Hazrat Isa A.S.

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@Mughal1

So my friend wake up and read the quran properly if you want to change your lives for the better. You cannot get a better book than the quran for guidance. It was not send to guide the people with supernatural powers but ordinary human beings me and you.

This is why it tells us what to do the way it is possible for us to do and change our world around just like sensible people before us did it. This is the example of the prophets we need to follow not fight over length of our beards or pajamas.

Peace Mughal1

What you have said so eloquently is on the whole true … but it’s totally out of context to this thread … And for a surety this debate was not initiated by me …

Mr.Popat (with whom you agree on dogma, however seem to oppose on debating tactics), has argued that the Qur’an states that Isa (AS) has died … I contested this as false … I said it was a lie … that Qur’an does not say that …the debate has led to this … that it appears the same “word” that we use to defend that he is alive is the very word that is used by others to say that he died … I think we should leave it at that … Our hadith of him coming back are interpreted one way by us and another by you … I think we should leave it that …

The parts however where I disagree with is the role of the Qur’an … yes it is sent as guidance for life, but it has very specific functions outside guidance as well, such as to cure illness, in certain places to demonstrate it’s own truth, for example the challenges it makes … and guidance itself has two parts …

Guidance of how to live our lives
Guidance of how to align our beliefs

The Qur’an covers all of these points that your beautiful words have some how ignored.

[brahmachari99]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

Psyah,
The page from Maulana Maudoodi’s writings that was posted earlier says that Quran does not conclude that Jesus (AS) was taken up bodily. Would you disagree with him?

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@brahmachari99

Psyah,
The page from Maulana Maudoodi’s writings that was posted earlier says that Quran does not conclude that Jesus (AS) was taken up bodily. Would you disagree with him?

Sheikh al-Islam Mustafa Sabri, a contemporary of al-Kawthari, cites this verse as evidence and offers the following interpretation: "If we were to take the word tawaffaa as meaning ‘killing,’ then souls would also have to die."29
In his commentary on the Qur’an, the Islamic scholar **Mawlana Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi **makes the following statement about mutawaffeeka, which appears in Surah Al 'Imran:55 (the same word is also used in Surat al-Ma’ida:117):

The word mutawaffeeka, in the Arabic text comes from the word tawaffaa, meaning “to take the surrender of” and “take the soul,” although here it is used in a figurative sense. Here, it means "relieving from duty."30

Abu Mansur Muhammad al-Maturidi, regarded as one of the first Qur’anic commentators, also stated that the verse does not refer to the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) dying in the familiar biological sense:

The thing being referred to in the verse is not passing on in the sense of death, but in the sense of the body being taken from this world.31

[TABLE=“width: 250, align: left”]

Islamic scholars agree that mutawaffeeka means that the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) did not die, but that he was raised to Allah’s Presence and will return to Earth. For example, the famous commentator and scholar al-Tabari stated that mutawaffeeka is used in the sense of “removing from Earth” and interpreted the verse in the following terms:

In my opinion, the soundest thing is to take this word in the sense of “to take into one’s possession,” “draw [away] from Earth.” In that case, the meaning of the verse is: “I shall take you from Earth and into the heavens.” The rest of the verse emphasizes the [believers’] victory over unbelievers in the End Times, which confirms the above idea."32

Further on in his commentary, al-Tabari included other interpretations of mutawaffeeka. Islamic scholars are in general agreement that its correct interpretation is “a kind of sleep.” According to Imam Hasan al-Basri, the Egyptian scholar Muhammad Khalil Herras stated that the verse means: “I shall put you to sleep and raise you to My Presence as you sleep.” In his commentary, al-Suyuti said, based on reliable hadith, that the Prophet Jesus (pbuh) did not die, and then continued:

In that case, Jesus (pbuh) was raised to the skies and will return before the Day of Judgment.33http://www.harunyahya.com/books/faith/did_not_die/jesus_did_not_die_03.php

[brahmachari99]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

Again, Maudoodi sahib seems to have concluded that Quran does not say Jesus (AS) was taken up bodily to heavens.

