Baha'i and Islamic concepts of Prophets - Similar or irreconcilably different?

[Dawnofhope]

Who else in the Quran is included on the list as being "Prophets" along with Moses, Jesus and Muhammad?

The categorisation of Prophets is not as straightforward as the Baha’i Faith. According to one school of Islamic thought:

Several prominent exponents of the Fatimid IsmailiImams explained that throughout history there have been six enunciators (natiqs) who brought the exoteric (zahir) revelation to humans, namely: Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. They speak of a seventh enunciator (natiq), the Resurrector (Qa’im), who will unveil the esoteric (batin) meaning of all the previous revelations. He is believed to be the pinnacle and purpose of creation.


Prophets and messengers in Islam - Wikipedia

This is certainly consistent with a Baha’i worldview.

Which books from Buddhism and Hinduism do Baha'i consider to be Scripture? And, does the Quran also say that those books are Scripture?

The Baha’i writings don’t specify any Buddhist and Hindu writings as being authentic scriptures as with Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is a matter left to scholars of religion to investigate. The Quran doesn’t mention Hinduism and Buddhism, nor any of their scriptures.

 

[firedragon]

So you regard the Quran, Gospel and Torah as equal importance without discrimination?

Strawman.

Read the comment several times.

 

[rational experiences]

Humans are humans by human sex. Born babies grow into adults.

First two equal humans our parents not any prophet.

The teaching human self ideals.

DNA in genetic studies says everyone's first parent owned the exact same DNA. Family everyone.

Meaning O earth life with God human owned equal form.

Then science chosen changed life by radiation fallout voice...language...DNA health....brain mind conscious causes.

The human teaching.

Why we know we are brother and sister

New DNA then was land owned where you got irradiated. Changed human self expressions.

Science basic is the basic used common denominator in religious idealisms.

Self.

How much radiation metal changed your own families DNA. How much life you had left after sacrifice by changed earth God. All religious teaching..sciences.

Messages. Gained by a human in heavenly spirit gas changes.

Identified as asteroid wandering star or comet reasoning. What came swiftly. Stone messages. As God is one first in science stone.

Or in UFO phenomena sightings

Evil causes radiation burning conditions to heavens gas spirits

Written as data imposed by an ancient science language to speak by changed tongue.

A medical biological teaching.

Bahai teaching said his message was very spiritual. By his emotive human experience that idealised the loss of a once lived perfect human race. And what needed to be achieved for regained family unity.

No different from any type of spiritual human experienced condition. A human having a notified life changing experience.

Jesus taught don't make it personally especial as a self. As we are human first.

Reasoning. His life was owner of a personal physical harm experience. A different way of learning a teaching human.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Strawman.

Read the comment several times.

There is no strawman but it is relevant to the OP. Clearly the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not regarded with equal importance without distinction. In fact for many Muslims the Gospel and Torah that forms part of the Hebrew and Christian scripture are considered either irrelevant or wholly subserviant to the Quran. If the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not seen as being equal without distinction, it follows that Muhammad, Jesus and Moses are not seen as equal without distinction.

 

[CG Didymus]

The apparent contradictions and thus the disagreements between Christians, Muslims and Baha'is come about as a result of how the scriptures are interpreted

I know you know this, but there was disagreements amongst Christians as to what was to be voted on as Scripture. Also, we talk about this all the time, and sometimes from Baha'is pointing out the problems with the NT, it was written way later by people who weren't eyewitnesses. Then, a large chunk of the NT is letters that Paul wrote. A guy who was persecuting Christians until he had a vision of Jesus and became a follower. So... is the NT "The Word of God"? Or, the words written by men who were followers of Jesus and their "interpretation" of what Jesus meant? Even with the gospels, it was what four writers said about the things Jesus said and did?

But some writings didn't make it into the NT. Were they fakes? Did those Church leaders get it right? Or were they biased in their decisions? I know you like to answer questions like this with, "How should I know. I can't read their minds." But we can make an educated guess. I think they were probably putting writings in the NT that supported their views on who Jesus was. And not long down the road the Church leaders made Jesus God. That was what they decided was the "Truth" being told in the NT.... a book they made "The Word of God"? But, again, you know all this... And, you and other Baha'is have probably used this against Christians who try and make the NT to be as if it is somehow without errors and contradictions.

There is a Baha'i quote that says that the Bible is not 100% accurate. Never mind, here it is...

