To justify the persecution of Ahmadis, Anti-Ahmadis use an excuse that the Ahmadi Muslims consider all non-Ahmadis Kafir (non-Muslim). They use this allegation to further incite hatred and violence against the community whose members are already killed, imprisoned, their mosques destroyed and graves desecrated.

In this article, we will expose the hypocrisy of the Anti-Ahmadis and show the authentic belief of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community regarding the status of non-Ahmadi Muslims.

Implication of the Takfir of Sunnis and Shias

When the ‘Sunnis’ and Shias declare someone a Kafir, this is what it implies:

1. They have become apostates. Thus, their blood is Halal and must be killed.
2. They will burn in Hell for eternity,

The takfir of the Sunnis and Shias is a disgusting murder tool through which they have spilled the blood of hundreds and thousands. This takfir causes murder of innocents even today and the prime example for this is the murder of 100s of innocent Ahmadis in the recent decades, all across the world, especially Pakistan.

This severity of the Takfir of ‘Sunnis’ was mentioned by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) more than a century ago.

About 200 maulawis put their seals of affirmation on it and I was declared a kafir [disbeliever]. These edicts were so harsh that some of the clerics even declared that my followers and I are worse than the Jews and Christians in our kufr. In general, edicts were issued stating, ‘These people should not be buried in Muslim graveyards, nor greeted with the greeting of peace, nor should a handshake be extended to them.’ Also, they declared that since we are kafirs, it is not permissible to offer prayers behind us. Rather, we should not be allowed to enter the mosques because we are disbelievers; mosques become defiled by us and if we do enter, the mosque ought to be thoroughly washed. Moreover, it is permissible to steal our goods, and we deserve execution because we deny the coming of a murderous Mahdi and repudiate jihad [with the sword].

[Haqiqatul Wahi, pg. 142]

Ahmadi Muslims reject such filthy beliefs. These are not proven from either the Holy Quran or the words and actions of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAW). The 2nd Khalifa of Ahmadiyya Islam, Mirza Basheerudin Mahmud Ahmad (RA) clarifies that we do not hold such unislamic beliefs:

Moreover, there is a great deal of difference between our definition of Kufr and theirs. They understand by Kufr to mean the denial of Islam, which is the meaning we do not ascribe to this term when using it about the non-Ahmadis. Our view is that if a person conforms to the tenets and teachings of Islam to a given extent, he is entitled to be called a Muslim.

But when he falls below even that point then although he may be called a Muslim, he cannot be regarded a perfect Muslim. We never allege on the basis of this definition that every Kafir is doomed to hell-fire for ever. We do not call even the Jews and the Christians to be Kafirs of that description.

[Political Solidarity of Islam, pg. 9]

Who initiated Takfir first?

It was the Sunnis and Shias who first declared Takfir of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS) and his followers. In 1891, when the Promised Messiah (AS) claimed to be the Messiah and proved that Isa (AS) has died, Muhammad Hussain Batalvi travelled throughout the Indian subcontinent to gather signatures of 100s of scholars on the Fatwa of the Takfir of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS).¹

Over the next decades, these scholars also continued to publish numerous such articles and pamphlets that incited the mobs for the murder of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) and his followers. This continues till this day and these references are posted elsewhere for the brevity of this article. [Add ref]

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (AS) challenged them to prove he takfired non-Ahmadis first. He says:

Can any maulawi, or any other opponent, or any custodian of a shrine prove that we were the first to issue edicts of apostasy against them? Let them produce any document, announcement, or treatise published by me prior to their own edicts of apostasy against us, in which I had pronounced my Muslim antagonists to be kafirs; otherwise, they should consider how dishonest it is that they are the ones who declared us to be kafirs, yet accuse us of denouncing all Muslims as kafirs.

