Muhammad (pbuh), the Last Prophet

[hamba2han]

For those who wish to learn the story of how Islam began and why it became so readily accepted and spread so rapidly throughout all of Arabia and eventually the lands beyond, here is a short animated movie which does a fairly decent job of explaining how the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) brought this divine Message to all of humankind.

 

[français]

ohh, it's a cartoon! cool! lol

anyways i am about to go out, but when i get back, i have nothing better to do.. so i will watch! thanks a lot!

 

[Snowbunny]

hola hamba2han

i did not know you were a member here... i am jayda from Catholic Answers.

que Dios te bendiga

 

[hamba2han]

Hi Jayda, yes I am a member but I do not post as often as I would like as I find the forum rules here to be rather restrictive and I am not allowed to post various things that I am able to post on other forums.

Anyhow, it is good to see you on this forum as well.

 

[Snowbunny]

gracias

would you mind if i asked you some questions about mohamed in your thread here?

que Dios te bendiga

 

[hamba2han]

I would not mind at all Jayda.

What is your question(s)?

 

[Snowbunny]

gracias

why should their be an end to the prophetic line in islam? also, if the word of God is complete with mohameds message, why did God consciously choose to leave people with incompleteness for the first thousands of years. and if there is a warner for every nation, like the quran says so... why did God arbitrarily decide that an arab living in the sixth century is the prophet for my 'nation' the 21st century United States? it seems like if God is going to say that sixth century arabia and first century Judea are separate nations... given the relatively little difference between them, then there should be a separate prophet for the modern age.

like Bab.

why not just give one unchangeable perfect and complete revelation to Adam to be handed down forever? or alternatively, why not just accept that prophethood continues for 'every nation' and the prophetic tradition carries on to the Bab like bahais believe?

que Dios te bendiga

 

[Futuwwa]

I'll take a pot shot at this.

why should their be an end to the prophetic line in islam?

Well, if the amount of revelation needed to provide the true faith in its entirety is finite, why would you need an infinite number of prophets?

also, if the word of God is complete with mohameds message, why did God consciously choose to leave people with incompleteness for the first thousands of years.

Well, to understand the motives of a metaphysical entity like God is ultimately impossible, but... would it have made sense to deliver everything to Adam? The Kaaba did not yet exist, so instructing the believers to go on pilgrimage would have been irrelevant. There were no organized societies during Adam's time, so instructing the believers on sociological matters would have been irrelevant.

There's also a growth perspective to the question. Could humanity have taken in all at once? Humanity, as a whole, needs to take it in a bit at a time, establish the earlier revelation before being able to take on new.

and if there is a warner for every nation, like the quran says so... why did God arbitrarily decide that an arab living in the sixth century is the prophet for my 'nation' the 21st century United States? it seems like if God is going to say that sixth century arabia and first century Judea are separate nations... given the relatively little difference between them, then there should be a separate prophet for the modern age.

Well, how would a modern age prophet differ from a 7th century one? Islam is universal, God doesn't adapt to the spirit of the age, regardless of how much liberals would want him to.

 

[TrevorKamal]

Well, if the amount of revelation needed to provide the true faith in its entirety is finite

But the notion that it would be finite doesn't really make much sense to me. Is there something in the Qur'an that talks about this? It seems to me that revelation will always be somewhat limited not by the source but by what humankind is ready for at the time.

 

[evange]

I went to see this at the theater, but it was so poorly organzed. It was a private screening, so when I got to the theater, I couldent buy a ticket from the agent, they gave me a phone number to call the organizer. The organizer said "sure, you can attend, but you have to come to my house that's on the other side of town to pick up the tickets."

So I just went home because it wasnt worth the agrevation.

I tell you, if it wasnt for the jizya a lot of muslims would starve.

Since then I have read the Koran and some of the hadiths for myself, and well now I dont think I'd be interested in that movie. I am against pedophilia, rape, and polygamy, and have no desire to see it in caroon form.

 

[warghaha]

I tell you, if it wasnt for the jizya a lot of muslims would starve.

Errrr....what?

I am against pedophilia, rape, and polygamy, and have no desire to see it in caroon form.

I'm too against pedophilia, rape (and some polygamists, not polygamy). And also hentai .

I understand where your view of pedophilia on him is coming from, but rape? What rape? Hmm...a new acusation to him that I'd never heard before.

 

[Renton405]

Errrr....what?

I'm too against pedophilia, rape (and some polygamists, not polygamy). And also hentai .

I understand where your view of pedophilia on him is coming from, but rape? What rape? Hmm...a new acusation to him that I'd never heard before.

Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 19, #2991:


Anas said:

“A beautiful slave girl fell to Dihyah. The apostle purchased her for seven slaves. He then gave her to Umm Sulaim for decoration her and preparing her for marriage.”

