuqoosh Azad compiled by Ghulam Rasool Mehr, Letter 47, p. 99, Publisher: Kitab Manzil, Lahore)
Allama Iqbal considered this concept to be the result of a foreign conspiracy and did not accept the traditions concerning it. In a letter, he stated:
In my opinion, the hadiths related to Mahdi, Messianism, and the concept of renewal (Mujaddidiyat) are the result of Iranian and foreign imaginations. They have no connection with the Arab ethos or the true spirit of the Qur’an. (Kulliyat Makatib-e-Iqbal, Vol. 3, January 1929-December 1934, compiled by Syed Muzaffar Husain Burney, Publisher: Urdu Academy Delhi, Published: 1993)
The well-known Deobandi scholar Maulana Zafar Ahmad Usmani's son, Qamar Ahmad Usmani, states in his book Aqidah Khatm-e-Nubuwwat aur Nazool-e-Masih that the beliefs in the Finality of Prophethood and the life of Jesus are contradictory. He notes that many renowned scholars accepted the death of Jesus. He writes:
Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA) believed in the death of Jesus (PBUH) and among the early scholars, Imam Ibn Hazm and Imam Ibn Taymiyyah have declared the issue of the second coming of Jesus to be a matter of dispute. (Refer to: ‘Maratib al-Ijma’ by Ibn Hazm and ‘Naqd Maratib al-Ijma’ by Imam Ibn Taymiyyah.) In our times, scholars and intellectuals such as Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Allama Tamanna Imadi Phulwarwi, Allama Maulana Musa Jarullah, Sheikh Noor Muhammad Murshid Al-Makki, Allama Shah Muhammad Jafar Nadwi, Allama Iqbal, Sheikh Mahmood Shaltout of Egypt, Allama Syed Rashid Raza of Egypt, and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi do not acknowledge the authenticity of the beliefs in the second coming of Jesus and the appearance of Mahdi. (pp. 6-7)
He further adds:
With the belief in the Finality of Prophethood in place, the conceptions of the life and second coming of Jesus have always been troubling to the heart and mind as both notions cannot coexist. If the doctrine of the Finality of Prophethood is true, then there is no justification for the arrival of any prophet or for Islam to be granted true dominance by such a coming. (pp. 8-9)