[Haqiqatul Wahi, pg. 143]

Takfir of a Muslim renders one a Kafir

So it is a hypocrisy of the Anti-Ahmadis to complain that we Takfir them when they were the ones who initiated it. For argument’s sake, even if Ahmadis did Takfir Sunnis and Shias, it would still be okay as the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) said that if a Muslim Takfirs another Muslim, he himself becomes a Kafir:

إِذَا قَالَ الرَّجُلُ لأَخِيهِ يَا كَافِرُ فَقَدْ بَاءَ بِهِ أَحَدُهُمَا

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “If a man says to his brother, O Kafir (disbeliever)!’ Then surely one of them is such (i.e., a Kafir). “

[Sahih al-Bukhari 6103]

And lastly—even if Ahmadi Muslims did declare the Sunnis and Shias as Wajib-ul-Qatl (liable to be killed) and eternally hell-bound in the same vicious manner that they do—it’s surprising to see them play the victim. We are only repeating the Fatwa of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW). But we don’t even do such a thing.

Khalifatul Masih II (RA) mentions this as well:

غیر احمدیوں نے جب احمدیوں پر فتویٰ لگایا تو انہوں نے انہیں دائمی جہنمی قرار دیا لیکن احمدیوں نے جب کسی پر فتویٰ لگایا تو ساتھ ہی یہ کہہ دیا کہ اول تو اس فتویٰ کے یہ معنی نہیں کہ اسلام کی جامع و مانع تعریف سے وہ نکل گئے ہیں۔ دوم لفظ گفر کا اگر کسی معنوں میں بھی اُن پر اطلاق ہو تو اس کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ وہ خدا تعالیٰ کے نزدیک بھی قابل مواخذہ ہیں۔ اللہ تعالیٰ کا مواخذہ محض بد نیتی اور اتمام حجت پر ہوا کرتا ہے۔ اگر اُن کی نیت نیک ہے اور اگر اُن پر اتمام حجت نہیں ہوا تو وہ کسی سزا کے مستحق نہیں۔

When non-Ahmadis issued a fatwa against Ahmadis, they declared them to be eternally destined for hell. But when Ahmadis issued a fatwa against anyone, they simultaneously stated that firstly, this fatwa does not mean that they have been expelled from the comprehensive and exclusive definition of Islam (Millat-e-Islam).

Secondly, if the word kufr applies to them in any sense, it does not mean that they are also accountable before Allah the Almighty. Allah the Almighty’s accountability is solely based on ill-intention and the completion of proof (itmam-e-hujjat). If their intention is good and if the proof has not been completed against them, then they are not deserving of any punishment.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 23, pg. 372, Masala Wahi-e-Nabuwat ke Mutaliq Islami Nazariya]

Definition of a Muslim

Before we can define who is a Kafir, and who is not, we need to look at the definition of a Muslim as per the Quran and Hadith and we need to look who has the right to call himself a Muslim? Luckily, our beloved Prophet, Muhammad (SAW) has made it extremely simple for us.

When doing a census of Medina, the Prophet (SAW) did not ask individual Muslims for their Aqeedah (belief) breakdown. All he requested was to ask people if they claim to be Muslim.

The Prophet (ﷺ) said (to us),

“List the names of those people who have announced that they are Muslims.”

So, we listed one thousand and five hundred men.

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3060]

Notice, that he did not ask each person to detail their Aqeedah. He did not ask if that person believes Allah is above the Arsh or He has 2 eyes or rejects a certain belief and so on, something that Muslims do today. Similarly, the Prophet (SAW) defines who is a Muslim in another hadith. He says:

“Whoever prays like us and faces our Qibla and eats our slaughtered animals is a Muslim and is under Allah’s and His Apostle’s protection. So do not betray Allah by betraying those who are in His protection.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari 391]

In summary, anyone who claims to be a Muslim has the full right to call himself a Muslim. Anyone who prays like a Muslim and eats the Zabiha (slaughtered meat) like a Muslim, has the full protection of a Allah and his prophet. This further refutes the unislamic and disguting belief of the ‘Sunnis’ and Shias that calls for the murder of those who are declared Kafir.

The 2nd Khalifa of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Mirza Basheerudin Mahmud Ahmad (RA) says the following after mentioning the above ahadith:

From all these references, it is proven that for inclusion in the Islamic community (Millat-e-Islam), merely reciting the Kalima (declaration of faith) is sufficient. There is no other matter that is necessary for inclusion in the Islamic community.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 23, pg. 348, Masala Wahi-e-Nabuwat ke Mutaliq Islami Nazariya]

Status of non Ahmadis in an Ahmadi state

Finally, one may ask that if Ahmadi Muslims did not initiate the Takfir of the non-Ahmadi Muslims and the Ahmadis don’t call for the murder of non-Ahmadis, then what is their status?