The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá’u’lláh.

We cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá’ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá’u’lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic...

Shoghi Effendi...
​

Which parts are inaccurate? Baha'is say, "We don't know. But we do know we can trust the parts that are quoted in the Baha'i writings." Well, there you go. There's the answer. There are no contradictions with the Baha'i writings in those parts. And if there are contradictions in those other parts, then they are no doubt the parts that are not accurate.

 

[firedragon]

There is no strawman but it is relevant to the OP. Clearly the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not regarded with equal importance without distinction. In fact for many Muslims the Gospel and Torah that forms part of the Hebrew and Christian scripture are considered either irrelevant or wholly subserviant to the Quran. If the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not seen as being equal without distinction, it follows that Muhammad, Jesus and Moses are not seen as equal without distinction.

You didn’t ask a question Adrian. You made a statement. If you want to ask a question about what the Quran says, ask it. Don’t make statements about Torah injeel or whatever as if I claimed something about them. You are trying to build an argument on something I never claimed anything about. That’s a straw man.

Jf you don’t believe the Quran is gods word, say so. If you don’t believe the Quran is correct, then say so. If you believe it is gods word, and it says no distinction between Rasools, and you think it’s bogus, then you are arguing against god.

That has nothing to do with Torah and gospel. You are trying to build a caricature you wish to argue against. But that’s a straw man. I never said anything about them. So don’t make bogus statements like “so you are saying Torah and gospels are .......” because no, I never said anything about them.

Now ask your question if you have any.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Is the concept of Prophethood in the Baha'i Faith compatible with that in Islam? Are the concepts of Prophethood within the two religions so fundamentally different as to irreconcilable?

Alright. So now that you have clarified Rasool is a prophet in your words, the Quran says "we do not make any distinction between any of his rasools".

The principle stands of distinction between Nabi and Rasool. If there is no distinction between the Prophets of God such as Moses, Jesus and Muhammad then why were they different people with different messages at different points in history? It is the essence of their message that is the same. All were Prophets of God sent forth to guide the people to the straight path and led them from error. They each spoke in a language and manner that could be understood in part by at least some of the people they interacted and taught. That is one reason why Muhammad spoke of there being no distinction between the Prophets IMHO.

So what you are saying is that, since the Quran is saying no distinction between them, and that Muhammed and Moses as examples are different, the "QURAN IS WRONG" right? So you believe the Quran is Gods word, but its wrong.

Anyway, the Quran saying "distinction" does not mean they looked the same, had the same name, had the same amount of hair on their body and head, and smelt the same, or/and their messages were the same.

Anyway, the word here is Farak. What it is saying is not to make distinction between them. That means no one is higher, or lower. They are all the same.

So you have to either accept or decline based on what it says. Either you believe the Quran is Gods word, or believe it is not, and that it was wrong. Please dont create a strawman to argue against. I hope you understand.

2/ How do you see Muhammad, Moses and Jesus as being the same and not distinct from each other?

They are of the same importance to us. No discrimination.

So you regard the Quran, Gospel and Torah as equal importance without discrimination?

Strawman.

Read the comment several times.

There is no strawman but it is relevant to the OP. Clearly the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not regarded with equal importance without distinction. In fact for many Muslims the Gospel and Torah that forms part of the Hebrew and Christian scripture are considered either irrelevant or wholly subserviant to the Quran. If the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not seen as being equal without distinction, it follows that Muhammad, Jesus and Moses are not seen as equal without distinction.

You didn’t ask a question Adrian. You made a statement. If you want to ask a question about what the Quran says, ask it. Don’t make statements about Torah injeel or whatever as if I claimed something about them. You are trying to build an argument on something I never claimed anything about. That’s a straw man.

Jf you don’t believe the Quran is gods word, say so. If you don’t believe the Quran is correct, then say so. If you believe it is gods word, and it says no distinction between Rasools, and you think it’s bogus, then you are arguing against god.

That has nothing to do with Torah and gospel. You are trying to build a caricature you wish to argue against. But that’s a straw man. I never said anything about them. So don’t make bogus statements like “so you are saying Torah and gospels are .......” because no, I never said anything about them.

Now ask your question if you have any.

