Talk:Prophets in Islam/Archive 1

Introduction (Who are the prophets of Islam)

I Added the following:

- Correcting wrong information about Islamic creed on the subject in the introduction.

- I added four references to make you sure about the accurecy of my changes.

Thank you for your time

Research2006 05:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal Movements

Added the following: While traditionally Muslims always believed the stories of the Qur'an to be history, some liberal movements in Islam argue that they are primarily illustrations of Islamic ethics; as such they may or may not be historically accurate. Modern historians generally take the view that neither the Qur'anic nor Biblical accounts of these stories are historically reliable. --Zeeshanhasan 20:26, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

You have this some "liberal movements in Islam" inserted almost everywhere in these articles, regardless of the topic. In most cases it seems this some "liberal movements in Islam" consists only you and your web site. For example, you inserted a belief of some "liberal movements" in Noah article that the Qur'an borrows the flood story from Sumerian mythology. I defy you to find me proof of this claim (other than your own web site). Which "liberal movement in Islam" has said that? Until you do that, I would remove that claim from Noah article. You are inserting you own oneliner beliefs everywhere in all these articles by preceding the beliefs with 'some "liberal movements in Islam,"' it seems. OneGuy 11:56, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I removed:

The most widespread Islamic view is that all these prophets originally preached the same message, most recently exemplified by the revelation of the Qur'an to Muhammad. However, various sects such as the Mu'tazilis and the Ismailis, as well as liberal movements in Islam have speculated that divine revelations such as the Qur'an and Bible are created by God according to the needs of particular times and circumstances. This would allow for a legitimate diversity of revealed truths (accounting for the differences between Biblical and Qur'anic stories of prophets).

The premise is at best too vaguely stated; the Qur'an explicitly notes that some regulations were imposed by God on the prophet's own community but not on other communities (eg the Sabbath and some of the Jewish dietary regulations), and the various revealed books are of course different, although in some sufficiently abstract sense they might be considered the same "message". The Mutazili and Ismaili beliefs described are relevant to Qur'an, but seem to have little connection to here. - Mustafaa 12:16, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Zacharias vs. Zechariah

Correction: Zechariah is an Old Testament prophet. He is not mentioned in the Qur'an. The 'Zakariya' mentioned as a prophet in the Qur'an is in fact the father of John the Baptist. His name is Zacharias. (I don't know how to edit it.)Prater 13:43, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

OK- I updated this. Prater- you are correct; for anyone questioning it, refer to the included Qur'anic links beneath the said Prophet and compare to Zecharia from the Bible / Torah. --Abdullah Tahir 14:43, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uzair (Ezra)

Hughes' Dictionary of Islam also lists Uzair (Ezra) and Luqman. Uzair should definitely be added to the list in the article. Prater 14:00, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Different articles?

Why is it that some prophets have their "Islamic view" pages different from the non-Islamic view (e.g. Sulayman) but others (e.g. Ibraim, Yahya) don't? --Abdousi 21:18, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think if they have a separate page it is meant to show that there will be more information about XX in Islam and to make it more prominent. the Jesus in Islam section of Jesus would be severely suppressed because this encyclopedia is being editted by many people who know a lot more about Christianity than Islam. If we use the page Isa his view as an Islamic prophet can have some prominence. That's what I think at least gren 22:44, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Abakh Khoja

Can we include Abakh Khoja on this page? See the following from Kashgar:

The tomb of Abakh Khoja, considered the holiest Muslim site in Xinjiang. Built in the 17th century, the beautiful tiled mausoleum 5 km northeast of the city centre also contains the tombs of five generations of his family. Abkah was a powerful ruler, controlling Khotan, Yarkand, Korla, Kuch and Aksu as well as Kashgar. Among some Xinjiang Muslims, he was considered a prophet, second only to Mohammed in importance. (emphasis mine) ~ Dpr 16:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not unless he is specifically mentioned in the Qur'an- If you can point to the qur'anic verses that verify this, we should add him to the list; otherwise, add him to the section "Other Possible Prophets." If only "some xinjiang" Muslims see him as a prophet, by definition that is a highly minority and heterodox view. I believe the purpose of the list on this page is to document the orthodox, widely accepted prophets as mentioned in the Qur'an. --Abdullah Tahir 14:55, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I have an unrelated question. What is the Arabic word for the minor prophets? Rasul is used for Major Prophets, or Messengers, and another word is used for prophets (lower case p). Hujjat 01:55, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such word? Maybe "peygamber", but that's just "prophet".

The best possible answer I can give is this: The Arabic word NABI (NaBee) is used to refer to a prophet, i.e. one who has been chosen by God. While RASUL (RaSool) is a prophet of extreme strong will who is usually, but not always accompanyed by a message/book. By definatrion anyone chosen by God is a NABI, so all RASULs are NABIs, but the opposite is not true. It would be easy to translate NABI into the english "prophet", and RASUL as "messenger", but while the former conotes religiosity in english the latter does not; not unless its used with of God as in "...Mohamed is the messenger of Allah".

Tawrah is NOT the Torah

What a fundamental error - gosh ! It should be made manifestly clear that the Tawrah (scripture revealed to Moses) is not the same as the Torah. ---Mpatel (talk) 16:11, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

List of Prophets?