The answer is that anyone claims to be a Muslim will be given the rights of a Muslim. That person is far more closer to Ahmadi Muslims than anyone else. They are closer to us than the Jews and Christians. They will be given the same status within an Ahmadi Muslim state as any Ahmadi Muslim. No Jizya will be taken from them nor any other discrimination will be done to them.

This is contrary to how Ahmadi Muslims are treated in the Sunni and Shia countries. For example, in Pakistan, it is illegal for us to even say Islamic terms like Asslam-o-Alaikum, Alhmadulillah etc. Our mosques are destroyed, graves desecrated and Ahmadi Muslims murdered and jailed regularly.

Non-Ahmadi Muslims are not True Muslims

As explained in the previous sections, Ahmadi Muslims believe that anyone who calls themselves Muslim will have the right to do so. No one can take that right from them or force them to do otherwise. But just like all the sects of Muslims, we also believe that no one else is a true Muslim except us.

Honesty requires that we be truthful. It was the prophecy of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) that in the latter days, Muslims will become just like the Jews and divided into numerous sects. Only 1 of them will be right while the rest would be Hell-bound. Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is that 1 Heaven-bound sect.

It was narrated from ‘Awf bin Malik that the Messenger of Allah(ﷺ) said:

“The Jews split into seventy-one sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy in Hell. The Christians split into seventy-two sects, seventy-one of which will be in Hell and one in Paradise. I swear by the One Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, my nation will split into seventy-three sects, one of which will be in Paradise and seventy-two in Hell.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allah, who are they?” He said: “The united community.”

[Sunan Ibn Majah 3992]

Moreover, we cannot dare say that those Muslims who do all of the following are true Muslims just like us:

• Istagatha (Asking Dua from the dead saints/prophets)²
• Believe that Quran has abrogated (useless) verses³
• Believe that Isa (AS) will murder innocent women/old/men for merely rejecting Islam ⁴
• Believe that Isa (AS) will abrogate many more verses of Quran when he returns⁵
• Believe that Allah has literal 2 eyes, fingers and other body parts⁶
• Reject ahadith completely (Quranists)
• Believe in Imams/Prophets/Saints who have all knowledge of unseen and control every atom of the universe⁷
• Believe that sex/sexual pleasures with pre-pubescents is allowed⁸

There are many, many more unislamic beliefs that are widespread amongst all the Muslims but for the sake of brevity, we only posted a few.

In short, Ahmadi Muslims are the only only Muslims who follow the true Islam that was followed by the Prophet (SAW) and Sahaba (RA). This is because it is only the Ahmadi Muslims that have accepted the Messiah and Mahdi of the age, whose job was to bring back Muslims to the pure Islam, as taught by the beloved Prophet, Muhammad (SAW).

The rest of the Muslims are only Muslims by name and have full rights to identify themselves as Muslim. This is the summary of the “Takfir” done by the Ahmadis.

Rejection of prophet of Allah deems one a Kafir?

Some ask that denial of any prophet of Allah deems one a Kafir. Since Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS) is the Messiah and has the status of a Prophet, then how come his denial does not render the non-Ahmadi Muslims as Kafir?

A simple answer to this is that yes, this is exactly why Ahmadi Muslims consider non-Ahmadis to be Kafir i.e they are not true Muslims (Momin) and only Muslims by name.

But again, our takfir does not imply that we kill them or declare them eternally hell-bound or that we stop them from praying Salat or jail them for merely saying “Asslam-o-Alaikum” or “Alhamdulillah”. Or that we consider them to be outside the nation of Islam (Millat-e-Islam). Khalifatul Masih II (RA) explains the same in the Munir Enquiry Commision in 1954

Question: Do you count Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib among those commissioned ones (divinely appointed figures) whose acceptance is necessary to be called a Muslim?

Answer: I have already answered this question before. A person who does not believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib cannot be declared outside the circle of Islam (Millat-e-Islam).

