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

[Terry Sampson]

I want to have a conversation with Muslims and other interested parties about the seal of the Prophet. That can’t happen in the DIR threads.

Proposal: Open the equivalent of this thread in "One-on-One Debate: By invitation only", specifying that only bona fide Muslims of X/Y/Z categories are invited. That should keep out the the "I am One with the Matrix" crowd.

 

[Pastek]

We have some hadiths confirming this :

The Prophet (ﷺ) said to 'Ali: "You are to me in the position that Harun was to Musa, except that there is no Prophet after me."


Hadith - Chapters on Virtues - Jami` at-Tirmidhi - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "The Israelis used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place.
There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Caliphs who will increase in number." (...)


Hadith - Book of Prophets - Sahih al-Bukhari - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Of course there's plenty of hadiths about the Antichrist, Jesus and the Mahdi. So I don't have to precise that he confirmed the return of Jesus.
But no new prophet nor messenger.

 

[Terry Sampson]

Proposal: Open the equivalent of this thread in "One-on-One Debate: By invitation only",

P.S. And close this thread?

 

[Shia Islam]

Functionally, the word khatam means 'last;' that's how it is used and how it's glossed in dictionaries. Wherever you can envision the concept of a seal, it is always connected to the end or closure of something. Think about it. A seal marks the end of a document, when you seal an envelope, you close it, etc. Moreover, if you look at all the qira'at of the Qur'an, khtm in Q. 33:40 is vocalized in two different ways, and these two are connected. Either it can be read as khatam (seal), as in the Hafs recitation, but it can also be read as khatim (last), as in the Warsh recitation. Both of these are valid. So there is very good reason just in the Qur'an for holding to the view that the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace) was the last of the prophets (nabiyyin) and that he closed the cycle of prophecy (nubuwwa). This, however, does not mean that humanity is left without guidance from God. The Shi'a recognize that, in spite of this, the cycle of providential guidance (walaya) continues. Moreover, there is also the statement of the Imam 'Ali that "alchemy is the sister of prophecy."

with respect, the problem is that you are denying parts of islam that when it is accepted that they can be denied, this will mean denying Islam altogether as it is known.

it is not about the interpretation of a single quranic verse as you like to show it..

 

[Pastek]

Do you have a prophecy that Muhammad gave that's come true?

30.2 The Byzantines have been defeated
30.3 In the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome.
30.4 Within three to nine years. To Allah belongs the command before and after. And that day the believers will rejoice

"The surah begins by noting the recent defeat of the Byzantines by the Persians at the Battle of Antioch.
This defeat posed a significant theological and sociological problem for the early Muslim community because the Byzantines were Christians and considered monotheists while the state that defeated them were considered dualists because the official religion was Zoroastrianism.

The surah is in part a response to the non-Muslim Meccans, who took this victory as a sign that the traditional polytheistic practices would win out over monotheism.
In the third and fourth ayatayn, the Muslim community is promised that the Byzantines will reverse their defeat into a victory "in a few years' time"

Ar-Rum - Wikipedia

But we have a lot of hadiths too concerning some other events.
You can search for "hadiths+end of the world/times"

 

[wizanda]

If you mean 2:136, it is not a definition of Muslims.

Meant more than just that verse; if Allah sent messengers to every nation (10:47), it is only listing Abrahamic teachers, not Dharmic as well.

2:136 Say, [O believers], "We have believed in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the Descendants and what was given to Moses and Jesus and what was given to the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him."

I'm not sure how these are relevant?

Because religion is one, not divided.... Religious books globally are part of Islam.

So you follow the laws established by the Qur'an and you follow the commands within?

I adopt the best morality laws; other bits that go against these principles I don't keep... So I'm vegan, and do not accept it is acceptable to kill animals for food, etc.

Plus Abraham, Moses, Yeshua didn't follow the Quran, they followed Islam, which isn't contained in a book, it is the Oneness of God.

In my opinion.

 

[stvdv]

Just a few thoughts. If we take that literally the term Seal of the Prophets means no more Prophets then Jesus well before Muhammad had already called Himself the ‘first and last’ ‘ the beginning and the end’ But He obviously was not meaning it literally as He spoke of His return and the Comforter and the Spirit Of Truth to come after Him.