Anas said:

Captives were gathered at Khaibar. Dihyah came and said, “apostle, give me a slave girl form the captives.” He said, “Go and take a slave girl.” He took Safiyyah. A man then came to the prophet and said: “You gave Safiyyah chief lady of Quraizah and al-Nadir to Dihyah?” This is according to the version of Yaqub. Then the agreed version goes: “She is worthy of you.” He (Muhammad) said, “Call him along with her.” When the prophet looked at her, he said to him: “Take another slave girl from the captives.” The prophet then set her free and married her.


And,


Narrated ‘Abdul ‘Aziz:

Anas said, 'When Allah's Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet. He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.' He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, ‘Muhammad (has come).’ (Some of our companions added, “With his army.&#8221 We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, ‘O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.’ The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Allah's Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.’ So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, ‘Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.’ Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her.”

Thabit asked Anas, “O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?” He said, “Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her.” Anas added, “While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet. So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, ‘Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.’ He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-SawTq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walrma (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Apostle.” (Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367)

As to the righteous, they will be in gardens and in happiness... (to them will be said,) "Eat and drink ye with profit and health, because of your (good) deeds." They will recline (with ease) on thrones (of dignity) arranged in ranks; and We shall join them (in the original: marry them) to companions with beautiful, big and lustrous eyes... And We shall bestow on them, of fruit and meat, anything they desire. S. 52:17, 19, 20, 22 (see also 4:57; 76:12-22; 55:54-56; 47:15)

Even more astonishing is this description:

"Surely for the godfearing awaits a place of security, gardens and vineyards, and maidens of SWELLING BREASTS (kawa'eb), like of age, and a cup overflowing." S. 78:33 Arberry (see also Dawood, Rodwell)

Ibn Kathir, one of Islam's premiere commentators, notes:

"Kawa'eb" - "SWELLING AND FIRM, NOT SAGGING." (Quoted from M. Rafiqul-Haqq and P. Newton, Place of Women in Pure in Islam, p. 3


Quran speaks of women as tillage that one can plow into anyway they choose:

"Your women are a tillage for you, so go to your tillage as you will." S. 2:223

"‘Your wives are a tilth unto you; so go to your tilth when or how you will.’ (2.223)" (Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 51)

 

[Snowbunny]

I'll take a pot shot at this.

gracias Janissary

Well, if the amount of revelation needed to provide the true faith in its entirety is finite, why would you need an infinite number of prophets?

i think this goes to the question i had that followed this one, and TrevorKemals point... what independent evidence do we have that revelation is finite? no prior revelation (except for zoroastrianism, which is not the same) says that there will be a final prophet or that revelation will close... this appears to be a new idea that came with mohamed, at least for me and apparently Trevor this idea does not make sense and needs to be proven.

Well, to understand the motives of a metaphysical entity like God is ultimately impossible, but... would it have made sense to deliver everything to Adam? The Kaaba did not yet exist, so instructing the believers to go on pilgrimage would have been irrelevant. There were no organized societies during Adam's time, so instructing the believers on sociological matters would have been irrelevant.

but don't muslims believe that the kabaa was actually first built by Adam? i am very sure of this... and are you saying that the quran is irrelevant for people who do not yet have organized societies? there still are people in the world who do not live even by the most rudimentary sociological patterns like tribalism...

in fact isn't it true that the quran talks about many things which are not relevant to many people in the world? such as forbidding people to bury their daughters... this was a practice in arabia during the sixth century, as far as i know the roman world did not do this, and certainly this is not done in the vast majority of nations today...

i think my point is that if you believe the quran to be universal, it shouldn't have a time or culture stamp on it that makes it irrelevant for not matching the time and culture of the people being preached to... also if (as muslims believe) prophets bring the exact same message every time they come, 'oneness' why shouldn't the quran be just as useful to prehistoric man?

i just do not see what you are saying...

There's also a growth perspective to the question. Could humanity have taken in all at once? Humanity, as a whole, needs to take it in a bit at a time, establish the earlier revelation before being able to take on new.

so primitive cultures that resemble prehistoric man are excempt from the restrictions and requirements of the quran today? if this is an issue of ripening i do not see why that should not be the case...

also what makes first century roman Judea less 'ready' for mohamed than sixth century arabia?

what aspect of humanity needed to grow? and where in the quran does it say any of this?