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 24, pg. 383, Tehqiqati Adalat mein Jama’at Ahmadiyya ka bayan]

Why Takfir is important?

Another question that’s often asked is: why do even Ahmadis do Takfir in the first place? What’s the benefit of it? It’s understood that the Sunnis are calling for the murder of Ahmadis by declaring them disbelievers, and that they were the first to initiate the Takfir. But still—why can’t Ahmadis be the “bigger person” and just ignore it?

Firstly, Ahmadis only bring up the topic of Takfir when asked—either by curious individuals or hostile attackers. We don’t go around labeling people Kafir the way many non-Ahmadi Muslims do, including Sunnis and Shias. They’ve made it into a national sport. We haven’t.

This can be easily confirmed by reviewing any Sunni and Shia books, websites, articles, social media posts, and videos. Each of them will declare us kafir without question. Then check the literature of the Ahmadis and you will notice that those same Sunnis and Shias have been called Muslims repeatedly.

Secondly, the Takfir of non-Ahmadis has been specifically mentioned in our literature addressed to the Lahori Ahmadis. It was never addressed to non-Ahmadi Muslims. So the term Kafir has been used in a way that both Ahmadi groups understand, i.e, it only means they are not true Muslims (Momin), but they still have the right to identify as Muslim and are part of the Millat-e-Islam.

Thirdly, the answer to the question as to why takfir is important lies in understanding the status of the Messiah. According to Sunni and Shia belief, the Messiah who appears in the latter days will hold the rank of a Prophet (Nabi), and his rejection will lead to eternal Hell. In their own theology, rejecting him is no light matter. They also declare the rejectors of that Messiah and Mahdi to be Kafir, worthy of death and eternally Hell-bound.

Ahmadis simply apply that same principle but not the same implication. The rejection of the Promised Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (AS), is no trivial act. When a person denies him, they’re not just disagreeing with a scholar or ignoring a random saint—they are rejecting the very Messiah and Mahdi prophesied in the Quran, Ahadith, and supported by hundreds of living signs from Allah. Rejecting him is a major sin, and everyone will be accountable before Allah based on their intellect, sincerity, and effort in seeking the truth.

And because the rank of the Messiah is so high, it becomes necessary to state the consequences of denying him. Silence in the face of that would be dishonesty.

Conclusion

The following is the summary of all the points in the article.

1. The non-Ahmadis first initiated Takfir of the Ahmadis.
2. The non-Ahmadis also have the same Takfir fatawa against each others
   • Barelvi Sunni vs Deobandi Sunni vs Salafi
   • Sunni vs Shia
   • Shia vs Shia
3. When non-Ahmadis Takfir, it means:
   • The accused has left Islam entire
   • The accused cannot legally claim to be Muslim or follow any Islamic commadments
   • The accused is Wajib-ul-Qatal (liable for death) as he is an apostate
   • The accused is eternally Hell-bound
4. When Ahmadis used the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to put a Fatwa of Kufr on the non-Ahmadis, even then they were cautious. Non-Ahmadis:
   • Are not outside the Millat-e-Islam (nation of Islam)
   • Are not eternally Hell-Bound
   • Are not Wajib-ul-Qatl (liable for death)
   • Can still identify as Muslim
   • Have all the rights of a Muslim
5. Non-Ahmadis proudly Takfir Ahmadis even today while Ahmadi Muslim literature continues to address all non-Ahmadis as Muslims.

I will end with the following summary by Khalifatul Masih II (RA):