In the Quran there are many passages below that indicate to me that Muhammad is not the last Prophet nor the Quran the final Revelation from God, and that God’s Words will never be exhausted.

But this is only my humble opinion.

#MeToo

And Enlightened ones teach us to live in the present, not in the future, nor in the past.

And besides that, God will never limit himself by declaring such a thing

And besides that, God is known to be "beyond time and space"

Might have been some "mis-communication" IMHO

According to the Prophet, being the Seal of the prophets is one of six qualities that distinguish him from other prophets: “I have been favored above the prophets in six things: I have been endowed with consummate succinctness of speech; I have been made triumphant through dread; war booty has been made lawful for me; the whole earth has been made a place of worship for me and a means of purification; I have been sent to all created beings; and the succession of prophets has been completed in me” (IK).

Is this what Muhammad said?

Oh my God, what did I just read here?

I really hope my English failed me completely

Because if this says what I think it says, it is sick

Maybe someone can explain that these are really nice and humble words

And that I just need some extra sleep (english is my second language)

 

[Terry Sampson]

Oh my God, what did I just read here?

Commentary on 33:40 in:

The (IK) tells us that the source for the sentence that alarmed you is:

• (IK) ʿImād al-Dīn Abu’l-Fidāʾ Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373), Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm
  

 

[Link]

God could of chosen words that are clearer, true. Meaning, it's true "seal of Prophets" can mean the "end of their journey" and "All Prophets are the first and last points of each other" like Baha'allah said, and it's also true that it can mean "seal of Prophets" as in "stamp of verification of all Prophets" and would mean Mohammad verifies all Prophets.

So if it means the end of, why did he choose these words? As Baha'ais believe in Wilayah of 12 Imams after Mohammad, the question is raised, why didn't he state it their Wilayah in a way that language doesn't allow for disagreement. The truth, is context is key.

But the verse itself actually in context of other verses requires:

(1) Verification from Prophet and his family to what it really mean.
(2) See the context of other verses in Quran that supplement it and imply it, like Mohammad being sent all the worlds (humans and jinn, and all their nations).

Itself it's not clear enough as in the words itself could've been clearer it could have been said "There is no Prophet after Mohammad" but that's what is stated. It has possible meaning that it's the end of Prophethood, so we have to ask the family of the reminder when we don't know, and they verify this meaning.

Plus there is many verses in Quran that verify this plan of sealing Prophethood with Mohammad.

 

[Wasp]

Meant more than just that verse; if Allah sent messengers to every nation (10:47), it is only listing Abrahamic teachers, not Dharmic as well.

Because they aren't God's messengers.

Because religion is one, not divided.... Religious books globally are part of Islam.

Ridiculous invention.

I adopt the best morality laws; other bits that go against these principles I don't keep... So I'm vegan, and do not accept it is acceptable to kill animals for food, etc.

So you're neither a Muslim nor believe in the Qur'an.

Plus Abraham, Moses, Yeshua didn't follow the Quran, they followed Islam, which isn't contained in a book, it is the Oneness of God.

It isn't the oneness of God. After the quran everyone should follow the quran.

 

[Muffled]

I believe it is most likely the case. Of course the anti-Christ will appear to be a prophet but not one from God.

 

[Muffled]

Do you have a prophecy that Muhammad gave that's come true?

I believe not all prophets are required to predict the future. He is a prophet because he heard from God and proclaimed the message he was given.

 

[wizanda]

So you're neither a Muslim nor believe in the Qur'an.

Abraham did not follow the laws in the Torah or Quran, so he wasn't a Muslim either according to you.

3:65-67 O People of the Scripture, why do you argue about Abraham while the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him? Then will you not reason? Here you are - those who have argued about that of which you have [some] knowledge, but why do you argue about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows, while you know not. Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was one inclining toward truth, a Muslim [submitting to Allah]. And he was not of the polytheists.

In my opinion.

 

[Wasp]

Abraham did not follow the laws in the Torah or Quran, so he wasn't a Muslim either according to you.

