"Seal of the Prophets" not Messengers.

All research or scholarship questions
Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

"Seal of the Prophets" not Messengers.

Postby Keyvan » Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:40 am

since it came up in a previous thread i thought id post my schpeal. reconciliation of this is not very difficult, nor is it a stretch. and in fact it makes more sense follows through more clearly than any of the common Muslim dogmas that have been passed down from generation to generation.

the first thing that must be realized is that only in english are the terms "Prophet" and "Messenger" used interchangeably. but in Arabic..
Prophet = nabi
Messenger = rasul

these terms are not interchangeable but dogmas made them appear that way for Messengers.

it is not disputed that the Prophetic system was that of a hierarchically successed Administrative Order of the previous Jewish Dispensation. As soon as one Prophet died, another would take over, so on and so on.

These Prophets were not Messengers though, and this is not disputed. Prophethood was a leadership post, leading a Dispensation under a continuing Divine Revelation.

Also not disputed is the fact that it was Messengers who started the Dispensations and a Prophetic system that would reign successively later, and of course the Messengers would be the first Prophets of that Dispensation.

the DIFFERENCE is that just because someone is a Messenger doesnt mean they are automatically a prophet. the two positions are mutually exclusive and neither have to have one or the other.

In fact, there are THREE Messengers never referred to as Prophets; Sha'ib, Saleh, and Hud. These three messengers were also the only three Messengers who's religions were never accepted by the people. Clearly they could no be Prophets then, since Prophethood is a post of leadership of an established following in a Dispensation, and these Messengers never had a following established, thus they never assumed Prophethood.

Thus, all "seal of the Prophets" means is that Muhammad is the first and last Prophet of that Dispensation. Be a Muslim Shia or Sunni, they would agree that the Administrative Order after Muhammad was not a Prophetic one. That is, it is differentiated from the Jewish system, and thats all "sealing Prophethood" is, a Revealed differentiation between the Quranic Dispensation from the Jewish one.

----

In fact, another Messenger is anticipated in the Quran. The Surah of Hud is all about Messengers who's religions were not accepted by the people. This is where we come across Saleh and Hud as mentioned above. Basically the cycle of these stories worked like this: the Messenger was sent to the people, the people rejected Him, and they suffered for it. Again and again, thats what happened.

Then towards the end of the Surah we read:

120 And all that We relate unto thee of the story of the messengers is in order that thereby We may make firm thy heart. And herein hath come unto thee the Truth and an exhortation and a reminder for believers.
(The Qur'an (Pickthall tr), Sura 11 - Hud)



"an exhortation and a reminder for believers"

1) who is this surah directed to?

"the believers" the Muslims who have accepted the Book therein; accepted the Quran

2) what is it asking of them?

"an exhortation and a reminder...." refering to the stories told. what other warning could this possibly be then that another Messenger will come, and there will be a tendency to reject Him out of neophobia.





--

side note. use of the term "Manifestation" is clearly done to illuminate the role of the Messenger. Baha'u'llah's Revelation never shied away from proclaiming Messengerdom, so to suggest use of the term Manifestation would route away that question is absurd.

British_Bahai
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:27 am

Postby British_Bahai » Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:02 pm

:D THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!

Even though I didnt read this post properly (I'm in a rush), I for one can say that i ALWAYS get confused between "nabi" and "rasoul".

Ill read this properly when I come back. I know this post is going to be useful to many people. I might change its status to "sticky".

Thanks again

Baha'i Warrior
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:07 am
Location: U.S.A.

Postby Baha'i Warrior » Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:45 pm

It's an interesting argument, that Messengership has not ended with Muhammad, one that is made by Muhammad Mustafa in Baha'u'llah: The Great Announcement of the Qur'an:

    O children of Adam! there shall come to you Apostles from among yourselves, rehearsing my signs to you; and who so shall fear God and do good works, no fear shall be upon them, neither shall they be put to grief
    (Surih VII, "Al Araf", v. 33)

    This verse, addressed to the children of Adam, assures mankind that Apostles will continue to be sent by God, without affirming the continuity of Prophethood.

