Any difference b/w a Prophet and Messenger?
-
Peace be upon you,
For the record, I have Nabi as "those who talk to the God" (intuition), and messengers are those who spread the information that is intuited by themselves or others.
Jonah perhaps was unwilling to share what he intuited, but learned the consequences.
-
Peace to all,
The distinction is evident.
469 And whoever obeys God and the messenger will be among those whom God has blessed from the prophets and the truthful and the martyrs and the upright. What an excellent companionship!
The above verse clearly distinguishes between a prophet and messenger. Prophets obey messengers as do all believers, since the message is God's.
In the case of "Muhammad", he being a messenger who spoke God's word's verabatim had no time to understand what was being sent to and through him, however, after the messages had ended, he as a human pondered over them and surrendered to them.
Furthermore, the cateogry of prophet seems to be a level of belief in the Message/God, since Prophet is categorized in the above verse with other believers, thus I must conclude that a Prophet is one who attains absolute belief.
Any comments?
Peace
-
Peace be upon you,
In the case of "Muhammad", he being a messenger who spoke God's word's verabatim had no time to understand what was being sent to and through him, however, after the messages had ended, he as a human pondered over them and surrendered to them.
WHere is this information found?
-
WHere is this information found?
Peace Kyle,
Its been awhile since our last communication, its good to hear from you.
The information is found in verse 469, how else can you explain the fact that "Muhammad" the Prophet, obeys the messenger*(Muhammad)..
Further, we clearly our able to deduce the role of messneger with verses that elaborate a Messengers only duty is in delivering the message(599), thus if their only Duty is to deliver, a logical deduction would entail that a messenger does not have to understand, the message he delivers.
All this should leave us with the Understanding that muhammad the messenger repeated God's words to humanity, and in so doing, he inevitably delivered the message to his human self, which in turn accepted the message(obey God and the messenger) to a point in which he was appoint a prophet.
Peace
-
Peace be upon you,
Peace Kyle,
Its been awhile since our last communication, its good to hear from you.
Yes, I thought the name was familiar, good to hear from you again D
The information is found in verse 469, how else can you explain the fact that "Muhammad" the Prophet, obeys the messenger*(Muhammad)..
Further, we clearly our able to deduce the role of messneger with verses that elaborate a Messengers only duty is in delivering the message(599), thus if their only Duty is to deliver, a logical deduction would entail that a messenger does not have to understand, the message he delivers.
This is the part that I do not see evidence for. I do not hold the view that a man recieved a message that he did not understand. I take the WHOLE of it as a story, showing us the spiritual ascention of the Human. "Muhammad" is the one who appreciates this whole process.
The message comes to ALL humans in pieces, and we put them together as we continue to increase in knowledge.
I do not see "muhammad" as a literal figure in the past, only a level in the journey of ALL mankind.
-
PEACE Kyle,
Indeed, it is always good to hear from you, and your insightful thoughts.
This is the part that I do not see evidence for. I do not hold the view that a man recieved a message that he did not understand. I take the WHOLE of it as a story, showing us the spiritual ascention of the Human. "Muhammad" is the one who appreciates this whole process.
The message comes to ALL humans in pieces, and we put them together as we continue to increase in knowledge.
I do not see "muhammad" as a literal figure in the past, only a level in the journey of ALL mankind
Sure, I can see how you conclude that "Muhammad" never existed in the literal sense.
But, this has nothing to do with the distinction that has been elaborated on in verse 469.
The verse clearly states that prophets obey messengers and other verses explictly state, "messengers only duty is delivering". Thus knowing the individual("Muhammad/Ahmad") was a Messenger-Gentile Prophet we are easily able to understand the different roles played by each label.
As a messenger he delivered and as a Prophet he recieved/understood.
Further, to elaborate another point. As I have suggested, a Prophet is someone who reaches absolute belief in the Unseen God. Now, for this to be accomplished by a human, he must be absolutley certain that God exists(no doubt), and the only way i believe this can be done is by experiencing the otherside, thus the otherside contacting the individual.