The problem with your argument is that no-where else does the “tawaffa” mean “take up the whole body”. Only when it comes to Jesus (AS) that you give this a totally new new meaning, which has no precedent.

In the Hadith that was quoted earlier, Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihe wa’aalihi wassalam) said he’ll say the same thing as Jesus (AS) said. If Prophet Muhammad (SAW) specifically says that he’ll say the exact same thing, then you cannot assign different meanings to the same words. Hence you’ll have to conclude that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was also taken up bodily.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@psyah

Peace Mr.Popat

This verse shows Allah is doing tawaffee of the nufs, around the time of death or sleep.

It does not set sleep as the doer of the action … But again, this verse proves that tawaffee is not death and is not sleep, but tawaffee is what is performed.

In this case it is specifically stated that the nufs is taken during sleep or death, but the word nufs is absent for the tawaffee of Isa (as) .

This is good work Mr.Popat keep it up …

Oh, please answer my long asked question … Do you now agree that death and sleep do not equal tawaffee?

tawaffee is what its performed. OK. tawaffee of the nafs , hence soul. There are many many many verses in which the word ‘nufs’ is mentioned.
I’ll give you few verses yet again.

2:48 And fear the day when** no soul shall serve** as a substitute for another soul at all, nor shall intercession be accepted for it; nor shall ransom be taken from it; nor shall they be helped.

2:233 No soul is burdened beyond its capacity ( part of long verse)

2:281 And fear the day when you shall be made to return to Allah; then shall every soul be paid in full what it has earned; and they shall not be wronged.

3:30 Beware of the Day when every soul shall find itself confronted with all the good it has done and all the evil it has done. ( part of a long verse )

Let me make bullet points so it is not hard for you to understand.

• Allah does tawaffee of nufs
• Nufs is soul. (see above verses where nufs is used and meant soul)
• Allah ‘takes away’(does tawaffee) in 2 cases 1) sleep 2) death.

You say the word ‘nufs’ is not present in the verse for Isa(as). Well, neither does any word which means ‘physically taken up’. The word ‘nufs’ does not need to be present for it to mean death. See the following verse for example, where tawaffee is used without the word ‘nufs’ or ‘mawt’.

8:50 : And if thou couldst see, when the angels take away the souls of those who disbelieve, smiting their faces and their backs, saying: ‘**Taste ye the punishment of burning!
**
if you say i’m including the word soul there, then try translating it and see if it make sense to you. Angels ‘take away’ (something) of disbelievers and says : ’ **taste ye the punishment of burning ’
**
What im pointing out is, the word nufs, which means soul does not need to be written everywhere for it to mean taking away soul. Angels dont say ‘taste ye the punishment of burning’ to someone whose sleeping ( temporary tawaffee), but **only **when souls are taken away from them ( which is death ).

Again, your argument is weak about the word ‘nufs’ not being present in Isa(as)'s case. You are yet to show me the 3rd way of Allah taking someone up.

sleep and death do not equal tawaffee? what is that even suppose to mean? tawaffee you said means ‘taking up’.
I’m saying that ‘taking up’ process Allah says happens in 2 cases. The cases are sleep and death.

[Mr.Popat]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@psyah

Peace Mr.Popat

Yes, in those verses where it specifically states souls are being taken, then that is the case … **Otherwise there are deeper insights of the word tawaffee … That perhaps you have not realised … **

When death takes someone … Notice the taking (tawaffee) done by death (mawt) will always be on the whole person … It takes hold of the whole person … Separates the soul from the body then let’s them go … Here death is used to represent the actions of the angel of death.

The many years later perhaps after judgement another tawaffee is done, this time only on the soul …

there are no deeper insight to the word. I’ve seen it from every angle. Maybe I have not realized it, but I dont think you have either.

I dont understand why it is that you’re just making up stuff now just so your belief doesnt get hurt. I give you verses from Quran to back up what I say, whereas you just make things confusing not for me but also for yourself. I have nothing to reply to what you said above but I just only have ONE question.. Mawt or sleep…either case, the ‘physical body’ remains on EARTH! do you disagree to this ?