Well, how would a modern age prophet differ from a 7th century one? Islam is universal, God doesn't adapt to the spirit of the age, regardless of how much liberals would want him to.

there are many issues today that require a new prophet... the illumination of science has seemingly dispelled many of our prior superstitious beliefs about the creation and governance of the world (including those found in the quran), science has also presented new moral dilemmas, we can interfere with the process of life, we can change our world in newer and bigger ways... global warming is such an example. there are moral issues today which mohamed could not have dreamed of...

the quran does not rise to answer any of these questions by itself... it always needs interpretation to meet the challenge, somebody to stretch the words to meet the scenario...

it seems to me that if God was dissastisfied enough with the Church interpreting the Bible to meet the new moral dilemmas of a culture only six centuries into the future, that He would send another revelation... that God would need to send another one for the modern era.

we have less in common with sixth century arabia than sixth century arabia had with first century judea... yet these are different 'nations' sent different 'warners.'

unless muslims feel that the pinnacle of civilization was sixth century arabia... and that we should regress to the patriarchalism of that time period... i could understand that as the muslims perspective but not accept it as proof that there was a need for a final prophet.

que Dios te bendiga

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

In fact, this whole "last prophet" thing is based on a misunderstanding!

There are several different explanations of the verse in the Qur’an saying Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets (a statement we Baha’is accept):

First off, there is a sense in which EVERY Divine Messenger is the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, and the Seal!

More specifically, there are multiple Arabic words that all translate into English as "prophet."

One of these is "nabi," which refers to a minor prophet such as Jeremiah or Amos.

Another is Ras'ul, which means a major, religion-founding Divine Messenger like Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, or Baha'u'llah (our Founder). (And yes, Muhammad was a major--not a minor--Prophet.)

And the word actually used in the Qur'an is "nabi," meaning Muhammad was the Seal of the minor prophets! This says nothing whatever about the great Divine Messengers.

Muhammad is also the Seal in the sense that He was the last Messenger during the Prophetic Age, which began with Adam and ended with Him. The Bab then closed out that Age and opened the Age of Fulfillment, of which Baha'u'llah is the first major Messenger.

Finally, there is a sense in which the word commonly translated as "seal" also means "ornament," so that this verse of the Qur'an may simply be saying that Muhammad is the Ornament of the prophets! (Nothing whatever about any sort of finish.)

Peace,

Bruce

 

[Snowbunny]

gracias BruceDLimber

i think that makes more logical sense... obviously i have very different views about the nature of revelation than muslims or baha'is do, but i think if one were to accept the muslim argument that mohamed is a prophet then they must accept that the flood doors are open to the possibility there are many more prophets... like the Bab, Bahá'u'lláh or Joseph Smith...

something i have been thinking about as a consequence of this discussion is that it is interesting comparing these people because i know that muslims often suggest we cannot exclude mohamed as a prophet because (muslims believe) he was an example of great virtue... yet i would argue that the bab and joseph smith were also outwardly men of extremely good moral character, in some respects much more so than mohamed.

nor can i say that mormonism or bahai are forces of great evil in the world... i would hope muslims agree, i see no reason they should not... both are very God loving groups who have worked very hard for human justice in the modern world, just like islam. yet the character of joseph smith and the bab, and the good fruits of bahai and mormonism have not been enough to convince muslims to accept these men as prophets.

yet character of the man and character of the religion is the same standard muslims very often tell Catholics is how Jesus meant it when he said we should know false prophets by 'their fruits.' it is something that they argue proves islam is not founded by a false prophet and that mohamed is not a false prophet.

Bahá'u'lláh is especially interesting because his message is fundamentally the same as mohameds... 'believe in the One God' and 'i am a prophet.'

que Dios te bendiga

 

[hamba2han]

To understand how Muslims view earlier Prophets like Jesus (pbuh), then maybe it would be much better if the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself explain it to you.

Abu Huraira reports that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said:

"My position, in relation to the prophets who came before me, can be explained in the following example: ‘A man erected a building and adorned his edifice with great beauty, but he left an empty niche in the corner, where just one brick was missing. People looked around the building and marveled at its beauty, but wondered why a brick was missing from that niche! I am like unto that one missing brick and I am the last in line of the prophets.’" (Reported by Bukhari and Muslim.)

The Qur'an says:
"O people ! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Apostle of God and the last in the line of Prophets. And God is Aware of everything."
(Surah Al Ahzab: 40)

And in another hadith, Thauban reports: "The Holy Prophet (PBUH) observed: And there will arise Thirty imposters in my Ummah and each one of them will pronounce to the world that he is a prophet, but I am the last in the line of the Prophets of God and no Apostle will come after me." (Abu Dawud, Kitab-ul-Fitan)

There are in fact numerous hadiths which report the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) asserting that he is indeed the Last Prophet and therefore there can no doubt whatsoever in the minds of Muslims that no new prophet will come after him.

There is absolutely no need at all for a new prophet since the deen (way of life) of Islam has been completed and is perfect in the eyes of God as told in Surah 5:3 of the Qur'an:

"This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion."

And so then, if the Creator Himself has said that Islam is perfect and has promised to preserve it till the Day of Judgment, then who are the creations to disagree with Him by hoping for a new prophet to arrive and "solve" their problems?