It looks to me as if you are avoiding my question. You are avoiding answering my question by labelling it as a straw man. Ironically it is you, not I, that is building a caricature. You are making a statement that I am contradicting the Quran despite believing it is the Word of God. That is your belief but all I’m contradicting is your opinion about what the Quran says in regards to distinction between Prophets. Your opinion appears to have little to do with the Quran but rather how the Muslim community has collectively come to understand parts of the Quran.

So let’s go back to the beginning.

What did Muhammad say specifically about making distinctions about Prophets such as Himself, Jesus and Moses?

You have claimed that Muhammad says we should regard the Prophets (Muhammad, Jesus and Moses) as being of the same importance without distinction.

Do you stand by that claim? If so, does that mean Muhammad regarded the Quran, Gospel and Torah as having the same importance without distinction?

 

[firedragon]

It looks to me as if you are avoiding my question.

Nope. You never asked a question. You made a statement.

So again, ask your question.

What did Muhammad say specifically about making distinctions about Prophets such as Himself, Jesus and Moses?

See, if you believe the Quran was Muhammeds word, please say so so that I will know your state. Is it Muhammed who was the author or God in your theology?

You have claimed that Muhammad says we should regard the Prophets (Muhammad, Jesus and Moses) as being of the same importance without distinction.

I didnt claim that "Muhammed says" anything. I didnt claim anything anyway. I quoted the Quranic verse. If you dont accept it, that's up to you. Just FYI, I will cut and paste a translation.

The messenger acknowledges in what was sent down to him from his Lord and those who have acknowledged. All acknowledged God, His angels, His books, and His messengers, "We do not discriminate between any of His messengers;" and they said, "We hear and obey, forgive us O Lord, and to you is our destiny - 2:285 Quran.

So this is not talking about any revelation, or any of the things you are trying to merge with this statement to go to the Bible somehow, it says what it says. Please read. And ask your question directly. Dont make statement about things I never said as if I said.

I never said anything about the Torah, Gospel etc etc. So dont make statements like "so you are saying the Torah and gospel are the same as the Quran" or what ever you wish to bring to the table. I explain this for the second time since you are refusing to understand that you are misquoting me or/and creating a strawman.

Try and understand.

 

[firedragon]

Your opinion appears to have nothing to do with the Quran but rather how the Muslim community has collectively come to understand parts of the Quran.

Untrue. For the fourth time, here is the verse. This is not my "OPINION".

The messenger acknowledges in what was sent down to him from his Lord and those who have acknowledged. All acknowledged God, His angels, His books, and His messengers, "We do not discriminate between any of His messengers;" and they said, "We hear and obey, forgive us O Lord, and to you is our destiny - 2:285 Quran.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

.
. Is it Muhammed who was the author or God in your theology?

.

In Bahai view it was Muhammad who was the Author of the Quran. We don't make distinction between God and His messenger. Muhammad was a Manifestation of God.

This is what Baha'u'llah confirmed in the Iqan:


“There is no distinction whatsoever between Thee and them; except that they are Thy servants, and are created of Thee.” This is the significance of the tradition:
“I am He, Himself, and He is I, myself.”



The concept of Manifestation of God is in the Quran as well. It just does not use the term.

Like, the concept of "Messenger of God" is in Torah and Injil, but we cannot find such a term is Them. Bible only uses the Word "prophet".

Now, if one comes and say, the Quran invented a new idea, because the term "Messenger of God" did no exist in Torah or Injil, would such an objection be acceptable?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Nope. You never asked a question. You made a statement.

So again, ask your question.

I asked you to make a comparison between the Quran, Gospel and Torah. Simple question. Then in my last post I asked does Muhammad make a distinction between these Revelations.

What am I missing?

See, if you believe the Quran was Muhammeds word, please say so so that I will know your state. Is it Muhammed who was the author or God in your theology?

The Quran is God's Word spoken through Muhammad. I have no problem referring to the Quran as God's Word or the Words spoken by God through Muhammad, or to simply state the obvious....that these are Words spoken by Muhammad. All these statements are true. To say Muhammad spoke the Words of God, does not make Muhammad God or in anyway a Divine being. He is simply the pure and sanctified vessel through which God's Revelation passes...like a hollow reed from which the pith of self is blown. You asked me a question about my theology. I have answered your question.

I didnt claim that "Muhammed says" anything. I didnt claim anything anyway. I quoted the Quranic verse. If you dont accept it, that's up to you. Just FYI, I will cut and paste a translation.

