Seal of the Prophets - Does it mean Muhammad is the final Prophet?

[Dawnofhope]

Yeah, well, Sunnis did the same with "Whoever I am their Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla". The first step towards clarity is to know - God clarifies everything in his book and it's a clear book. If anything is unclear, it's due to either injustice or sorcery, or a mix of these.

If everything is so clear in Islam why do only 10% of Muslims follow Shi'a traditions whereas 90% follow Sunni? Your faith may be clear to you, but important parts of what you believe is not shared by your fellow Muslim. Do you believe Sunnis follow sorcery and injustice?

 

[Link]

Yes, I do believe sunnis are unjust and follow and believe in the sorcery of Iblis and his forces over the truth clarified by God, his Prophet and the 12 Imams.

 

[Link]

Not only is the truth clear, it's bright as the sun. The Quran is a very clear book.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yes, I do believe sunnis are unjust and follow and believe in the sorcery of Iblis and his forces over the truth clarified by God, his Prophet and the 12 Imams.

As you may know, Baha'is believe in the successions of the 12th Imam as do the Shi'a Twelvers. However we both know Ali as Muhammad's successor is not clearly stated in the Quran. Perhaps that is why so many deny the Imams?

 

[Link]

Nope it’s a clear books and it clearly calls to Ahlulbayt. The leaders of guidance are from its foundational clear teachings.

 

[Link]

Ali is clearly in Quran.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@Link and @firedragon

Here is a Hadith that exactly and actually explains why Myhammad is called Seal of Prophets:


ولم يجز لنبي نبوة حتى يأخذ خاتما من محمد فلذلك سمي خاتم النبيين ، محمد سيد النبيين وأنا سيد الوصيين"

بحار الأنوار - ط دارالاحیاء التراث - العلامة المجلسي - کتابخانه مدرسه فقاهت

Imam Ali has said, "The permission of Prophecy was not given to a Prophet unless he received a Seal (Khatam) from Muhammad, and thus [for this reason ] He is named the Seal of Prophets. Muhammad is the Master of the Prophets and I am the Master of the Successors."


The term Khatam un nabiyyin according to this Hadith, has nothing to do with finality. It shows the Spiritual greatness of Muhammad in comparison to the prophets (Nabis). As you know, Islam believes Muhammad Spirit is like Light who always existed, even before Adam.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Ali is clearly in Quran.

well, the Sunnis don't think so. I agree Ali is mentioned in Quran, but not by name. There are allusions to Him.

 

[Link]

Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Ash’ari has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from al-Barqi from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya ibn ‘Imran al-Halabi from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said that he heard abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say the following. "Allah, Majestic is Whose mention, ended with your prophet the (coming of) the prophets. Thus, there will never come any prophet after him. With your book He ended sending of (heavenly) books. Thus, there will never come other heavenly books. In it (your book) He has placed clarifications for all things, such as your creation and the creation of the heavens and the earth. Therein is the news of the beings before you, the laws that help settle your disputes and the news of the beings that come into being after you, the news of the issues of Paradise and Fire and that to which you proceed."

 

[Link]

Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Ash’ari has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from al-Barqi from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya ibn ‘Imran al-Halabi from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said that he heard abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) say the following. "Allah, Majestic is Whose mention, ended with your prophet the (coming of) the prophets. Thus, there will never come any prophet after him. With your book He ended sending of (heavenly) books. Thus, there will never come other heavenly books. In it (your book) He has placed clarifications for all things, such as your creation and the creation of the heavens and the earth. Therein is the news of the beings before you, the laws that help settle your disputes and the news of the beings that come into being after you, the news of the issues of Paradise and Fire and that to which you proceed."

The word used there for ended is the same of the root word "khatamal", for it's exactly "khatama."

To say there was no hadith that interprets the word as "no more Prophets" is thus proven false.

This in Alkafi, and I haven't searched other hadiths about the word yet. But I'm betting we have quite a few that say it means "there is no Prophet after me", and interpret khatama in that sense.

 

[Link]

well, the Sunnis don't think so. I agree Ali is mentioned in Quran, but not by name. There are allusions to Him.

Yes and no, allusions to him include allusions to his name, so his name is explained and emphasized more then any other name except for the title "Allah".

 

[sooda]

If everything is so clear in Islam why do only 10% of Muslims follow Shi'a traditions whereas 90% follow Sunni? Your faith may be clear to you, but important parts of what you believe is not shared by your fellow Muslim. Do you believe Sunnis follow sorcery and injustice?

We ALL need to move away from literalism and end times fantasies.