یادر ہے کہ احمدی تمام مسلمان کہلانے والے لوگوں کو اُمتِ محمدیہ میں سمجھتے ہیں اور اگر انہوں نے کسی جگہ پر کافر کا لفظ استعمال بھی کیا ہے تو اس کے صرف یہ معنے ہیں کہ وہ مرزا صاحب کی صداقت کے منکر ہیں یہ معنے نہیں کہ رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی امت میں نہیں یا اصولِ اسلام کو نہیں مانتے۔کافر کے معنے عربی زبان میں منکر کے ہیں۔جب کوئی شخص مرزا صاحب کو نہیں مانتا تو عربی زبان اس کے لئے کافر کا لفظ ہی استعمال کیا جائے گا لیکن اگر کوئی یہ لفظ بولے تو اس کے معنے کھینچ تان کر یہ کر لیں کہ وہ اسے خدا اور رسول کا منکر کہتا ہے یہ سخت ظلم کی بات ہے۔کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمانوں کو امت محمدیہ سے خارج نہیں سمجھا۔کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمان کہلانے والوں کو کلمہ کا منکر قرار نہیں دیا، کبھی احمدیوں نے مسلمانوں کو خدا اور قرآن اور محمد رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم اور حشر و نشر اور تقدیر کا منکر قرار نہیں دیا۔جب بھی کہا یہی کہا ہے کہ ان سے غلطی ہوئی ہے کہ انہوں نے ایک بڑی بھاری صداقت کا انکار کیا ہے۔یعنی حضرت مرزا صاحب کو جو خدمت دین اور اشاعت کے لئے آئے تھے نہیں مانا اور اس طرح اسلام کی ترقی میں روک بنے۔

It should be remembered that Ahmadis consider all people who call themselves Muslims to be part of the Ummah of Muhammad. And if they have used the word ‘kafir’ (disbeliever) anywhere, it only means that they are deniers of Mirza Sahib’s truthfulness – it does not mean that they are not part of the noble Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Ummah or that they do not accept the principles of Islam. The meaning of ‘kafir’ in the Arabic language is ‘denier.’ When someone does not accept Mirza Sahib, then in the Arabic language the word ‘kafir’ will be used for them. But if someone utters this word and its meaning is stretched and distorted to suggest that they are calling them deniers of God and the Prophet, this is a matter of grave injustice. Ahmadis have never considered Muslims to be outside the Ummah of Muhammad. Ahmadis have never declared those who call themselves Muslims to be deniers of the Kalima (declaration of faith). Ahmadis have never declared Muslims to be deniers of God, the Quran, Muhammad the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), resurrection, or divine decree. Whenever they have spoken, they have only said that they (non-Ahmadis) have made an error in that they have denied a great truth – namely, they have not accepted Hazrat Mirza Sahib who came for the service and propagation of the religion, and thus have become an obstacle to the progress of Islam.

[Anwarul Ulum, vol. 24, pg. 26, Mawlana Maudidi ke Risala “Qadiani Masala’ ka Jawab]

References

Non-Ahmadi Muslims claim that we must understand the ahadith about the Dajjal literally. They believe such prophecies of the coming of Dajjal will be fulfilled exactly as described and no interpretation is needed for them, even though all such descriptions are from the dream and visions of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W).

In this article, we will prove that

1. The prophecies about the coming of the Dajjal are all dreams and visions, and thus, require interpretation.
2. Sunni Muslims themselves do interpretations of such ahadith due to the same reason that they were dreams of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W).

Dajjal was seen in a dream

Hadith #1

The first hadith shows that Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) saw the Dajjal in a dream while sleeping near the Ka’abah.

The Prophet (ﷺ) mentioned the Masih Ad-Dajjal in front of the people saying, Allah is not one-eyed while Masih Ad-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape. While sleeping near the Ka`ba last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown color the best one can see amongst brown color and his hair was long that it fell between his shoulders. His hair was lank and water was dribbling from his head and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is Jesus, son of Mary.’ Behind him I saw a man who had very curly hair and was blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan (i.e. an infidel) in appearance. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a person while performing Tawaf around the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this? ‘They replied, ‘The Masih, Ad-Dajjal.‘ “

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3439]

Hadith #2

The dajjal was also seen by the Prophet (S.A.W) during Maira’j, which was yet another special vision/experience granted by Allah to him. For those who don’t believe Maira’j was a vision/dream, here is the article that proves it.

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, “On the night of my Ascent to the Heaven, I saw Moses who was a tall brown curlyhaired man as if he was one of the men of Shan’awa tribe, and I saw Jesus, a man of medium height and moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair. I also saw Malik, the gate-keeper of the (Hell) Fire and Ad-Dajjal amongst the signs which Allah showed me.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3239]

Hadith #3

In another hadith, the expression “I liken him” clearly shows that the Prophet (SAW) must have seen Dajjal since he is comparing his physical appearance to someone. The only way he would have is through visions/dreams as he hadn’t appeared during his time.