 

[evange]

Errrr....what?

Jizya is a head or poll tax that Islamic rulers demanded from their non-Muslim subjects.

I understand where your view of pedophilia on him is coming from, but rape? What rape? Hmm...a new acusation to him that I'd never heard before.

Aisha = statutory rape

 

[Futuwwa]

i think this goes to the question i had that followed this one, and TrevorKemals point... what independent evidence do we have that revelation is finite? no prior revelation (except for zoroastrianism, which is not the same) says that there will be a final prophet or that revelation will close... this appears to be a new idea that came with mohamed, at least for me and apparently Trevor this idea does not make sense and needs to be proven.

Huh? Why are you asking for independent evidence? Revelation being finite is one of the basic postulates of Islam; to understand Islam, you need to view it through its own worldview if you want to find consistency.

It surprises me that the idea of finite revelation is foreign to you. Wasn't Christianity completed by the work of the apostles? You might not call it an end to revelation, but you aren't expecting any more prophets, are you?

but don't muslims believe that the kabaa was actually first built by Adam?

Abraham, actually.

and are you saying that the quran is irrelevant for people who do not yet have organized societies? there still are people in the world who do not live even by the most rudimentary sociological patterns like tribalism...

Not irrelevant, its moral lessons are not irrelevant. But, commandments like, for example, instructions on holy war would be highly irrelevant if there isn't any infidel nation around with a hostile stance to Islam.

in fact isn't it true that the quran talks about many things which are not relevant to many people in the world? such as forbidding people to bury their daughters... this was a practice in arabia during the sixth century, as far as i know the roman world did not do this, and certainly this is not done in the vast majority of nations today...

There's more to it than not burying unwanted daughters, the relevant passages deal in very general terms about not favouring boys over girls, something which is found in very, very many cultures throughout human history.

i think my point is that if you believe the quran to be universal, it shouldn't have a time or culture stamp on it that makes it irrelevant for not matching the time and culture of the people being preached to... also if (as muslims believe) prophets bring the exact same message every time they come, 'oneness' why shouldn't the quran be just as useful to prehistoric man?

Not exactly the same message. Every prophet's message is consistent with what came before, but adding new things to it.

also what makes first century roman Judea less 'ready' for mohamed than sixth century arabia?

Well, 1st century Judea already had Jesus' teachings to digest

what aspect of humanity needed to grow? and where in the quran does it say any of this?

Where in the Quran? Please, this is just theological speculation by me. Which is all that really can be done. As I said, how does one go about trying to find out the motives of a God whose very essence is incomprehensible to the human mind?

there are many issues today that require a new prophet... the illumination of science has seemingly dispelled many of our prior superstitious beliefs about the creation and governance of the world (including those found in the quran), science has also presented new moral dilemmas, we can interfere with the process of life, we can change our world in newer and bigger ways... global warming is such an example. there are moral issues today which mohamed could not have dreamed of...

the quran does not rise to answer any of these questions by itself... it always needs interpretation to meet the challenge, somebody to stretch the words to meet the scenario...

Well, what's wrong with using the Quran "as is" for guidance on new issues arising? Why would a moral guide have to be a "when X, do Y" kind of checklist? I'd dare say that despite the apparent dazzle of technology, the basics of human coexistence aren't much different from what they've always been. And, who says that there even is such a thing as an absolute will of God on global warming? Would emission levels matter to God as long as the issue is handled in a way consistent with established Islamic morality?

it seems to me that if God was dissastisfied enough with the Church interpreting the Bible to meet the new moral dilemmas of a culture only six centuries into the future, that He would send another revelation... that God would need to send another one for the modern era.

A few corrections are in order. Muhammed's primary mission was to complete revelation, not correct the Church (though that, of course, came along with him as well). There were unrevealed things left, so Muhammed would have come regardless of the Church.

unless muslims feel that the pinnacle of civilization was sixth century arabia... and that we should regress to the patriarchalism of that time period... i could understand that as the muslims perspective but not accept it as proof that there was a need for a final prophet.

Well, no, I never said that Islam = 7th century Arabia. The early Islamic Arabs weren't perfect, but they made a good attempt to live up to Islam.

que Dios te bendiga

You too

 

[Futuwwa]

Aisha = statutory rape

You can define it as rape as much as you want, and even make a law defining it as rape. That does not actually make it into rape, no more than defining the force of gravity to be nonexistent makes it so.

 

[Renton405]

You can define it as rape as much as you want, and even make a law defining it as rape. That does not actually make it into rape, no more than defining the force of gravity to be nonexistent makes it so.

Theres a moral issue you forget to list.. No one can consciously look at a 6 year old and think marriage without guilt.. God has put that into our minds..

God given instinct.. I think Muslims have a word for that actually..