The messenger acknowledges in what was sent down to him from his Lord and those who have acknowledged. All acknowledged God, His angels, His books, and His messengers, "We do not discriminate between any of His messengers;" and they said, "We hear and obey, forgive us O Lord, and to you is our destiny - 2:285 Quran.

So this is not talking about any revelation, or any of the things you are trying to merge with this statement to go to the Bible somehow, it says what it says. Please read. And ask your question directly. Dont make statement about things I never said as if I said.

There is a close association between the Messenger and the Message. It is a strong theme throughout the Quran. So while I agree that 2:285 doesn't specify the Message or Revelation brought by the Prophets, it is an essential aspect of what a Prophet does. Perhaps you divorce the Prophet from the Revelation they bring. That seems problematic.

Keeping in mind it was the seventh century when Muhammad spoke these Words, He was probably drawing a distinction between what He was asking of the Muslim community and the way the Jews and the Christians rejected the Prophets of Allah and no doubt reject Muhammad's Message.

I never said anything about the Torah, Gospel etc etc. So dont make statements like "so you are saying the Torah and gospel are the same as the Quran" or what ever you wish to bring to the table. I explain this for the second time since you are refusing to understand that you are misquoting me or/and creating a strawman.

Try and understand.

Unfortunately you are misunderstanding my point. To understand a verse from any scripture including the Quran, we need to analyze it. Sometimes that analysis takes the form of exploring some of the literal and most obvious meanings and checking out if they are logical or not. So of course Muhammad is saying all the Prophets are the same, but He is not saying literally follow them all or the Revelation they brought has exactly the same relevance and importance. Muhammad is saying follow Muhammad and the Quran. In many other Quranic verses He will complain about how the Christians and Jews have strayed. He's saying don't be like those Christians and Jews. Follow Islam.

Untrue. For the fourth time, here is the verse. This is not my "OPINION".

The messenger acknowledges in what was sent down to him from his Lord and those who have acknowledged. All acknowledged God, His angels, His books, and His messengers, "We do not discriminate between any of His messengers;" and they said, "We hear and obey, forgive us O Lord, and to you is our destiny - 2:285 Quran.

Mate, we are discussing religion. Its mostly belief and opinion. There's a few facts here and there but its mostly subjective. You can quote the same verse a thousand times, but we are still sharing our views as to what that verse means. Please avoiding becoming defensive or prickly. Avoid elevating your personal views to the status of fact and this discussion will be much easier for both of us.

 

[firedragon]

I asked you to make a comparison between the Quran, Gospel and Torah. Simple question. Then in my last post I asked does Muhammad make a distinction between these Revelations.

What am I missing?

Ill just ignore the comments and try and answer your question.

You want me to make a comparison between the Quran, Gospel and Torah.

Torah and Intel among others mentioned in the Quran. These were specifically named or called Taurath and Injeel. Jesus was given the Injeel and was taught the Taurath. In comparison, the Quran names itself the Quran. It calls itself the criterion, the Furqan, Muhaymeenun, controller or quality checker, the yardstick to measure anything against. Quran is a reading and it means reading or recitation.

Please ask your specific question if you have one.

About the second question about Muhammed making any distinction between these revelations, are you referring to the ahadith?

The Quran is God's Word spoken through Muhammad. I have no problem referring to the Quran as God's Word or the Words spoken by God through Muhammad, or to simply state the obvious....that these are Words spoken by Muhammad. All these statements are true. To say Muhammad spoke the Words of God, does not make Muhammad God or in anyway a Divine being. He is simply the pure and sanctified vessel through which God's Revelation passes...like a hollow reed from which the pith of self is blown. You asked me a question about my theology. I have answered your question.

Thanks for the clarification.

There is a close association between the Messenger and the Message. It is a strong theme throughout the Quran. So while I agree that 2:285 doesn't specify the Message or Revelation brought by the Prophets, it is an essential aspect of what a Prophet does. Perhaps you divorce the Prophet from the Revelation they bring. That seems problematic.

Keeping in mind it was the seventh century when Muhammad spoke these Words, He was probably drawing a distinction between what He was asking of the Muslim community and the way the Jews and the Christians rejected the Prophets of Allah and no doubt reject Muhammad's Message.

Now you again use the word "prophet". It says rasool. You said you got it mixed up earlier, and now you are mixing it up again.