قَطَطٌ عَيْنُهُ قَائِمَةٌ كَأَنِّي أُشَبِّهُهُ بِعَبْدِ الْعُزَّى بْنِ قَطَنٍ فَمَنْ رَآهُ مِنْكُمْ فَلْيَقْرَأْ عَلَيْهِ فَوَاتِحَ سُورَةِ الْكَهْفِ

He (Dajjal) will be a young man with curly hair and a protuberant eye; I liken him to ‘Abdul-‘Uzza bin Qatan. Whoever among you sees him, let him recite the first Verses of Surat Al-Kahf over him.

[Sunan Ibn Majah 4075]

This hadith is also explained by Sunnis scholars, one of the most renowned is Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari who explains this as:

.لا شك في تشبيهه به إلا أنه لما كان معرفة المشبه في عالم الكشف أو المنام عبر عنه بكاني كما هو المعتبر في تعبير حكاية الرؤيا والله تعالى أعلم

I said: There is no doubt that he was likened to him, except that when the certain person was seen in the world of revelation or a dream, he was expressed by Kaani (as if), as is considered in the expression of the tale of the vision, and God Almighty knows best.

[Mirqat al-Mafatih Sharh Mishkat al-Masabih, pg 115]

Hadith #4

The Prophet (S.A.W) describes the appearance of Dajjal with phrases like “as if”. Just like the above hadith, this too is a clear indication that he must have seen Dajjal. The only way he would have is through visions/dreams.

The Prophet (ﷺ) said (about Ad-Dajjal) that he is one eyed, his right eye is as if a protruding out grape.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari 7123]

Another usage of the same phrase can be found in the following hadith

The Dajjal shall emerge from a land in the east called Khurasan. He is followed by a people whom appear as if their faces are shields coated with leather.

[Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2237]

Hadith #5

The following hadith is a vision of Tamim al-Dari (R.A) which he narrates to the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W), who then narrates it to the rest of the companions (R.A). It is quite long so I will only quote the parts that are relevant.

He said: By Allah. I have not made you assemble for exhortation or for a warning, but I have detained you here, for Tamim Dari, a Christian, who came and accepted Islam, told me something, which agrees with what I was telling, you about the Dajjal.
Then we hurriedly went on till we came to that monastery and found a well-built person there with his hands tied to his neck and having iron shackles between his two legs up to the ankles.
He said: Inform me about the unlettered Prophet; what has he done?
We said: He has come out from Mecca and has settled In Yathrib (Medina).
He said: Do the Arabs fight against him?
We said: Yes. He said: How did he deal with them?
We informed him that he had overcome those in his neighbourhood and they had submitted themselves before him.
Thereupon he said to us: Has it actually happened?
We said: Yes.
Thereupon he said: If it is so that is better for them that they should show obedience to him. I am going to tell you about myself and I am Dajjal and would be soon permitted to get out and so I shall get out and travel in the land, and will not spare any town where I would not stay for forty nights except Mecca and Medina…

[Sahih Muslim 2942a]

This hadith shows that it was a vision of Tamim al-Dari (R.A). The Dajjal here is reported to have asked, “Inform me about the unlettered Prophet; what has he done?”.

After all, how did this person come to know that the Arabian Prophet had already appeared? Should we think that he was also a recipient of revelation? Evidently this could not be. Nor could this be a case of guesswork. Thus, the only possible explanation is that it was seen in a vision as even the Sunni sources state:

Nabi [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam] was shown Dajjaal, either in his dream or he was inspired with this vision (Kashf).

[Islamqa.org (Hanafi)]

Hadith #6

Similarly, in another hadith, Dajjal is described to have a “likeness”(بِمِثَالِ) of Paradise and Hell and not an actual Paradise and Hell.