@psyah

Or during life … A person sleeps, the body feels nothing, but the soul does … It is taken without the connection to the body being severed … So this is another type of tawaffee …

Sometimes whilst in this state, death comes … So the connection severed while the soul is stretched away from the body … Or death does not come and the soul is allowed to bounce back in to the body …

Here the tawaffee of death is a whole person experience … It is felt by the body and the soul … So tawaffee does not have to be only on the soul … But when it is on the soul alone, we can say that either the person is asleep or going to die or who has died ..

ok sure. Sleep is another type of tawaffee. You keep repeating same thing over and over. I never said Allah doesnt do tawaffee whiel a person is asleep. Infact, thats my whole argument. Sleep and death. Tawaffee is on the whole person. You sleep, your soul goes to Allah (temporarily and comes back ). You die, your body remains on Earth and your soul departs. Sure, tawaffe is on the whole person. Whats the point there?

@psyah

However, another tawaffee can take place … And that is where the whole body is taken … And then returned (Nuzul).

Now, this is what I’m talking about. Show me the 3rd way where Allah used the word ‘tawaffee’ and He took someone bodily alive. You said there is another way it takes place . Which religion is this other way from ?

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@brahmachari99

Again, Maudoodi sahib seems to have concluded that Quran does not say Jesus (AS) was taken up bodily to heavens.

The problem with your argument is that no-where else does the “tawaffa” mean “take up the whole body”. Only when it comes to Jesus (AS) that you give this a totally new new meaning, which has no precedent.

In the Hadith that was quoted earlier, Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihe wa’aalihi wassalam) said he’ll say the same thing as Jesus (AS) said. If Prophet Muhammad (SAW) specifically says that he’ll say the exact same thing, then you cannot assign different meanings to the same words. Hence you’ll have to conclude that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was also taken up bodily.

Peace brahmachari99

Please learn logical argumentation … Maulana Maudidi did not negate the possibility of Isa (AS) to have been taken up, he only stated that “tawaffee in the case of Isa (AS) is not of the soul - i.e. it is not one of his being given death” - if there is anything that Maulana Maududi is negating is the death of Isa (AS) … He is silent on the matter of Ascension … he is saying the meaning of tawwaffee in this case is not of what happens at the time of death, but another thing that he has called “relieving of duty” …

When I hear the words “Allah took him” I will naturally conclude that it means death … but you see I will have to make the “interpretation of that” - even though this interpreted meaning is also the common understanding of that phrase which is death … we cannot overrule the possible literal meaning … that Allah really did take him … And this is how simple this particular verse really is … you are complicating it.

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@Mr.Popat

You say the word ‘nufs’ is not present in the verse for Isa(as). Well, neither does any word which means ‘physically taken up’.

Yes the word “tawaffee - itself can mean physically taken up” - wake up bro - this is my claim — "Allah (SWT) swore to Isa (AS) “I shall take you up” and that I admit can mean after death occurs … but for sure you cannot overrule the idea that you take it just as you read it … “that He (SWT) will take him (AS) up to heaven” …

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@Mr.Popat

there are no deeper insight to the word. I’ve seen it from every angle. Maybe I have not realized it, but I dont think you have either.

I dont understand why it is that you’re just making up stuff now just so your belief doesnt get hurt. I give you verses from Quran to back up what I say, whereas you just make things confusing not for me but also for yourself. I have nothing to reply to what you said above but I just only have ONE question.. Mawt or sleep…either case, the ‘physical body’ remains on EARTH! do you disagree to this ?

ok sure. Sleep is another type of tawaffee. You keep repeating same thing over and over. I never said Allah doesnt do tawaffee whiel a person is asleep. Infact, thats my whole argument. Sleep and death. Tawaffee is on the whole person. You sleep, your soul goes to Allah (temporarily and comes back ). You die, your body remains on Earth and your soul departs. Sure, tawaffe is on the whole person. Whats the point there?