Unfortunately you are misunderstanding my point. To understand a verse from any scripture including the Quran, we need to analyze it. Sometimes that analysis takes the form of exploring some of the literal and most obvious meanings and checking out if they are logical or not. So of course Muhammad is saying all the Prophets are the same, but He is not saying literally follow them all or the Revelation they brought has exactly the same relevance and importance. Muhammad is saying follow Muhammad and the Quran. In many other Quranic verses He will complain about how the Christians and Jews have strayed. He's saying don't be like those Christians and Jews. Follow Islam.

Again. If you believe the Quran is Gods word, it is not Muhammed saying this.

Also, the Quran of course says that Jews and the Christians have strayed. But it also says to follow Islam. And to be a Mumeen. And it says the book is written to the Muttaqoon. Also it says "THE RELIGION OF IBRAHIM". Millath Ibraheema.

Mate, we are discussing religion. Its mostly belief and opinion. There's a few facts here and there but its mostly subjective. You can quote the same verse a thousand times, but we are still sharing our views as to what that verse means. Please avoiding becoming defensive or prickly. Avoid elevating your personal views to the status of fact and this discussion will be much easier for both of us.

You can try your best to make it all about some subjective personal view when a verse is cited. It is just going to be an ad hominem, nothing more brother.

I have quote the Quran. Thats according to you "Gods word". If you have a problem with it, state it clearly without attacking me personally. This is not my view at all. Try and address the verse.

Cheers.

 

[CG Didymus]

The concept of Manifestation of God is in the Quran as well. It just does not use the term.

Like, the concept of "Messenger of God" is in Torah and Injil, but we cannot find such a term is Them. Bible only uses the Word "prophet".

No, "messenger" is in the Bible...

The Hebrew word for angel is "malach," which means messenger...
According to Jewish tradition, an angel is a spiritual being and does not have any physical characteristics.
​

Yes, the Bible does use the term "prophet"...

The Hebrew word for a prophet, navi (Nun-Beit-Yod-Alef) comes from the term niv sefatayim meaning "fruit of the lips," which emphasizes the prophet's role as a speaker.

The Talmud teaches that there were hundreds of thousands of prophets: twice as many as the number of people who left Egypt, which was 600,000. But most of the prophets conveyed messages that were intended solely for their own generation and were not reported in scripture. Scripture identifies only 55 prophets of Israel.

A prophet is not necessarily a man. Scripture records the stories of seven female prophets, listed below, and the Talmud reports that Sarah's prophetic ability was superior to Abraham's.
​

So how do you get from "navi" or "prophet" to "manifestation"? Since Baha'is say that Abraham and Moses are manifestations, is there any word in Hebrew used to describe them that makes them more than a prophet?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

No, "messenger" is in the Bible...

The Hebrew word for angel is "malach," which means messenger...
According to Jewish tradition, an angel is a spiritual being and does not have any physical characteristics.
​

Yes, the Bible does use the term "prophet"...

The Hebrew word for a prophet, navi (Nun-Beit-Yod-Alef) comes from the term niv sefatayim meaning "fruit of the lips," which emphasizes the prophet's role as a speaker.

The Talmud teaches that there were hundreds of thousands of prophets: twice as many as the number of people who left Egypt, which was 600,000. But most of the prophets conveyed messages that were intended solely for their own generation and were not reported in scripture. Scripture identifies only 55 prophets of Israel.

A prophet is not necessarily a man. Scripture records the stories of seven female prophets, listed below, and the Talmud reports that Sarah's prophetic ability was superior to Abraham's.
​

So how do you get from "navi" or "prophet" to "manifestation"? Since Baha'is say that Abraham and Moses are manifestations, is there any word in Hebrew used to describe them that makes them more than a prophet?

But the Quran calls Abraham, Noah or Moses, Messengers. Does Bible call Them Messengers?

God said to Moses, I will make you a God to Aaran, and I will make you a God to Pharaoh. A God, means, Manifestation of God.

 

[CG Didymus]

But the Quran calls Abraham, Noah or Moses, Messengers. Does Bible call Them Messengers?

God said to Moses, I will make you a God to Aaran, and I will make you a God to Pharaoh. A God, means, Manifestation of God.