Hence, the reason "Muhammad/Ahmad" is the seal of the prophets, because he was the last human to have contact with the otherside, thus the last person who would have absolute belief in the Otherside.
Please comment.
Peace
-
Peace be upon you,
Sure, I can see how you conclude that "Muhammad" never existed in the literal sense.
Thats a good point of agreement.
But, this has nothing to do with the distinction that has been elaborated on in verse 469.
The verse clearly states that prophets obey messengers and other verses explictly state, "messengers only duty is delivering". Thus knowing the individual("Muhammad/Ahmad") was a Messenger-Gentile Prophet we are easily able to understand the different roles played by each label.
469 is refering to the group of people who can all be described as messengers. Prophets INTUIT The message, while others get the message from outside of themselves.
As a messenger he delivered and as a Prophet he recieved/understood
.Yes, but prophet describes HOW he got the message.
Further, to elaborate another point. As I have suggested, a Prophet is someone who reaches absolute belief in the Unseen God. Now, for this to be accomplished by a human, he must be absolutley certain that God exists(no doubt), and the only way i believe this can be done is by experiencing the otherside, thus the otherside contacting the individual.
Here I disagree, we all have the God within us, closer than the jugular vein. Just as einstein "doiscovered" something beneficial for guidance, so can others intuit the answers to life.
Hence, the reason "Muhammad/Ahmad" is the seal of the prophets, because he was the last human to have contact with the otherside, thus the last person who would have absolute belief in the Otherside.
I have it that the state of appreciation of the WHOLE(oneness) is the seal of the "talkers with the God", it is by truly understanding and cultivating ONENESS that people can reach the level of talking to the God.
-
Peace Kyle,
469 is refering to the group of people who can all be described as messengers. Prophets INTUIT The message, while others get the message from outside of themselves.
I don't see that in the verse. However, what I do see is certain positive labels(Prophets,.righteous,martyrs, upright) as being those who Obey God and the Messenger.
The message was delivered through the mouth and hand of the messenger, and received through the ears and eyes of the prophet, as it was with all believers.
Peace
-
peace .
I do not see "muhammad" as a literal figure in the past, only a level in the journey of ALL mankind
Sure, I can see how you conclude that "Muhammad" never existed in the literal sense.
muhammed never existed?!!! what was that about ?! sure i cannot see how you conclude that . enlighten me please .
peace . -
Peace be upon you Zeljko,
Quote
469 is refering to the group of people who can all be described as messengers. Prophets INTUIT The message, while others get the message from outside of themselves.I don't see that in the verse. However, what I do see is certain positive labels(Prophets,.righteous,martyrs, upright) as being those who Obey God and the Messenger.
Yes, are you aware that the word "rasool" means BOTH messenger AND message? ALl of the above follow the MESSAGE Of The God, that is correct.
The message was delivered through the mouth and hand of the messenger, and received through the ears and eyes of the prophet, as it was with all believers.
No, you are confusing human messengers with non human messengers. When information is INTUITED from within, it is to a prophet, the prophet them becomes a messenger once he/she delivers that message. Lets look at a few verses.
(2136) Say "We believed with The God and what was descended to us and what was descended to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Issac, and Jacob, and the tribes , and what was given to Moses, and Jesus , and what was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not separate/distinguish between anyone from them, and we are to Him submitters/surrenderers/Moslems ."
verse 384 says the same as above
(2213) The people were one nation , so God sent the prophets, announcing good news and warners/givers of notice , and He descended with them The Book ...
Why was the covenant made with the prophets and not the messengers?
-
Peace be upon you Saladin,
Quote
I do not see "muhammad" as a literal figure in the past, only a level in the journey of ALL mankindQuote
Sure, I can see how you conclude that "Muhammad" never existed in the literal sense.muhammed never existed?!!! what was that about ?! sure i cannot see how you conclude that . enlighten me please .
peace .I made the first statement, and what I mean is that "muhammad" means one who is appreciative. "Muhammad" is not a literal figure of history, it is a description of the latent potential within ALL OF US. It is a guide to life, not a history book.
