Download PDF: [S] Who is Nabi Zul Kifl

Nabi Zul Kifl Alayhis Salaam is mentioned in the Holy Quran only in Surah Ambiyah and Surah Saad. Another matter is that only his name is mentioned and no other issue pertaining to his life story is mentioned.


In Surah Ambiya, verse 85, the Qur’an declares that:


وَ اِسْمٰعِیۡلَ وَ اِدْرِیۡسَ وَ ذَا الْکِفْلِ ؕ کُلٌّ مِّنَ الصّٰبِرِیۡنَ﴿۸۵﴾ۚۖ


“And remember Ismail and Idrees and Zulkifl. They were all men of patience.”


In Surah Saad, verse 48, it is mentioned:


وَ اذْکُرْ اِسْمٰعِیۡلَ وَ الْیَسَعَ وَ ذَا الْکِفْلِ ؕ وَکُلٌّ مِّنَ الْاَخْیَارِ ﴿ؕ۴۸﴾


“And remember Ismail, Al-Yasa, and Zulkifl. They are all excellent ones.”


In the Ahadith also, no mention is made of Nabi Zul Kifl’s Alayhis Salaam life. Therefore, in this regard, all we can say is that he was one of the Prophets sent to a specific nation to give them guidance.


However, Shah Abdul Qadir Dehlwi explains that Nabi Zul Kifl Alayhis Salaam was actually the son of Nabi Ayyub Alayhis Salaam and because he had taken the responsibility of another person, he spent many years in jail and many tests were sent to him. (Muaduhul Furqan). Certain scholars of Qur’an have said that Hadrat Zul Kifl Alayhis Salaam is actually the title of Hadrat Hazqeel Alayhis Salaam.


Some people are under the impression that “Zul Kifl” is actually the other name of Buddah. They say that the capital city of Buddah was Kapil Dastu and “Kapil” stands for “Kifl” and “Zu” stands for “master or owner.” Therefore, the actual owner of this capital is Kapil Dastu who is none other than Zul Kifl.


Some people also say that the actual teachings of Buddah was based on Islamic principles but these teachings were later changed and corrupted. However, we are of the opinion that this is merely rumour and nothing else. There is no historical reports which prove this claim. All we can say is that he was one of the Prophets who came to the Bani Israeel and there is nothing to suggest anything else. Therefore, since the Qur’an has merely mentioned his name and nothing else, we should do the same and just mention his name. We cannot delve into an issue in which there is no basis or testimony.