From what I read they would be "prophets" since the Bible is calling the spiritual beings that appear to people "messengers". But, of course, all of them had a message. And Moses was given a message, so, therefore, we could call him a messenger. But then a "manifestation" is something greater. It is a special creation that gets sent down to Earth to reveal a religion. And, supposedly, is a perfectly polished mirror that is reflecting God. Abraham, Moses or anyone else in the Bible, to me, is not that. I'm fine with them just being prophets that were ordinary humans, flaws and all. But then again, I'm fine with them being partially or totally mythical. Like when did it all get written? Centuries of oral transmission of people telling their kids, "This is our story. This is how we got to where we are now. And this is the story of our God. In the beginning..." And I, along with the Baha'is, don't take it literally and historically true. So could have made them Gods, they could have made them space aliens, but it wouldn't matter, because we wouldn't take it literally anyway.

I don't need any of the "prophets" to be manifestations. They were plenty good enough to be people that God, through a vision or through a message from an angel, used them to convey his message. So now do we take the Quran literally? We don't take the Bible literally. So if the Quran alludes to Moses being "a God" why can't that be figurative? But, I know, the Baha'is Faith makes them "manifestations", so it must be literally true. But that's what Christians did to the Bible. They needed Jesus to be God and they needed Satan, so they found verses that they could use that kind of alluded to it. Anyway, I'm studying up on the Baha'i Faith and Buddhism, so I'll see you on Firedragon's thread with some more questions. Thanks.

 

[Niblo]

I checked, but I could not find anywhere where Baha'u'llah said He was the 'sender' of messengers.

Hi Trailblazer.

‘In Isfahan there was a believer, a prominent man who accepted Baha'u'llah with his brain as the right prophet for today. He was a new believer and tried hard to overcome his shortcomings, like all of us, but had no success with his drinking habit, and friends could smell alcohol on his breath. In defense, he would state that his addiction was too difficult, and besides that, he was harming no one, and he was too lowly a servant for Baha'u'llah to be concerned about his private life. Then he had the bounty of attaining the presence of Baha'u'llah. One day when he was among other believers and Baha'u'llah was pacing back and forth, a thought occurred to him that it is true that Baha'u'llah is a great Messenger of God, but he wondered what Baha'u'llah meant when He stated, "I am the Sender of the Messengers and the Revealer of the Books.'' He had not finished his thought when suddenly Baha'u'llah walked to him, put His blessed hand on his shoulder, and said, ''It is true, We are the Sender of the Messengers and the Revealer of the heavenly Books." (‘Stories of Baha'u'llah, by Hand of the Cause A. A. Furutan, p. 74-5’; my emphasis).

Be advised that this quote is taken from ‘The Truth About the Baha'i Faith: A Shocking Expose' by Darrick Evenson and the Unitarian Baha’is. I have not been able to check its accuracy.

Peace.

 

[Trailblazer]

He had not finished his thought when suddenly Baha'u'llah walked to him, put His blessed hand on his shoulder, and said, ''It is true, We are the Sender of the Messengers and the Revealer of the heavenly Books." (‘Stories of Baha'u'llah, by Hand of the Cause A. A. Furutan, p. 74-5’; my emphasis).

Thank you very much for finding this quote, I could not find anywhere in the Writings of Baha'u'llah where He wrote that.

I think it is important to note that when Baha'u'llah says "We" He is referring to Himself and God and all the other Messengers of God in the Supreme Concourse. Since "We" includes God, it means that God sends the Messengers and the Messengers reveal the heavenly Books;at least that is how I interpret what Baha'u'llah said.

 

[Niblo]

Thank you very much for finding this quote, I could not find anywhere in the Writings of Baha'u'llah where He wrote that.

Hi,

You're very welcome. Many thanks for your reply.

May I take this opportunity to comment – before addressing yours – on posts that have gone before:

In Post 51, Adrian writes:

‘Bahá’u’lláh (and I believe Muhammad too) refers to an earlier David who revealed a book called the Zabur, now lost in the mists of time.’

There is a general principle in Islam that we should not say of Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) that which He has not said of Himself. I would extend this principle to His Books.

Our concern is with the Zabūr.

In Post 27, InvestigateTruth invites me to explain why the Bible does not call David’s Book ‘Zabur’.

Perhaps because Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) did not write the Septuagint. It is here – in Greek – that the name ‘Psalms’ first appears; a translation of the Hebrew ‘mizmor’, meaning ‘song’.

In the Hebrew manuscripts, the ‘Book of Psalms’ is entitled ‘Sepher Tehillim’ – the ‘Book of Praises.’ Why would we expect a Hebrew Book to bear an Arabic name?