-
No, you are confusing human messengers with non human messengers. When information is INTUITED from within, it is to a prophet, the prophet them becomes a messenger once he/she delivers that message. Lets look at a few verses.
(2136) Say "We believed with The God and what was descended to us and what was descended to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Issac, and Jacob, and the tribes , and what was given to Moses, and Jesus , and what was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not separate/distinguish between anyone from them, and we are to Him submitters/surrenderers/Moslems ."
Peace Kyle,
Are point of contention can be summed up as such, "which comes first, the chicken or the egg". Your position is that Prophet comes before the messenger, my position is the messenger before prophet.
Lets see if we are capable of unraveling this dichotomy.
The verse above doesn't help us much, since its context is in relation to verse 2135 and directly the Monotheistic creed (there is no god but God)given to Abraham. Verse 2136 elaborates further by naming others who also received this same monotheistic creed of there being no god but The God(note the tribes).
Thus, no distinction is to be made in relation to the fact that all these prophet/tribes had submitted to God in monotheism.
Before moving on, I would first like to ask you, how do you deal with verse 661 where in which, the Prophet had disobeyed God and the Messenger. Especially since, yopur position inculcates the messenger within the prophet, thus how can a prophet on one hand deliver, and another break his own intuited deliverence?
Peace
-
Peace be upon you Zeljko,
Are point of contention can be summed up as such, "which comes first, the chicken or the egg". Your position is that Prophet comes before the messenger, my position is the messenger before prophet.
NO, not even close to chicken vs egg, this reading poits us to the fact that a "nabi" is one who "talks to the God" and is therefore responsible for spreading (messenger now) the message to the people, because until he does spread the message, the people don't know the truth, they are incapable of reaching the PEACEFUL GARDEN where one can tap into the Knowledge of the ALL KNOWING within.
Lets see if we are capable of unraveling this dichotomy.
The verse above doesn't help us much, since its context is in relation to verse 2135 and directly the Monotheistic creed (there is no god but God)given to Abraham. Verse 2136 elaborates further by naming others who also received this same monotheistic creed of there being no god but The God(note the tribes). Thus, no distinction is to be made in relation to the fact that all these prophet/tribes had submitted to God in monotheism.
Brother, the verse clearly says "What was GIVEN to the Prophets from thier Lord". Why does it not say Messenger?
Before moving on, I would first like to ask you, how do you deal with verse 661 where in which, the Prophet had disobeyed God and the Messenger. Especially since, yopur position inculcates the messenger within the prophet, thus how can a prophet on one hand deliver, and another break his own intuited deliverence?
Take another look, 661 is about the Prophet (One who talks to the God and now contains useful info for mankind) WITHHOLDING INFO. Of course it has to be addressed to "prophecy" because that is the LEVEL where one talks to the God. Jonah was one who talked to the God but tried to withhold the info, and he ended up in the big fish, until he lerned his lesson and came to dry land and spread the message to EVERYONE! D
You have to erase what we all have been incorrectly taught , otherwise those old ideas will strangle the clear teaching.
-
Peace Kyle.
NO, not even close to chicken vs egg, this reading poits us to the fact that a "nabi" is one who "talks to the God" and is therefore responsible for spreading (messenger now) the message to the people, because until he does spread the message, the people don't know the truth, they are incapable of reaching the PEACEFUL GARDEN where one can tap into the Knowledge of the ALL KNOWING within.
Z Then based on your definition, the one who received the Quran, is not a prophet, since he had never "Spoken to The God". If you have some evidence to the contrary please present it.
Brother, the verse clearly says "What was GIVEN to the Prophets from thier Lord". Why does it not say Messenger?
It also states, "what was given to the tribes". Why does it not say what was given to the tribes through the messenger/prophet, since the tribes must have received what was sent to them through one of these conduits.