 

[paarsurrey]

Khatam an-Nabiyyin, usually translated as Seal of the Prophets, is a title used in the Quran to designate the Prophet Muhammad. Among Muslims, it is generally regarded to mean that Muhammad was the last of the prophets sent by God.

The title khatam an-nabiyyin or khatim an-nabiyyin, is applied to Muhammad in verse 33:40 of the Qur'an. The popular Yusaf Ali translation reads,

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
— The Qur'an – Chapter 33 Verse 40

Khatam an-Nabiyyin - Wikipedia

This is commonly understood that Muhammad is the final Prophet for all time despite eschatological beliefs in regards a future Madhi or Qa'im.

Mahdi - Wikipedia

One consequence of understanding Muhammad as being the final prophet, is that other religions such as the Baha'i Faith believe there can be prophets after Muhammad. Baha'is consider the forerunner of the Baha'i faith, the Bab and the founder of the Baha'i faith, Baha'u'llah to be Prophets who have a similar station. Many Muslims of course strongly disagree and will sometimes consider the Baha'i Faith an apostate religion. This has led to persecution of Baha'is in severalof Islamic countries including Iran.

Báb - Wikipedia

Bahá'u'lláh - Wikipedia

What I would like discussed in this thread is to hear from Muslims as to why this single verse in the Quran has come to be understood as Muhammad being the final Prophet of all time. It would also be useful for those who believe in Muhmmad but also a Prophet after Muhammad (eg Baha'is and Ahmadiyyas), why this verse doesn't mean the final Prophet for all time.

Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia

Ahmadiyya - Wikipedia

If it doesn't mean Muhammad was the final Prophet for all time as believed by Muslims, what does it mean?

NB - Anyone who has something constructive to contribute is also welcome to post.

"Baha'is consider the forerunner of the Baha'i faith, the Bab and the founder of the Baha'i faith, Baha'u'llah to be Prophets who have a similar station." Unquote

Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":

• that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
• Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.

If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.

If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

In this verse its "Rasool". Not "Nabi".

The confusion is in the use of English words "messenger" and "prophet" interchangeably, mostly out of no other choice. Also the verse you have taken is speaking of those who rejected Yusuf and his message or rather doubted him and his message. Also, the verse does not say "he was the last rasool". It says "they first reject his message, doubt everything about him, and when he dies they have the audacity to say there won't be any messenger after him". And 33:40 says last Nabi, not last rasool. So these are two completely different types of things in two different verses. I hope you understand that.

The verse 33:40 very clearly distinguishes between a rasool and Nabi. Because it says very clearly the he is the messenger of God or rasoolullah first and then says that he is the last Nabi. Thus if one wishes to argue that a rasool may come in the future, but the Quran is clear that Muhammed is the last Nabi.

In simple language hatham means 'seal'. I would use it when I finish something. If I finish reading the Quran I would say "hathamul Quran". End of the month I would say "hatham asshahar". Lets say you are drinking a glass of water and you say khatham (I added the k because people are used to it this way) it means thats the end of the drink. Its finished. There is no more to drink. Khaathamun, if applied to something I am writing it would be the last paragraph. There are no more paragraphs or writing there. Thats the end.

So the Quran is indeed, very vividly saying that Muhammed is the last Nabi.

One of the biggest issues in this matter is the lack of empathy towards another language. The word prophet and messenger are interchangeable in our minds. But if you stop using these words until you understand this passage it would be a better approach. The verse as I said already clearly differentiates between Rasool and Nabi. It says Muhammed is the last Nabi, but doesn't say he is the last Rasool. So one could argue that a rasool can come. And the Bahai argument is exactly that. So is the Ahmadi argument. EXACTLY THAT.

Islamic eschatological beliefs of the Mahdi and the return of Jesus are never found in the Quran. All of the concepts of an end-time figure be it the Mahdi, Al Qaim of there Shia's, Shirazi, Mirza Hussain, Dajjal (beast 666 the antichrist), return of Jesus, are all extra Quranic teachings that were interpreted that way.

The debate with Rasool and Nabi has been where the Muslims argue that Rasool brings a book, a Nabi is any messenger of God. Thus, last Nabi would mean that there will never be another person called a messenger of God. This is an argument to eliminate anyone claiming to bring any message from God. This is the typical muslim argument.

The Ahmadi's, Bahai's, followers of Rashad Khalifa argued that "Nabi is a book bringer", and "Rasool is any messenger of God". So even if there won't be a Nabi in the future, there could be Rasools. No more books, but messengers are possible. The variance in the Bahai argument is that after Shirazi, Bahaullah had a book.