In this same post, InvestigateTruth writes: ‘But when Quran talks about Book of Jesus, or Moses, it uses the name, Injil and Torah, the same known names. If you think, Quran just means to say Scriptures, as generally meaning of the word Zaboor, why this is only done about David, not about Moses or Jesus Books?’

The word ‘Zabūr’ occurs just eleven times in the Qur’an, in three derived forms. In one of these forms, it occurs (just three times) as a singular, proper noun – a name; a title – connected explicitly with David:

Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) says: ‘We have sent revelation to you (Prophet) as We did to Noah and the prophets after him, to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon – to David We gave the Scripture (‘zabūran’)’. (Al-Nisa: 163).

And again, in sūrah Al-Isra: ‘Your Lord knows best about everyone in the heavens and the earth. We gave some prophets more than others: We gave David the Scripture (‘zabūran’).’ (Verse 55).

Finally – in a different form, but still as a proper noun – in sūrah ‘Al-Anbiya’: ‘We wrote in the Scripture (‘l-zabūri’), as We did in (earlier) Scripture: “My righteous servants will inherit the earth.”’ (Verse 105).

The words: ‘My righteous servants will inherit the earth’ are linguistic parallel with Psalm 37:29: ‘The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever.’ (JPS Tanakh version).

This Psalm is ascribed specifically to David.

The words: ‘…as We did in (earlier) Scripture’ may well be a reference to the Taurât; more specifically, to Exodus 32:13:

‘Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Thy servants, to whom Thou didst swear by Thine own self, and saidst unto them: I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.' (JPS Tanakh version).

In Post 27 it is claimed that in the ʼaḥādīth, the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam): ‘Also used the name Mazaameer.’

It is very likely that InvestigateTruth had this ḥādīth in mind:

‘Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "The reciting of the Zabur (i.e. Psalms) was made easy for David. He used to order that his riding animals be saddled, and would finish reciting the Zabur before they were saddled. And he would never eat except from the earnings of his manual work."’ (Sahih al-Bukhari: Book 4; Chapter 55; ḥādīth 628’).

The words in parathesis do not occur in the original text. They are a gloss, an explanation, offered by the translator. This is a very common technique used by translators of the Qur’an.

Here is another ḥādīth:

‘Abu Hurairah narrated that the Messenger of Allah came out to Ubayy bin Ka'b, and the Messenger of Allah said: “'Would you like for me to teach you a Sürah the likes of which has neither been revealed in the Tawrah, nor the Injil, nor the Zabur, nor in the entire Qur'an?”

‘He said: 'Yes, 0 Messenger of Allah!' The Messenger of Allah said: 'What do you recite in your Salat?' He said: 'I recite Umm Al-Qur'an.' So the Messenger of Allah said: 'By the One in Whose Hand is my soul! The like of it has neither been revealed in the Tawrah, nor the Injil nor the Zabur, nor in the Furqan. It is the seven oft-repeated, and the Magnificent Qur'an which I was given."’ (Sunan Tirmidhi: Volume 5: 42 ‘The Chapters On Virtues Of The Qur'an From The Messenger Of Allah’; ḥādīth 2875’).

Here the translator offers no gloss, but simply translates the text.

The Bible and Qu’ran know only one David.

The Bible and Qur’an know only one Book given to David.

It follows that ‘Al-Zabūr’ – when used in the singular, and connected explicitly with David – and the Book of Psalms are one and the same.

Continued:

 

[Niblo]

In Post 84, Adrian writes:

‘Clearly the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not regarded with equal importance without distinction. In fact for many Muslims the Gospel and Torah that forms part of the Hebrew and Christian scripture are considered either irrelevant or wholly subservient to the Quran. If the Quran, Gospel and Torah are not seen as being equal without distinction, it follows that Muhammad, Jesus and Moses are not seen as equal without distinction.’

This is what the Qur’an has to say about those Scriptures that preceded it:

‘So can you (believers) hope that such people will believe you, when some of them used to hear the words of Allāh and then deliberately twist them, even when they understood them? When they meet the believers, they say: “We too believe.” But when they are alone with each other they say: “How could you tell them about Allāh’s revelation (to us)? They will be able to use it to argue against you before your Lord! Have you no sense?” Do they not know that Allāh is well aware of what they conceal and what they reveal? Some of them are uneducated, and know the Scripture only through wishful thinking. They rely on guesswork. So woe to those who write something down with their own hands and then claim: “This is from Allāh,” in order to make some small gain. Woe to them for what their hands have written! Woe to them for all that they have earned!’ (Al-Baqara: 75-79).