Take another look, 661 is about the Prophet (One who talks to the God and now contains useful info for mankind) WITHHOLDING INFO. Of course it has to be addressed to "prophecy" because that is the LEVEL where one talks to the God. Jonah was one who talked to the God but tried to withhold the info, and he ended up in the big fish, until he lerned his lesson and came to dry land and spread the message to EVERYONE!
You have to erase what we all have been incorrectly taught , otherwise those old ideas will strangle the clear teaching.
First you will have to provide evidence that the prophet talked to God, since all the evidence I have suggests that the info was given via the Messenger/Angel Gabriel.
297 "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel, then know that he has sent it down into your heart by God's permission, authenticating what is already present, and a guide and good news for the believers."
Further, 661 is in regard of the Prophet breaking a commandement God has already revealed...
662God has already given the law, regarding the cancellation of oaths. And God is your Lord, and He is the Knowledgeable, the Wise.
Kyle, there is no reason to argue what someone should let go or keep, unless of course there is evidence/proofs of what one should let go or Keep.
Please comment on some of these problems I see with your interpretations.
Peace
-
salams guys,
well it's been a while since i've posted and i dont know when i shall post again. One reason is the birth of my daughter, who is doing fine alhamdulillah. She's my first so it's going to take some getting used to ) And another reason is that the items that I was working on and was hoping to post here (in response to the whole idea of prophet vs messenger and khatem) were lost in a hard drive crash! To make matters worse, something bizarre is happening to my computer that even when I installed a new drive and a fresh copy of windows, it works fine as long as i never reboot.. as soon as i reboot, chkdsk finds errors, fixes them and on the next reboot the computer is locked in an endless reboot and i have to install another fresh copy of windows!
so anyway, let me just say a few things briefly which I dont think I have gotten across before.
I think that central to this question is the concept of revelation itself. Anyone who is proposing that Muhammad was not the last messenger, is claiming that revelation is continuing and that even today there are certain "divinely" guided individuals who are in direct communication with God. This is not a new concept by the way... sufis have it in their kashf/ilhaam, shias have it in their imaams. Ahmedi, etc etc etc, this is not a new concept and indeed it would appear that it is an oft employed argument to advance certain groups/individuals. (Like kids fighting on a playground, "Oh ya, well I receive wahi!")
So I think this is REALLY what ought to be discussed... i can tell that getting into linguistic arguments about khatem, nabi, etc are going to be fruitless to the people who have made up their minds. The real issue is revelation/wahi. If it is continuing, then why is only the Quran preserved and why are we all so concerned about the Quran if there has been so much wahi SINCE the Quran???
wassalam
ps - to those who believe intuition or "an idea popping into one's head," is revelation, that statement is ignorant of how the human mind works. These processes are not divine or unexplained, and have been well analyzed and explained... would you claim that a logical step by step proof is "divinely inspired?" Then dont claim that intuition or an idea popping into one's head is divinely inspired because these 2 things spring out of the same fountain and are related. -
Peace be upon you Z,
Quote
NO, not even close to chicken vs egg, this reading poits us to the fact that a "nabi" is one who "talks to the God" and is therefore responsible for spreading (messenger now) the message to the people, because until he does spread the message, the people don't know the truth, they are incapable of reaching the PEACEFUL GARDEN where one can tap into the Knowledge of the ALL KNOWING within.Z Then based on your definition, the one who received the Quran, is not a prophet, since he had never "Spoken to The God". If you have some evidence to the contrary please present it.
What do you mean he never "spoke to the God"? Of course he spoke to the God, how else would he "discover" such a powerful message? This book did not come down out of a cloud carried by a little boy with wings, it was intuited to a person who wrote it down. So what exactly makes you say that this person did not speak to the God?
Quote
Brother, the verse clearly says "What was GIVEN to the Prophets from thier Lord". Why does it not say Messenger?It also states, "what was given to the tribes". Why does it not say what was given to the tribes through the messenger/prophet, since the tribes must have received what was sent to them through one of these conduits.