Typical Muslim argument
Nabi = Any messenger of God (No more means no more anything)
Rasool = Bringer of a book (Moses, Jesus, David, Muhammed)

Typical opposing argument
Rasool = Any messenger of God (Thus can be another in the future)
Nabi = Bringer of a book (Moses, Jesus, David, Muhammed. No more Nabi means there could be rasools)

Hope thats comprehensible. I am not making any judgment calls in this particular post, just answering the query.

"Because it says very clearly the he is the messenger of God or rasoolullah first and then says that he is the last Nabi."

Just to clarify that a Nabi has to be a Rasul as per Quran verse[72:27] [72:28] :

“Therefore, the title of Nabi would be justified wherever this connotation would apply. A Nabi has to be a Rasul, for if he is not a Rasul he cannot be the recipient of knowledge of the unseen, as indicated by the verse:

[[72:27]عٰلِمُ الۡغَیۡبِ فَلَا یُظۡہِرُ عَلٰی غَیۡبِہٖۤ اَحَدًا ﴿ۙ۲۷﴾
He is the Knower of the unseen; and He reveals not His secrets to any one,
[[72:28]اِلَّا مَنِ ارۡتَضٰی مِنۡ رَّسُوۡلٍ ﴾
Except to him whom He chooses, namely a Messenger of His.

Now, taking this connotation into account, if the appearance of a Nabi is denied, it will be tantamount to believing that this umma has been deprived of Divine address and converse, because whosoever discloses matters of the unseen on the basis of Divine knowledge would necessarily be a Nabi within the connotation of the verse:
فَلَا یُظۡہِرُ عَلٰی غَیۡبِہٖۤ اَحَدًا
“and He reveals not His secrets to any one”

Likewise, anyone who is sent by God will be called Rasul. The only difference is that, after our Holy Prophet (sa) till the end of days, there cannot be any Nabi who is granted a new shariah. Nor can anyone be granted the title of Nubuwwat unless it is through the Holy Prophet (sa), and unless a person has arrived at such a stage of complete devotion to him (sa) that he too is named Muhammad and Ahmad in heaven.”

Page 6 of 21 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
A Misconception Removed | Islam Ahmadiyya

Right, please?

Regards
______________
#213 Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":
~that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
~Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.
If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?

 

[firedragon]

"Because it says very clearly the he is the messenger of God or rasoolullah first and then says that he is the last Nabi."

Just to clarify that a Nabi has to be a Rasul as per Quran verse[72:27] [72:28] :

“Therefore, the title of Nabi would be justified wherever this connotation would apply. A Nabi has to be a Rasul, for if he is not a Rasul he cannot be the recipient of knowledge of the unseen, as indicated by the verse:

[[72:27]عٰلِمُ الۡغَیۡبِ فَلَا یُظۡہِرُ عَلٰی غَیۡبِہٖۤ اَحَدًا ﴿ۙ۲۷﴾
He is the Knower of the unseen; and He reveals not His secrets to any one,
[[72:28]اِلَّا مَنِ ارۡتَضٰی مِنۡ رَّسُوۡلٍ ﴾
Except to him whom He chooses, namely a Messenger of His.

Now, taking this connotation into account, if the appearance of a Nabi is denied, it will be tantamount to believing that this umma has been deprived of Divine address and converse, because whosoever discloses matters of the unseen on the basis of Divine knowledge would necessarily be a Nabi within the connotation of the verse:
فَلَا یُظۡہِرُ عَلٰی غَیۡبِہٖۤ اَحَدًا
“and He reveals not His secrets to any one”

Likewise, anyone who is sent by God will be called Rasul. The only difference is that, after our Holy Prophet (sa) till the end of days, there cannot be any Nabi who is granted a new shariah. Nor can anyone be granted the title of Nubuwwat unless it is through the Holy Prophet (sa), and unless a person has arrived at such a stage of complete devotion to him (sa) that he too is named Muhammad and Ahmad in heaven.”

Page 6 of 21 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
A Misconception Removed | Islam Ahmadiyya

Right, please?

Regards
______________
#213 Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":
~that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
~Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.
If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?

You should have read through the post you are responding to brother. Because it says all of this already. Heres an excerpt FYI.

Typical Muslim argument
Nabi = Any messenger of God (No more means no more anything)
Rasool = Bringer of a book (Moses, Jesus, David, Muhammed)

Typical opposing argument
Rasool = Any messenger of God (Thus can be another in the future)
Nabi = Bringer of a book (Moses, Jesus, David, Muhammed. No more Nabi means there could be rasools)

 

[paarsurrey]

You should have read through the post you are responding to brother. Because it says all of this already. Heres an excerpt FYI.

I have read one's post.
So, one agrees to the contents of my post. Right, please?

Regards
______________
#213 Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":
~that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
~Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.
If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?

 

[firedragon]

I have read one's post.
So, one agrees to the contents of my post. Right, please?

Regards
______________
#213 Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":
~that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
~Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.
If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?

No. I dont agree brother. I have stated my position on this matter and its debatable.

 

[Earthtank]

Khatam an-Nabiyyin, usually translated as Seal of the Prophets, is a title used in the Quran to designate the Prophet Muhammad. Among Muslims, it is generally regarded to mean that Muhammad was the last of the prophets sent by God.

The title khatam an-nabiyyin or khatim an-nabiyyin, is applied to Muhammad in verse 33:40 of the Qur'an. The popular Yusaf Ali translation reads,

Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: and Allah has full knowledge of all things.
— The Qur'an – Chapter 33 Verse 40

Khatam an-Nabiyyin - Wikipedia

This is commonly understood that Muhammad is the final Prophet for all time despite eschatological beliefs in regards a future Madhi or Qa'im.

Mahdi - Wikipedia

One consequence of understanding Muhammad as being the final prophet, is that other religions such as the Baha'i Faith believe there can be prophets after Muhammad. Baha'is consider the forerunner of the Baha'i faith, the Bab and the founder of the Baha'i faith, Baha'u'llah to be Prophets who have a similar station. Many Muslims of course strongly disagree and will sometimes consider the Baha'i Faith an apostate religion. This has led to persecution of Baha'is in severalof Islamic countries including Iran.

Báb - Wikipedia

Bahá'u'lláh - Wikipedia

What I would like discussed in this thread is to hear from Muslims as to why this single verse in the Quran has come to be understood as Muhammad being the final Prophet of all time. It would also be useful for those who believe in Muhmmad but also a Prophet after Muhammad (eg Baha'is and Ahmadiyyas), why this verse doesn't mean the final Prophet for all time.

Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia

Ahmadiyya - Wikipedia

If it doesn't mean Muhammad was the final Prophet for all time as believed by Muslims, what does it mean?

NB - Anyone who has something constructive to contribute is also welcome to post.

Hi Adrian,

Interesting post but, sorry, i am a little confused. Are you trying to reconcile between Islam and its final prophet and the Bahai faith? Not sure how you would connect the 2 to begin with.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hi Adrian,

Interesting post but, sorry, i am a little confused. Are you trying to reconcile between Islam and its final prophet and the Bahai faith? Not sure how you would connect the 2 to begin with.

The link between the Baha’i Faith and Islam is as clear as the links between Christianity and Judaism, Buddhism and Hinduism. One needs only to examine the historical origins. The Baha’i Faith emerged from Shi’a Islamic Persia in 1844, and then was spread through the Ottoman Empire with Bahá’u’lláh’s successive exiles and banishment to Iraq, Turkey and then Israel (then Palestine in 1868).

After Bahá’u’lláh’s passing in 1892, His eldest son Abdul-Baha became the leader of the Baha’i Faith followed by Shoghi Effendi in 1921. As the Baha’i Faith was considered an apostate religion in Islam due to conservative interpretation of the Khatham an- Nabiyyin its spread throughout the Islamic world was severely suppressed. It was the Baha’is in North America under the leadership of Abdul-Baha and Shoghi Effendi that enabled the Baha’i Faith to rapidly spread worldwide.

When I first encountered the Baha’i Faith in 1985 it appeared a very Western, liberal and modern religion. I initially had no idea it had emerged from a conservative and fanatical Islamic Empire during the nineteenth century and the barbarism used in efforts to totally eradicate it. For any serious student of the Baha’i Faith and Islam, the links between Muhammad, the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh are extremely clear. There’s nothing to reconcile.

 

[paarsurrey]

No. I dont agree brother. I have stated my position on this matter and its debatable.

I knew that, that is why I addressed the post to one.
Please read the book*, I provided the link of. It is originally written in Urdu language. The translation in English (the official one) consists of 21 pages only. Please read it intensively/intently. Then we will discuss it.

*Page 6 of 21 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad
A Misconception Removed | Islam Ahmadiyya

Right, please?

Regards
___________
#213 Irrespective of the meaning of the title Seal of Prophets given to Muhammad by G-d, Bahaullah never claimed in his core book "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude":
~that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger/Prophet by G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
~Bahaullah did not claim that he had received any Word of Revelation from G-d in clear and unequivocal terms.
If yes, then please quote from "Kitab-i-Iqan" or "The Book of Certitude" in this connection.
If the followers of Bahaism Religion think that Bahaullah was a prophet/messenger appointed by G-d as per Quran, then it is their own incorrect thinking, it has got nothing to do with Bahaullah being a Prophet/Messenger as per Quran. Right, please?