Now, this is what I’m talking about. Show me the 3rd way where Allah used the word ‘tawaffee’ and He took someone bodily alive. You said there is another way it takes place . Which religion is this other way from ?

If only you understood Arabic grammar my friend …

List out the f’il (verb), faa’il (doer), and maf’ool (object) in every case this word is used and you will see what I mean by “death DOES tawaffee” … if death DOES tawaffee then death cannot BE tawaffee …

[kchughtai]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

^Death = Maut = Wafat

[kchughtai]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

b) Nothing shall harm Jesus (AS) as per Bible also not refuted in Islam - so any vain attempt to say he even went near the cross is on dodgy grounds. In fact it is a “promise” made to Isa (AS) and one of the derivatives of the root of tawaffee - i.e. wafa - is promise - and to fulfill something.

As I earlier quoted an example from Quran regarding our holy prophet (pbuh) and how it actually materialized. Instead of dwelling on an ambiguous account in bible, I would prefer what is stated in Quran in 5:110 i.e.,‘…When I(Allah(swt)) restrained the people of Israel from you (Isa(as))…’. This statement is fairly analogous to what is stated in 5:67 about our holy prophet (pbuh) i.e., ‘Allah will protect thee (the holy prophet(pbuh)) from the people’.

[kchughtai]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

c) Plenty of hadith say that he (AS) will descend … Isa(AS) will descend because he first ascended … context is as per Qur’an andhadith.

Yes there are hadiths but we have a precedent in the bible uncontested in the Quran that prophet malachi prophecised about the coming of Elijah the prophet. Prophet Elijah had lived around 9 B.C. Malachi lived centuries after Elijah.

The prophecy is stated as
**Malachi 3:1
“See, I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,” says the LORD Almighty.
**

Malachi 4:5 “See, I will send theprophet Elijah to you before that great and dreadful day of the LORD comes.”

In the New Testament, it is stated as

Matthew 11:10 **This is the one **about whom it is written: "‘I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.’
Matthew 11:14 **And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.
**
**Matthew 17:10-13
** 10 The disciples asked him, “Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
11 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. 12 But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have doneto him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

In Quran, it is stated in 3:39
“And the angels called to him as hestood praying in the chamber: ‘**Allah gives thee glad tidings of Yahya, who shall testify to the truth of a word from Allah **— noble and chaste and a Prophet, from among the righteous.’
‘a word of Allah’ refers to Jesus(as). So Yahya(as) was the Elijah that was to come as a sign of the truth of Messiah ibn mariam who has been called ‘a word of Allah’.
We have a clear precendent that a new messenger could be given the name of an older one in prophecies and it doesn’t mean that the older one must come again.
Moreover, if you guys look at the prophecies of coming of an ummati messiah ibn mariam, you can easily see that these prophecies are full of metaphors. Description of dajjal is a clear example.

[kchughtai]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

[quote]

comments on ‘tawaffee’ points d and h
\quote]

noun
Maut – Wafat – Death
verb
Mumeetuka – Mutawafeeka – cause thee to die
The person who died
Maet – Mutawafi – dead person
That person died
Maata Fulan – Tuwafia Fulan

Actually, I would say that if Allah had meant Jesus(as) to be taken asyou believe, there would have been words that clearly distinguish that casefrom the rest. Mention of ‘bodily’, ‘alive’, ‘upwards’, ‘towards skies’ wouldhave been helpful. Allah used the same word all over the Quran that meant deathor Qabz-e-Roh. In case of 39:42, mention of sleep and death has been clearlymentioned to mark the difference. In many other cases where no such explicit wordingis used, death is the default and automatic meaning.