And again:

‘There are some who twist the Scripture with their tongues to make you (people] think that what they say is part of the Scripture when it is not; they say it is from Allāh when it is not; they attribute lies to Allāh and they know it………………Allāh took a pledge from those who were given the Scripture - “Make it known to people; do not conceal it” - but they tossed the pledge over their shoulders, they bartered it for a small price: what a bad bargain they made! (Al‘Imran: 78 and 187).

Those who teach that Books revealed before the Qur’an are ‘either irrelevant or wholly subservient to it’ are wrong.

The general opinion of Muslim scholars is that where the Qur'an and the Bible agree, then that is fine; where the Qur'an and the Bible differ, then the Qur'an takes precedence; and where there is neither agreement nor disagreement, then Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) knows best!

This is not the place to examine – in any detail – the matter of those who: ‘….hear the words of Allāh and then deliberately twist them.’ It is enough to remind ourselves that textual corruption is the process by which a manuscript is changed in some way. This can involve accidental change (as when a scribe misreads an earlier text and, as a result, copies that text incorrectly); deliberate change (as when a later writer disagrees with that stated by an earlier writer, and so inserts his own version); the adding of text that did not exist in the earlier manuscript; the deliberate removal of portions of texts contained in the earlier manuscript; and, finally, the introduction into a text of one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases (a process of eisegesis rather than exegesis).

The Bible has been subjected to all of these corruptions. In what way can they be ‘equal without distinction’ to the Qur’an?

These corruptions do not – in any way – diminish the status of Moses, or of David, or of Yeshua (radi Allahu ‘anhum). That is why Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) has commanded: ‘So (you believers), say, “We believe in Allāh and in what was sent down to us and what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what was given to Moses, Jesus, and all the prophets by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we devote ourselves to Him.’ (Al-Baqara:136).

 

[Niblo]

Concerning the notion that prophets are ‘Manifestations of God’:

In Post 94, InvestigateTruth writes:

‘God said to Moses, I will make you a God to Aaran, and I will make you a God to Pharaoh. A God, means, Manifestation of God.’

This is a distortion of the Text.

Here is the relevant verse:

And the LORD said unto Moses: 'See, I have set thee in God's stead to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.’ (Exodus 7:1 – JPS Tanakh).

In Exodus 7:1, the status of Moses is that of one acting as the Exalted’s viceregent.

Perhaps this is best understood by reference to role of an Abbot, or Abbess, in a Benedictine Monastery:

‘The Abbot who is worthy to be over a monastery, ought always to be mindful of what he is called, and make his works square with his name of Superior. For he is believed to hold the place of Christ in the monastery, when he is called by his name, according to the saying of the Apostle: “You have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry Abba (Father).” Therefore, the Abbot should never teach, prescribe, or command (which God forbid) anything contrary to the laws of the Lord; but his commands and teaching should be instilled like a leaven of divine justice into the minds of his disciples.’ (St. Benedict: ‘The Rule of St. Benedict.’

The head of a monastery rules in Christ’s stead, but no-one believes that he, or she, is a ‘Manifestation’ of Christ.

Aaron was the ‘prophet’ of Moses in that he (Aaron) had been chosen by the Beloved to the ‘mouth’ of Moses, in part because of the latter’s doubt about his own skills as a communicator.

Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla)’s prophets act in His stead. They operate with His authority; in the same way that commissioned officers of the UK and Commonwealth military services operate with the authority of the Monarch. No member of the armed services of these countries would refused a legitimate order – given by a commissioned officer – on the grounds that the order had not been received directly from the Queen herself.

To obey the Beloved is to obey His messengers; to obey a messenger is to obey the One who sent him; who commissioned him.

Shaykh Seyyed Hossein Nasr reminds us that:

‘The comprehensive nature of belief according to Islam means that to be selective in the prophets and books one recognizes or to believe in God, but not in all His prophets and revelations is, to enter the realm of disbelief. Here the Quran warns against making such a distinction between God and His messengers, for those who truly believe in God will also follow His messengers…Elsewhere the Quran indicates that one should not make such distinctions between or among the messengers themselves.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary’).


Continued: