Is muhammad really the last prophet?
-
Salaam Mazhar
What I mean is that the verse does not address the prophet and the believers/men, but the prophet and those who have authority. Men do not divorce women, a judge does according to the laws of the qur'aan. They (judges/those who have authority) do not know the "idat" of a woman, but women tell their idat. If a woman can hide her pregnancy, how about menses?
-
Sister,
I am in a fix. Are you suggesting that husband A wishes to divorce his wife. The judge of the court announces the divorce and asks the lady to tell him whether or not she experiences menses, then asks her is her menses regular; and on the basis of information provided by her the judge decides the "prescribed duration" after which the marriage shall stand annulled if no settlement is arrived at between the husband and wife during that period?
-
Nowadays it should also be provable using solid evidence.
-
Salaam Mazhar
What I mean is that the verse does not address the prophet and the believers/men, but the prophet and those who have authority. Men do not divorce women, a judge does according to the laws of the qur'aan. They (judges/those who have authority) do not know the "idat" of a woman, but women tell their idat. If a woman can hide her pregnancy, how about menses?
sun
-
Salaam Mazhar
What I mean is that the verse does not address the prophet and the believers/men, but the prophet and those who have authority. Men do not divorce women, a judge does according to the laws of the qur'aan. They (judges/those who have authority) do not know the "idat" of a woman, but women tell their idat. If a woman can hide her pregnancy, how about menses?
Samia , salam
The verse says ,,,,,,, "you" (people), not ....... "who have authority", can you tell me how have you deduced the red part from the verse?
siki
-
Samia , salam
The verse says ,,,,,,, "you" (people), not ....... "who have authority", can you tell me how have you deduced the red part from the verse?
siki
Salaam siki
First I see that the prophet is addressed in asmuch as prophet, judge of people. If it were just for believers, why include the prophet here? Does the qur'aan address the believers AND the prophet anywhere else?
Secondly, husbands are not to divorce women by their sole will. If the qur'aan tells us that in case of "nushouz" and in case of adultery, husbands should consult counsils and people of authority and that it's those people who decide; then when would a man divorce by his sole will?
Verses do not always say You men and women, you who did so and so". We try to understand that from the context. If we can figure out who is addressed, many verses will be better understood.
I think the misunderstanding of this verse is one of the main reasons why we have all this messing with divorce and post divorce problems, and the lack of responsibilty shown in many divorces carried out by some irresponsible men, unfortunately the majority. Plus women and children allowances are left to the whims of some irresponsible husbands. If a divorce is carried out in front of a judge, we will not see "remote control" divorces, sometimes by letters that do not arrive to the divorced wife, verbal divorces, , sms divorces, confusion about how many divorces were uttered...These problems will be tackeled on the spot.
-
Peace,
Here's my updated understanding on Muhammad being the last prophet. The quran uses very precise wording. If the God wanted to say that Muhammad was the last prophet, it would have used 'aakhir' not 'khatam' in 3340. As the word for final is 'aakhir'. For Example the hereafter is called 'al aakhir' repeatedly.
Seal/Khatam of the prophets means 'authenticates the prophets' i.e. their messages are found in Al Quran for our guidance, without corruption.
-
Peace all,
This is slightly off-topic but relevant. According to 3340, Muhammad is the last prophet/nabi but not necessarily the last messenger/rasool. The angels of death have been called messengers/rusul too (661). Hence it follows that there could be messengers/rusul after prophet Muhammad.
Now, according to 2213 and 5725, the scripture can be sent down with both messengers and prophets
2213 The people used to be one nation, then God sent the prophets as bearers of good news and warners, and He sent down with them the scripture/al-kitaab with the facts so that they may judge between the people in what they were disputing. But after receiving the clarity, the people disputed in it due to animosity between them. And God guided those who believed with His permission regarding what they disputed in of the truth. And God guides whoever He wishes to a straight path.
5725 We have sent our messengers with clear proofs, and We sent down with them the scripture/al-kitaab and the balance, so that the people may uphold justice. And We sent down the iron, wherein there is great strength, and many benefits for the people. So that God would distinguish those who would support Him and His messengers on faith. God is Powerful, Noble.
Please note that the same word "al-kitaab" has been used for both prophets and messengers.
Combining 2213 with 5725 and 3340, it follows that there could be another scripture sent down with another messenger after Muhammad.
HENCE AL-QUR'AAN MAY NOT BE THE LAST SCRIPTURE FROM THE GOD !!!.
I think this difference between "Prophet" and "Messenger" is significant. Muhammad (pbuh) clearly seems to have preferred the term 'messenger' to 'prophet', which is why in the Shahadah 'Messenger' is used. Messenger emphasises the humanity of Muhammad, whilst 'prophet' has an unwanted supernatural ring to it. Whilst I wouldn't go as far as to talk about new 'scriptures', I think it is important to get out of the mindset of trying to limit God. Allah can do anything he wants, we can't go telling him 'you can't communicate with humanity anymore because Muhammad was the last prophet'. It's nonsense. There are no limits to what God can do if he so wills. He doesn't even need scriptures, he can speak to anyone's soul. If Allah gives a command, it is so.
-
I believe messenger and prophet are the same thing (notice how the terms are used interchangably in 491-3). I also don't ascribe to the theory of 'new scriptures'; it doesn't exist in Al quran. Every messenger/prophet will bring the same message and follow the same manual(42/13, 41/43, 46/9).
He/she may bring newer books, but it will contain the same message.
-
peace HMD, all,
The terms "messenger/rasul" and "prophet/nabi" are not equivalent everywhere in AQ in my opinion. If someone is known by two terms, this does not make the two terms equivalent and always interchangeable, at best only when definitely referring to the same person.
He/she may bring newer books, but it will contain the same message.
Same overall message yes, but not necessarily the exact same content, 100%.
-
Salam All,
I understand that the signifigance of knowing whether Muhammad (PBUH) was the last prophet may be important to our interpretation and beliefs of the way in which we practice Islam, (e.g. sunnism) However, I think what is most important is finding whether the Quran is the last inspiration via a prophet. To me, no offence, but the Quran is of way more significance than the prophet. Because the quran follows the bible and the Torah, and states it is without error, and came to correct error previously upheld in the other scriptures, I believe no matter what prophet or messenger comes after the Quran is still to be upheld and it is the final law. My opinion of course. So, what importance would this have if another prophet came to preach,..hmm, well I suppose, since i believe so firmly in God and the Quran. I would hope he came to confirm what is already with us, but there will be no other book.
Honor
-
I believe messenger and prophet are the same thing (notice how the terms are used interchangably in 491-3). I also don't ascribe to the theory of 'new scriptures'; it doesn't exist in Al quran. Every messenger/prophet will bring the same message and follow the same manual(42/13, 41/43, 46/9).
He/she may bring newer books, but it will contain the same message.
If we think of the human race as a child growing up, and the prophets as teachers, you can see why different teachings or messages may have been appropriate at different times. The logic of Muhammad being the seal of the prophets would be recognition that the child, humanity, had reached adulthood.
This would mean there are no more new teachers. But even though the human race has had enough teaching, doesn't mean there is no more learning. Hence the distinction between prophet and messenger - being an adult, we, humanity, must thing for ourselves. So what Allah may provide hences is 'advice' and 'guidance', rather than teachings. So no new law, no new Quran, but yes Allah always supports his creation.
-
Peace Mahmud_H
I tend to think the teachings God has sent down to mankind have not ever been time specific, but applicable to any period in any time. I would point out that the sunnah of God has been described as always being the same with mankind. Therefore I would not agree that mankind has grown up from one point, but as the quran seems to imply history constantly repeats itself which is why representations given in the quran always should have meaning for those who can decipher them.
Joe
-
Can't that be the difference between individual human beings and the whole human race as a family? All the messages of all the prophets are relavent to people individually as we all face a variety of situations in our lives. But there has to be some logic, some cause, some reason why God chooses to send a particular message at any particular time, and I think it must be to do with our changing needs as times change.
-
peace all,
I think people need to clarify, for example
same message = do they mean everything is the same? "message" is not equivalent to word for word content/laws/stories/etc
God's sunnah doesn't change = do they mean everything doesn't change? "sunnah" is not equivalent to word for word content/laws/stories/etc
-
peace HMD, all,
The terms "messenger/rasul" and "prophet/nabi" are not equivalent everywhere in AQ in my opinion. If someone is known by two terms, this does not make the two terms equivalent and always interchangeable, at best only when definitely referring to the same person.
Same overall message yes, but not necessarily the exact same content, 100%.
Peace Wakas, all,
The terms "messenger/rasul" and "prophet/nabi" are not equivalent everywhere in AQ in my opinion.
Any examples? And in which way are they different?
If someone is known by two terms, this does not make the two terms equivalent and always interchangeable, at best only when definitely referring to the same person.
Not necessarily, no. Here are other examples where I believe the terms in question are used interchangeably.
287 and 91, 3144 and 146, 4163-65, 520 and 32, 575 and 581.
Same overall message yes, but not necessarily the exact same content, 100%.
Agreed, that is what I meant.
-
peace bro,
I do not have my resources with me at the moment so cant cite any specific examples. From my past studies, they cannot and should not be interchanged as equivalents everywhere as they are different. Specific examples aside, the words themselves and different in my opinion. "prophet" refers more to the individual in my opinion, and "messenger" is conditional upon having a message thus primarily refers to a role, rather than a person.
If I recall correctly, I am sure this has been discussed on the forum before.
-
Peace Wakas
By sunna I mean the way I see it used in the quran. From my site
"Hadeeth as you know is a saying or story. Sunnah means customary action or institution. It comes from the root Sin Nun which means "to follow a path" and has been used in the quran 11 times . In the quran the sunnah has been used in the context of God's dealings with the people and using the institution of others as an admonition."
The same message is the truth of man's condition and his best method of upliftment and the system of living proposed to them by God. Different communities have different languages so it's not nearly always the same word for word, but in practice and the message's confirmation in the world should always be the same.
Joe