Okay, lets keep verifying then, why is there a covenant of the Prophets but no covenant of the messengers?
Quote
Take another look, 661 is about the Prophet (One who talks to the God and now contains useful info for mankind) WITHHOLDING INFO. Of course it has to be addressed to "prophecy" because that is the LEVEL where one talks to the God. Jonah was one who talked to the God but tried to withhold the info, and he ended up in the big fish, until he lerned his lesson and came to dry land and spread the message to EVERYONE!You have to erase what we all have been incorrectly taught , otherwise those old ideas will strangle the clear teaching.
First you will have to provide evidence that the prophet talked to God, since all the evidence I have suggests that the info was given via the Messenger/Angel Gabriel.
297 "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel, then know that he has sent it down into your heart by God's permission, authenticating what is already present, and a guide and good news for the believers."
First, make sure you are clear that there is no word "angel" in this reading. I understand "Gabriel" to be the "Voice" of the God. DO you think that Musa was the only one to "talk to the God"?
Further, 661 is in regard of the Prophet breaking a commandement God has already revealed...
662God has already given the law, regarding the cancellation of oaths. And God is your Lord, and He is the Knowledgeable, the Wise.
Yes, already given to the PROPHET, who was WITHHOLDING the information.
-
PEace be upon you Shuaib,
so anyway, let me just say a few things briefly which I dont think I have gotten across before.
I think that central to this question is the concept of revelation itself. Anyone who is proposing that Muhammad was not the last messenger, is claiming that revelation is continuing and that even today there are certain "divinely" guided individuals who are in direct communication with God.
Do you see a verse stating "muhammad is the last messenger"? The God says "ALL children of Adam" will have a messenger. The God answers the call of His servants, you don't believe that? The God is closer than the jugular vein, why is it hard to "talk to the God"?
This is not a new concept by the way... sufis have it in their kashf/ilhaam, shias have it in their imaams. Ahmedi, etc etc etc, this is not a new concept and indeed it would appear that it is an oft employed argument to advance certain groups/individuals. (Like kids fighting on a playground, "Oh ya, well I receive wahi!")
Yes, and the first civilization (Ancient Kemet) also had this understanding as well as MANY African and Asian civilizations. The I ching Oracle and the Metu Neter Oracle are used today. And before you respond, why was the casting of lots(oracle) to see who would care for Mary not condemned?
So I think this is REALLY what ought to be discussed... i can tell that getting into linguistic arguments about khatem, nabi, etc are going to be fruitless to the people who have made up their minds. The real issue is revelation/wahi. If it is continuing, then why is only the Quran preserved and why are we all so concerned about the Quran if there has been so much wahi SINCE the Quran???
The word "quran" is not the name of a book, once this is understood, things get clearer. To saythere is no more "inspiriation" is to say that the new "discoveries" of life have ceased, there will be no more new inventions. That is not logical understanding.
wassalam
ps - to those who believe intuition or "an idea popping into one's head," is revelation, that statement is ignorant of how the human mind works. These processes are not divine or unexplained, and have been well analyzed and explained... would you claim that a logical step by step proof is "divinely inspired?" Then dont claim that intuition or an idea popping into one's head is divinely inspired because these 2 things spring out of the same fountain and are related.There are many things that pop into ones head, but that which pops into ones head and further leads to a purposeful truth which can be continuously verified in life a Ture, is divine inspiration, if not, who did it come from besides the God? Doesn't all good come from the God? What is the source of these ideas?
-
Peace
What about 1250?
1250 And the King said "Bring him to me." So when the messenger came to him, he said "Go back to your lord and ask him what was the matter regarding the women that cut their hands? My Lord is well aware of their scheming."
In this verse it is clearly the the word Rasul mean the messenger OF THE KING.
So in my opinion the word "Rasul" is not a special word for God's messengers.What do you think?