أَلاَ أُحَدِّثُكُمْ حَدِيثًا عَنِ الدَّجَّالِ مَا حَدَّثَ بِهِ نَبِيٌّ قَوْمَهُ، إِنَّهُ أَعْوَرُ، وَإِنَّهُ يَجِيءُ مَعَهُ بِمِثَالِ الْجَنَّةِ وَالنَّارِ، فَالَّتِي يَقُولُ إِنَّهَا الْجَنَّةُ‏.‏ هِيَ النَّارُ، وَإِنِّي أُنْذِرُكُمْ كَمَا أَنْذَرَ بِهِ نُوحٌ قَوْمَهُ

Shall I not tell you about the False Messiah of which no prophet has told his people before? Verily, he is blind in one eye. He will come with the likeness of paradise and fire. He will bring it and say it is paradise, but it is fire. Verily, I have warned you just as Noah had warned his people.

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3338]

Why don’t all ahadith about Dajjal mention it was a dream/vision?

A reader can ask why don’t all the ahadith about Dajjal mention that they were dreams or visions. Similarly, why can’t all the ahadith about the descent of the Messiah mention that they too were seen in a dream or a vision?

This is a valid question and we have similar ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim where the narrators omit the part which describes the event as a vision while the other mentions it.

‘A’isha reported that Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) was startled in the state of sleep. We said:

Allah’s Messenger, you have done something in the state of your sleep which you never did before, Thereupon he said: Strange it is that some people of my Ummah would attack the House (Ka’ba) (for killing) a person who would belong to the tribe of the Quraish and he would try to seek protection in the House. And when they would reach the plain ground they would be sunk. We said: Allah’s Messenger, all sorts of people throng the path. Thereupon he said: Yes, there would be amongst them people who would come with definite designs and those who would come under duress and there would be travellers also, but they would all be destroyed through one (stroke) of destruction. though they would be raised in different states (on the Day of Resurrection). Allah would, however, raise them according to their intention.

[Sahih Muslim 2884]

The above hadith mentions that Muhammad (S.A.W) is describing an event he saw in a dream while the next hadith from Bukhari does not mention it. But the described event is exactly the same.

Narrated `Aisha:

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “An army will invade the Ka`ba and when the invaders reach Al-Baida’, all the ground will sink and swallow the whole army.” I said, “O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)! How will they sink into the ground while amongst them will be their markets (the people who worked in business and not invaders) and the people not belonging to them?” The Prophet (ﷺ) replied, “all of those people will sink but they will be resurrected and judged according to their intentions.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari 2118]

Thus, we look at all the ahadith about a certain topic in a single lens. Any details omitted by some ahadith are detailed by others, which gives us a better understanding of the context of the ahadith.

“Sunnis” interpret Dajjal hadith since it is a dream

Similarly, “Sunnis” don’t understand all the ahadith about the Dajjal literally. They also interpret them. One of them is the hadith below where the Dajjal is seen doing Tawaf of the Ka’abah.

The Prophet (ﷺ) mentioned the Masih Ad-Dajjal in front of the people saying, Allah is not one-eyed while Masih Ad-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape. While sleeping near the Ka`ba last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown color the best one can see amongst brown color and his hair was long that it fell between his shoulders. His hair was lank and water was dribbling from his head and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is Jesus, son of Mary.’ Behind him I saw a man who had very curly hair and was blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan (i.e. an infidel) in appearance. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a person while performing Tawaf around the Ka`ba. I asked, ‘Who is this? ‘They replied, ‘The Masih, Ad-Dajjal.‘

[Sahih al-Bukhari 3439]

They don’t take it literally and explain that the Dajjal cannot be in Makkah and do Tawaf as it goes against other ahadith which proves that he cannot enter Makkah nor Medinah.

There will be no town which Ad-Dajjal will not enter except Mecca and Medina.

[Sahih al-Bukhari 1881]
[Sahih Muslim 2884]

Conclusion

In summary, all the ahadith of the Dajjal are visions and dreams that Muhammad (S.A.W) saw. Moreover, it is nothing unusual to interpret dreams. One example is that the hadith of Dajjal doing Tawaf of the Ka’abah is not taken literally because as per other ahadith, Dajjal cannot enter Makkah or Medinah. There are many other visions of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) that did not happen literally and are listed here.

Similarly, the ahadith about the coming of the Messiah are also visions where he saw both the Messiah and the Dajjal together. Thus, interpreting those prophecies is nothing new within Islam but a practice of the Prophet (S.A.W) himself, especially when they have already been fulfilled.