The Siege of Mecca - a question about the Mahdi
March 15, 2016 at 3:18 pm
(This post was last modified: March 15, 2016 at 3:23 pm by FebruaryOfReason.)
I have just finished reading an excellent book (non-fiction) called "The Siege of Mecca" by Yaroslav Trofimov
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Siege-Mecca-...0141034068
On 20 November 1979, a large group of gunmen led by the fanatic Juhayman bin Seif Uteybi stormed the Grand Mosque in Mecca and proclaimed one of their number - Mohammed Abdullah al Qahtani – as the Mahdi. (The Mahdi is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will rule for seven, nine, or nineteen years - according to differing interpretations - before the Day of Judgment).
This book is well worth a read – it’s very well written and has loads of information about Islam, the architecture of the Grand Mosque etc. The author manages to convey the deep sense of panic and rage spreading across the Middle East at the violation of Islam’s holiest shrine, the Saudi Arabian government’s desperate struggle to regain control of the mosque, and the consequences of the action that are still felt today.
And it raised a question for me. According to the hadith, the Madhi cannot be killed, at least not in the first few years of his reign.
http://www.mahdi.com/article.php_id=30233.html
But of course, the proclaimed Mahdi was killed by Saudi troops during the battle to retake the mosque. And this was taken as evidence that he was not the Mahdi.
My question is this: faith eschews exactly this kind of physical evidence. So might Mohammed Abdullah al Qahtani have actually been the Mahdi?
After all, it is only his physical death that argues against this, and faith is not a matter of considering the physical evidence, surely?
In which case, wasn't it a bit of an own goal to kill him?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Siege-Mecca-...0141034068
On 20 November 1979, a large group of gunmen led by the fanatic Juhayman bin Seif Uteybi stormed the Grand Mosque in Mecca and proclaimed one of their number - Mohammed Abdullah al Qahtani – as the Mahdi. (The Mahdi is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will rule for seven, nine, or nineteen years - according to differing interpretations - before the Day of Judgment).
This book is well worth a read – it’s very well written and has loads of information about Islam, the architecture of the Grand Mosque etc. The author manages to convey the deep sense of panic and rage spreading across the Middle East at the violation of Islam’s holiest shrine, the Saudi Arabian government’s desperate struggle to regain control of the mosque, and the consequences of the action that are still felt today.
And it raised a question for me. According to the hadith, the Madhi cannot be killed, at least not in the first few years of his reign.
http://www.mahdi.com/article.php_id=30233.html
But of course, the proclaimed Mahdi was killed by Saudi troops during the battle to retake the mosque. And this was taken as evidence that he was not the Mahdi.
My question is this: faith eschews exactly this kind of physical evidence. So might Mohammed Abdullah al Qahtani have actually been the Mahdi?
After all, it is only his physical death that argues against this, and faith is not a matter of considering the physical evidence, surely?
In which case, wasn't it a bit of an own goal to kill him?
I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty. I must not be nasty.