3:65-67 O People of the Scripture, why do you argue about Abraham while the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him? Then will you not reason? Here you are - those who have argued about that of which you have [some] knowledge, but why do you argue about that of which you have no knowledge? And Allah knows, while you know not. Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was one inclining toward truth, a Muslim [submitting to Allah]. And he was not of the polytheists.

In my opinion.

According to Islamic teaching, after the revelation of the Qur'an every rightly guided follows the Qur'an.

 

[firedragon]

40:34-35 And Joseph had already come to you before with clear proofs, but you remained in doubt of that which he brought to you, until when he died, you said, 'Never will Allah send a messenger after him.' Thus does Allah leave astray he who is a transgressor and skeptic." Those who dispute concerning the signs of Allah without an authority having come to them - great is hatred [of them] in the sight of Allah and in the sight of those who have believed. Thus does Allah seal over every heart [belonging to] an arrogant tyrant.

So the Quran clearly states that they shouldn't say "Last Prophet".

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 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

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.

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

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.

 

[firedragon]

Perhaps the most important words regarding apostasy are from Muhammad Himself.

Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
— trans. Yusuf Ali, Quran 2:256

Let there be no compulsion in religion is clear enough. How we go from such clarity and freedom to the complete opposite with apostasy laws and the death penalty in some countries for converting outside of Islam is another story. I believe it has little to do with what Muhammad taught. Many Muslims will beg to differ.

Apostasy laws are directly derived from ahadith. The Quran is directly against apostasy laws. So these laws are directly against the Quran, the book they believe is God's word.

Again, apostasy laws are against the Quran, only found in Hadith. The issue is, so is mahdi. Mahdi is also not in the Quran. Its in the hadith.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Can a Redeemer also be a Prophet as Christ was? I believe so.

This is why this should be a Muslim DIR because maybe more knowledgeable Muslims can expound on this. From my understanding, it is agreed upon by scholars that the Mahid’s duty is not prophethood. Jesus is the only prophet in Islam to come back.

The Mahdi is the precursor to Christ return. Jesus, not Muhammad, not Bab, not any of the Abrahamic prophets come back from death to return and correct the theological disagreements among the people on earth.

Whether or not the Bab or Bahá’u’lláh brought anything new can only be concluded after independent investigation of truth.

True. But I was suspect any adherent to any faith would have done some sort of investigation into believing in something. What my point was, was that any religious figure proclaiming to have come from divine providence must have something unique that stands out.

What does the Baha’i faith promote that is unique to itself and different from the other Abrahamic faiths other than its attempt to mesh all faiths (meaning their inner truths) into one?

m pleased you mention that persecution of Baha’is is wrong as many Muslims don’t wish to acknowledge that it is or would simply avoid considering the question.

Why would you be surprised? It is unIslamic to persecute someone who shares a different faith even if you feel strongly that faith is wrong. God said in the Qur’an “there is no compulsion in religion, the right direction is distinct from error.”

Truth stands alone and does not need force acceptance. I firmly believe let all believe as they wish and let God judge right from wrong and what is in between.

I want to have a conversation with Muslims and other interested parties about the seal of the Prophet. That can’t happen in the DIR threads.

I see. I just think the intersection of non-Muslims inferring their point of view as non-Muslims would be a distraction from the answers you seek from Muslims.

 

[Wasp]

And besides that, God will never limit himself by declaring such a thing

Are you saying you know what God will and will not do?

And besides that, God is known to be "beyond time and space"

But people aren't.

Because if this says what I think it says, it is sick

A bit of an overreaction. What is "sick" about it?

 

[firedragon]

Can a Redeemer also be a Prophet as Christ was? I believe so.

Well, conceptually, they are very very different people. Jesus the Christ was a Nabi and Rasool. Jesus was given a scripture. He is a completely different picture altogether. But thats according to the philosophy.

 

[wizanda]

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

Unless someone is told directly by the Source there is no more prophets; I'd still find it arrogant of me to assume the Source of reality gave no one else prophetic vision...

Especially when Abrahamically the promised made to Aaron, that God will maintain prophets is still there until Judgement day according to prophecy.

Now we can see historically that Muhammad was informed of the changes to the Bible after it was canonized, where the Quran is a summary, and confirmation of what was previously prophesied.

In my opinion.