39:42, where there is mention ofdeath and sleep and ‘taking of Nafs’ is mentioned and ‘tawaffee’ is used. Whethersoul is separated from the body or not, in either case, there is no physicalmovement up.
Whenever ‘tawaffee’ or its derivatesare used for a person when the actor is slient or ‘majhool’ and no otherinformation is provided then it always means death. When the actor mentioned isAllah or malaikah for a person and no other information is there, again themeaning is always death. This is evident not only from Quran but there areseveral ahadith that support this fact. Funeral prayer also makes use of‘tawaffi’ and this rule is not engineered but firmly founded in the ‘Lughat’
Saha -al-Johari - Tawafahu Allahhu –Qabaza Ruhahu
Qamoos – Al-wafatu Mautu wa tawafahuAllah hu Qabza roohahu
(‘WAFAT’ is death and ‘Allah did hisTawaffee’ means ‘Qabz-e-Rooh’)

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

[quote=“kchughtai”]

comments on ‘tawaffee’ points d and h
\quote]

noun
Maut – Wafat – Death
verb
Mumeetuka – Mutawafeeka – cause thee to die
The person who died
Maet – Mutawafi – dead person
That person died
Maata Fulan – Tuwafia Fulan

Actually, I would say that if Allah had meant Jesus(as) to be taken asyou believe, there would have been words that clearly distinguish that casefrom the rest. Mention of ‘bodily’, ‘alive’, ‘upwards’, ‘towards skies’ wouldhave been helpful. Allah used the same word all over the Quran that meant deathor Qabz-e-Roh. In case of 39:42, mention of sleep and death has been clearlymentioned to mark the difference. In many other cases where no such explicit wordingis used, death is the default and automatic meaning.

39:42, where there is mention ofdeath and sleep and ‘taking of Nafs’ is mentioned and ‘tawaffee’ is used. Whethersoul is separated from the body or not, in either case, there is no physicalmovement up.
Whenever ‘tawaffee’ or its derivatesare used for a person when the actor is slient or ‘majhool’ and no otherinformation is provided then it always means death. When the actor mentioned isAllah or malaikah for a person and no other information is there, again themeaning is always death. This is evident not only from Quran but there areseveral ahadith that support this fact. Funeral prayer also makes use of‘tawaffi’ and this rule is not engineered but firmly founded in the ‘Lughat’
Saha -al-Johari - Tawafahu Allahhu –Qabaza Ruhahu
Qamoos – Al-wafatu Mautu wa tawafahuAllah hu Qabza roohahu
(‘WAFAT’ is death and ‘Allah did hisTawaffee’ means ‘Qabz-e-Rooh’)

Please can I have the source of these terms and the Arabic triliteral roots …

If Allah (SWT) made this clear then I can’t work out how the fitnah of the imposter would come about … For a surety the fitnah of imposters comes about through the vague terms …

[Sa1eem]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@Mr.Popat

^^ I’ve researched on this matter so extensively that my heart knows what it is that I’m following. But thanks anyway. Will look into the verses that you’ll provide.

I have started a new thread on the verse I wanted to refer regarding Isa (AS) being alive, so that I do not interfere with the discussion on word ‘wafat and its derivative’ going on in this thread. If you disagree with interpretation of the verse I referred, we can discuss it there.

[lethal_kamikaze]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@Mr.Popat

‘rafa’a’. It means exalted ones status, or exalted oneself in rank.
There is no mention of physical body taking up in that verse. There is no mention of heaven, nor is there any mention of even sky. It is your assumption that he went to heavens bodily alive. Where is it written? On the contrary, when Allah said "allah exalted him to himself’, it means exalted his status and have given death.

When the word ‘rafa’a’ is used anywhere in Quran or ahadith, it has always meant as in status. Please see the verses below and please do confirm it.

[19:57] And We** exalted him** to a lofty station. <<< this one is for Hazrat Idris (as).

Assalam o alaikum warahmatullah.

Peace Mr.Popat,

As you wrote above: (1) Exalted him to Himself (2) exalted him to a lofty station.

Can’t you see the simple and bold differentiate between these two verses? Exalted to a lofty station that is understood but exalted his status and have given death? Yeh konsi logic use kr rahy ho

and how ‘rafa’a’ means exalted ones status? 'rafa’a means exalted. From where this ‘ones status’ came?