It should be noted that "Adam" in Arabic means "man," so we (man) are being addressed in this verse, and the verse isn't restricted to specific peoples of bygone ages. The term children, sons, etc., of Adam is used in the Qur'an to refer to us all.

It's a somewhat sticky situation though, and I hate to play the devil's advocate, but not only does Muhammad claim to be both the seal of the prophets and messengers in the hadith (i.e. His last sermon I believe, cited by Sunnis sometimes), but Baha'u'llah also does not claim to be a Messenger—in fact, quite the contrary:

    To this We reply: “Indeed thou speaketh the truth. We do testify that through Him, Messengership [Risálat] and Prophethood have both been sealed and any one claiming after Him this most exalted station is in manifest error.
(Lawh-i-Hasan-i-Sháhábadí, par. 2, http://bahai-library.com/provisionals/lawh.hasan.shahabadi.html)

So if Baha'u'llah doesn't claim to be a Messenger of Prophet, what is His significance? Read on:

    Nevertheless, O Questioner! Hearken unto My voice which sayeth: “Open thine eyes that thou mayest behold the Most Great Beauty, through Whom speaketh the Lord of divine decree. By God! Through Him the ‘Hour’ hath appeared, and the ‘Resurrection’ hath come to pass, and the ‘Moon’ hath been cleft asunder and thou wouldst behold all in a ‘continuing Regeneration’ if thou be of them that possess insight.

The Day of Judgement has come, and God Himself has appeared as promised in the Qur'an:

    And when the set time of concealment was fulfilled, We sent forth, whilst still wrapt within a myriad veils, an infinitesimal glimmer of the effulgent Glory enveloping the Face of the Youth, and lo, the entire company of the dwellers of the Realms above were seized with violent commotion and the favored of God fell down in adoration before Him. He hath, verily, manifested a glory such as none in the whole creation hath witnessed, inasmuch as He hath arisen to proclaim in person His Cause unto all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth. (Gleanings, p. 75)


So Baha'u'llah is light years exalted above prophethood and messengership, as He designated Himself as being the SENDER of the Messengers (the Bab was the King of the Messengers). Baha'u'llah is clearly (at least I believe) God Himself, not literally God incarnate, but the most perfect reflection of God in this material realm. We know that on the Day of Judgement we will meet God; the Koran says we can't see God. A Muslim on this forum argued that man can "meet" or be in the presence of God without "seeing" Him, but if that's the real meaning, then nothing significant is going to happen on the Day of Judgement since we are all already in the presence of God--He is everywhere: "We created man: and we know what his soul whispereth to him, and we are closer to him than his neck-vein." (Sura L, verse 15)

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:44 pm

007.035
YUSUFALI: O ye Children of Adam! whenever there come to you messengers from amongst you, rehearsing My signs unto you,- those who are righteous and mend (their lives),- on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve.
PICKTHAL: O Children of Adam! When messengers of your own come unto you who narrate unto you My revelations, then whosoever refraineth from evil and amendeth - there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.
SHAKIR: O children of Adam! if there come to you messengers from among you relating to you My communications, then whoever shall guard (against evil) and act aright-- they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.


yes it is pretty clear from this verse that there is anticipation of coming messengers, just as there is from 11:120.

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Questions

Postby Keyvan » Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:19 pm

Hi. I will try to answer your questions to the best of my ability.

Sunni and Shia are united on their dogma of what "seal of the prophets" pertains to. However we know historically that Shia dogma was highly influenced on Sunni dogma, regardless of instances where Sunni clerics would take ideas from the Shia Imam's, as any Shia will tell you.

This is because Shia lagged in development by a few centuries from Sunni. The first compilation of hadiths were published by Sunni's, and then that was adopted by Shia, further sustaining and setting a tone for lasting influence.