Well If I translate as per yours then the transltaion of [19:57] will be: **“And we exalted his status/rank to a lofty station” **. I think we can’t use both ‘his’ and ‘him’ at one time, right. That translation doesn’t make sense as why his “status/rank” exalted to a lofty station? why not “him”? But if we translate the same verse by using “him” than it will be “And we exalted him to a lofty station” which means he exalted to a lofty station alongwith his status/rank. Right. He can’t leave his status/rank back there.

Allah SWT exalted Hazrat Isa a.s. to Himself same as Prophet (with his status and rank i.e. prophency) and whan Hazrat Isa a.s. will come back, means when he will descendent to this earth he will be descended alongwith his status/rank i.e. the same prophency. So there is NO new Prophet After Muhammad . Like you said earlier “We both consider him to be khataman nabiyeen, the seal of the prophets” If yu consider and believe Prophet Muhammad is ‘Khataman nabiyeen’ then there should be no doubt of coming back of Hazrat Isa a.s.

[kchughtai]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

g) The grave site in the Roza (Madinah) is empty - Isa (AS) is to be buried there.

If you refer to the hadiths, the words of the prophet(pbuh) are 'fi qabri’ i.e., ‘in my grave’ not close to the grave nor in my tomb. So if you are fond of taking things literally, can you do that here? I am sure not. No believer can. It is not meant to be taken literally.

[psyah]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@kchughtai

If you refer to the hadiths, the words of the prophet(pbuh) are 'fi qabri’ i.e., ‘in my grave’ not close to the grave nor in my tomb. So if you are fond of taking things literally, can you do that here? I am sure not. No believer can. It is not meant to be taken literally.

Peace kchughtai

No in this case you are right … if it does say “fi qabri” we don’t take it literally … we take it to mean near or next to my grave … as is the custom with Arabic … I don’t take things literally all the time you know … there is a time and place for that … i.e. when the commonly understood meaning is not sufficient for the argument being presented.

So in this case the commonly understood is the literal and it is not sufficient in meaning, because how can Isa (AS) occupy the same literal space as Muhammad (SAW)? … so we take the next option which is to infer closeness of proximity - that it is so close it might as well be the same grave …

Likewise in the case of Isa (AS) his being taken to REFUTE the killing and crucifixion it is not sufficient to say that Isa (AS) will die, because the death of Isa (AS) does not REFUTE the accusation … so we have to offer other meanings … to adequately negate the main talking point, which is the physical taking up of Isa (AS) which is grammatically plausible from the words being used.

So since the grave site next to the one of our master Muhammad (SAW) is empty we can conclude that Isa (AS) has as yet not arrived and died on this world. Also, in the spiritual realm those people buried in the proximity of another grave - are actually sharing the same space as if they are in the same house … This can be gathered from the many hadith on the expereinces in the grave.

[brahmachari99]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@psyah

Peace brahmachari99

Please learn logical argumentation … Maulana Maudidi did not negate the possibility of Isa (AS) to have been taken up, he only stated that “tawaffee in the case of Isa (AS) is not of the soul - i.e. it is not one of his being given death” - if there is anything that Maulana Maududi is negating is the death of Isa (AS) … He is silent on the matter of Ascension … he is saying the meaning of tawwaffee in this case is not of what happens at the time of death, but another thing that he has called “relieving of duty” …

While I go back to school and try to learn logical argumentation, perhaps it’d be appropriate to point out that I was referring to the image in post # 133. It is the third image of the three posted there. The text is in Urdu, I am not sure if you read Urdu or not, but Maududi sahib says Quran does not say Isa (AS) was taken up bodily.

http://www.paklinks.com/gsmedia/files/72551/maudoodi%20rasailomasail.jpg

[brahmachari99]

Re: Hazrat Isa A.S.

@brahmachari99

In the Hadith that was quoted earlier, Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alaihe wa’aalihi wassalam) said he’ll say the same thing as Jesus (AS) said. If Prophet Muhammad (SAW) specifically says that he’ll say the exact same thing, then you cannot assign different meanings to the same words. Hence you’ll have to conclude that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) was also taken up bodily.

Psyah,
You forgot to mention if “taken up bodily” would apply Prophet Muhammad (AS) as well.