It seems pretty clear why Sunni would adopt the idea that "seal of the Prophets" would mean an end to all Divine Guidence after Muhammad, period. That is, to suggest otherwise, even slightly, would give a larger window for adherents of the Imamate to reconcile their claims of continuing Divine Guidence with the text. Furthermore, I would assume that at the time, Shia had enough of a burden trying to prove the Imamate, that they didnt want to seem insincere to this other dogma then propagated by Sunnis (that the Messenger line had ended) as it was technically inconsequential to the Shia case whether or not Messengers would continue.

Of course no Muslim would accept Baha'i writings as anything other than heretical, as believing otherwise would thus be an adherence to the Baha'i faith. Most, but in a decreasing number, muslims are hindered by dogmas established by clerics over the centuries. Dr. Reza Aslan's book, "No god but God" is a great study of that.

I see many places in the Quran advocating unity, in anticipation of the Baha'i Revelation. Some key quotes come to mind.

78. We did aforetime send messengers before thee: of them there are some whose story We have related to thee, and some whose story We have not related to thee.
(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 40)


164. Of some Messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not; and to Moses Allah spoke direct.
(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 4)


These quotes clearly indicate that there are more Messengers that were sent throughout the world who were not explicitly mentioned. For Baha'u'llah (in His rightful station) to make explicit who some of these other Messengers are, for the sake of uniting them under the common present cause is totally in bounds. Krishna, Zoroaster, and Buddha, to be specific.

Also, yes I do think Prophets is supposed to be capitalized.

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:19 pm

Ok I see what you are asking. The Quran for its time and place is more about advancing the ummah, the community therein. As for people of other beliefs, or of none they are Quranically in two groups. There are those who come from faiths of preceding Divine Dispensations like Judaism and Christianity (said explicitly), and then theres everyone else.

The Quran explains that regardless of Divine Dispensation, so long as they believe in God, work towards righteousness, and that there is consequence for acting otherwise, that they are on the path at least, just as muslims are, and can be rewarded etc etc.

As for those who are not of any Divine Dispensation, say a pagan or just someone who doesnt follow any faith, they are treated with due respect in the Quran as well.


Surah 109
Al Kafirun (Those Who Reject Faith)
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
1. Say: O ye that reject Faith!
2. I worship not that which ye worship,
3. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
4. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
5. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
6. To you be your religion, and to me mine.


This indicates a policy of respect and understanding for anyone of any belief.

The difference between this and the Baha'i Revelation is that we seek to actually work with people of other backgrounds to achieve our goals of universal prosperity. This idea of universal peace and justice, known as "the kingdom of God on earth" from a Christian background, or "the Universal Sharia of al-Mahdi" for a Muslim background (all the same thing), cannot be achieved by a policy of being exclusive.
This does not mean the Quran teaches against this. Its just that the primary goal of the Baha'i Faith is global and not regional so its more explicit and proactive about this.

British_Bahai
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:27 am

Postby British_Bahai » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:34 pm

(Keyvan - are u Muslim :question: )

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:47 pm

british_bahai wrote:(Keyvan - are u Muslim :question: )


Baha'i

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:04 am

Thankyou for your kind words.

Well in my personal opinion, fundamentalist radical interpretations (not even necessarily the militant type of radicalism) form, not out of objective reasoning of religious texts, but rather out of a preservationist need.

People are generally cenophobic when it comes to religion and culture (more extreme when it comes to religion though).

Its extremely closed and ignorant of people to be self-righteous in their own interpretations. Both the Bible and Quran explain that part of the Book is figurative,

7. He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part there of that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord;" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding.

(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 3)

16:25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.

(King James Bible, John)


and thus only a Divine Source can authoritatively explain it. In the Christian Dispensation Jesus left the Papacy,( even if the authoritative line of this was not rightfully succeeded early on after peter), and in Islam the Imamate (which wasnt followed by most Muslims). In the Baha'i faith we have the Interpretations of the Guardian, and now continuing Divine authority is vested in the Universal House of Justice. No Baha'i ever speaks for the faith, or can ever claim to. Like right now, no matter how much I may know, I can only claim to explain the faith to the best of my understanding.

So in our faith, just like in the previous Dispensations, there are really two main points to follow here.
1, the followers need to follow, all of the text, not just part of it.

"Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest?"
(The Qur'an (Yusuf Ali tr), Surah 2)

and 2, authority in interpretation and legislation is vested only in a Divinely Ordained Administration, not in any man or clergy. (we have no clergy btw)

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Wed Mar 28, 2007 2:30 pm

thanks for your kind words again.

and actually i did in fact mean "CENOphobia" not "xenophobia."

xenophobia - the fear of strangers or foreigners

cenophobia (aka centophobia) - the fear of new ideas or things

Zazaban
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 9:16 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Zazaban » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:04 pm

Keyvan wrote:thanks for your kind words again.

and actually i did in fact mean "CENOphobia" not "xenophobia."

xenophobia - the fear of strangers or foreigners

cenophobia (aka centophobia) - the fear of new ideas or things
Odd, it wasn't in the dictionary.
Justice and equity are twin Guardians that watch over men. From them are revealed such blessed and perspicuous words as are the cause of the well-being of the world and the protection of the nations.
~ Bahá'u'lláh

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Keyvan » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:31 pm

Zazaban wrote:
Keyvan wrote:thanks for your kind words again.

and actually i did in fact mean "CENOphobia" not "xenophobia."

xenophobia - the fear of strangers or foreigners

cenophobia (aka centophobia) - the fear of new ideas or things
Odd, it wasn't in the dictionary.


hmm. it may be under neophobia. but you can google it

Dorumerosaer
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 3:15 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: "Seal of the Prophets" not Messengers.

Postby Dorumerosaer » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:05 am

To my knowledge, this is not a distinction that is upheld in the Baha'i Writings as a basis for understanding this subject.

In Gleanings section XXV Baha'u'llah writes:

"It is evident that every age in which a Manifestation of God hath lived is divinely ordained, and may, in a sense, be characterized as God's appointed Day. This Day, however, is unique, and is to be distinguished
from those that have preceded it. The designation "Seal of the Prophets" fully revealeth its high station. The Prophetic Cycle hath, verily, ended.
The Eternal Truth is now come. He hath lifted up the Ensign of Power, and is now shedding upon the world the unclouded splendor of His Revelation."

In this verse Baha'u'llah appears to be claiming a station greater than a Prophet. Since we know from the Iqan that all of the Manifestations are equal in their own realm, the significance is one of emphasis on the greatness of the Revelation Baha'u'llah has brought.

Brent

Keyvan
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:58 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: "Seal of the Prophets" not Messengers.

Postby Keyvan » Sun Apr 08, 2007 3:20 pm

pilgrimbrent wrote:To my knowledge, this is not a distinction that is upheld in the Baha'i Writings as a basis for understanding this subject.

In Gleanings section XXV Baha'u'llah writes:

"It is evident that every age in which a Manifestation of God hath lived is divinely ordained, and may, in a sense, be characterized as God's appointed Day. This Day, however, is unique, and is to be distinguished
from those that have preceded it. The designation "Seal of the Prophets" fully revealeth its high station. The Prophetic Cycle hath, verily, ended.
The Eternal Truth is now come. He hath lifted up the Ensign of Power, and is now shedding upon the world the unclouded splendor of His Revelation."

In this verse Baha'u'llah appears to be claiming a station greater than a Prophet. Since we know from the Iqan that all of the Manifestations are equal in their own realm, the significance is one of emphasis on the greatness of the Revelation Baha'u'llah has brought.

Brent






Brent I feel like I pointed out the distinction above.

Nabi - Prophet

Rasul - Messenger


from my understanding Manifestation in a Baha'i context is fully interchangeable with Messenger (Rasul). and of course Messenger has a greater role than Prophet alone, as can be seen in the Quran and Baha'i Writings

British_Bahai
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:27 am

Re: "Seal of the Prophets" not Messengers.

Postby British_Bahai » Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:27 am

Keyvan wrote:Nabi - Prophet

Rasul - Messenger

A good way to remember the difference is by thinking of:
Nope, MR (lol)
Nabil & prophet; Messenger & Rasoul

\:D/
(sorry to side-track!)


Return to “Discussion”