What are the conditions for getting onto the "List of Prophets?" Is there some sort of system for doing so? I don't see why Luqman and Dhul-Qarnayn are excluded from the list of prophets, when both are mentioned in the Qur'an and are thus widely recognized as prophets. Luqman has a chapter of the Qur'an named after him, and is called, in the Qur'an, "one who Allah gave wisdom." Dhul-Qarnayn is similarly praised in the Qur'an, and is described as having conversations with Allah and one whom "Allah gave great power in the earth, and the ways and means to all ends." These are the only people listed under "Possible Prophets" who are mentioned in the Qur'an, while the rest of the "Possible Prophets" are frivolous suggestions such as the silly idea that Buddha was a prophet of Islam. --Zeno of Elea 21:39, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree with Zeno of Elea- Indeed, there is a large section of the Qur'an that discusses Qhul-Qarnayn. Indeed, sections of which state that "We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness" which illustrate God spoke to Dhul-Qarnayn, has given him authority over the world, and later ni the Surah it is clear that Dhul-Qarnayn is warning the peoples (another aspect of prophethood). All of the educated Muslims (including Imams and Shaykhs) that I know refer to him as a prophet, I will put him on the list. But I disagree with it being a "frivolous" or "silly" idea to mention possible prophets as according to Islam, God sent prophets to every people and that their teachings over time became corrupted. Hence, while you may have an aversion for Buddhism or Hinduism, this doesn't rule out that Buddha or Krishna were actually prophets. All we can say is that we do not know- I'll see if I can tweak that section too.

--Abdullah Tahir

It is true that Dhul-Qarnayn and Luqman were highly praised in the Qur'an, however it does not state that either of them were given prophethood in the Qur'an or any other hadith for that matter. Even though both man were blessed and very pious, the debate about them being a prophet is still questionable.

--Jay2o 19:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long

I think the long tag should be removed. It is long but there is no way to split this up and the immense size is because of so many links. The tag is for an issue that won't be resolved unless we decide to get read of the links to the Qur'an verses. So, should we get rid of the links? and, can we get rid of the tag? gren グレン 15:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tag removed - the article may or may not be too long, but the tag doesn't say anything helpful to readers. Moved to here: Template:long Enchanter 11:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might be worth going through some of the cited verses, I just clicked 1:7 which was listed as an admonition against becoming a Christian (following Ise), and found The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors. Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray. which seems to be completely unrelated. Sherurcij ^{(talk) (bounties)} 18:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about giving a brief description of each prophet and then giving a list of unlinked references to where they are mentioned ? At the moment, the article just consists mainly of a list of quranic links. MP (talk) 14:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not exactly encyclopedic but I think it's nifty. However, I think it probably should be what you said with a description of who are the known prophets, how many were there... opinions on iffy ones (Alexander, Cyrus), etc. gren グレン 14:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The links should absolutely be unlinked; Wikipedia is not a collection of external links. The unlinked lists of verses should stay in Wikipedia, but not here, where they are too specific; they should move to more specialized articles. Their presence in this overview is apparently stifling real summaries of the prophets, which is what the article is about. Melchoir 10:33, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree wholeheartedly. Currently this article is giving no actual summary information about each prophet and lots of external links - not what I expect from a Wikipedia article, and not meeting the standard requirements. I respectfully suggest making each section a summary of the prophet, and a link to a separate, deeper article on each, which could contain the current external links for reference. Had I the knowledge of the subject to do this myself, I would. Good luck! --Estarriol 10:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a wild idea. If we really care about this issue (and if we have the time), then we can share the work - by this I mean that we each pick a prophet and take up Estarriols suggestion of "making each section a summary of the prophet, and a link to a separate, deeper article on each, which could contain the current external links for reference." How does this sound ? MP (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind that. We can make an article on each prophet and have the links there too. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 17:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've begun work on the above plan; feel free to help out since I think it's pretty obvious what I'm doing. I'm doing section editing, one prophet at a time so others can easily help out. I'll usually delete the index of verses for the prophet I'm working on first. joturner 23:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say "good show" and thank those of you who have been editing this article recently. IMHO, its value as an encyclopedic article has improved immensely. Thanks! --Estarriol 11:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anbiyaa

Since Anbiyaa (though wrongly spelt Ambiyaa) now points here, I added its meaning in Arabic, otherwise the reason of the redirection is not clear. I have also added the Arabic spelling in singular and plural نبي أنبياء, which might be useful. --Filius Rosadis 22:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization?

Throughout these articles, I have seen it written both "Prophet" and "prophet". Which is correct? --OGoncho 09:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the word is in a quote, then leave it as it is, but if it's not a quote, then we should use 'prophet' to keep everything neutral. MP (talk) 11:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The submission site

I don't know if the submission site is the best site to be linking to, considering how they don't agree with the last two verses of the ninth chapter (i.e., their translation only has 127 verses as opposed to the vast majority of Muslims have 129 sites). Pepsidrinka 23:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Index of verses

See the article history to look at the index of verses removed from the article page. joturner 02:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You will add them to each prophet article? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 02:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll continue to do that. I have copied the links to Word so that I don't have to keep adding stress to the server as Pepsidrinka remarked on my talk page. joturner 02:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mission Accomplished

From the fifth longest article on the English Wikipedia to this; the long-anticipated reduction of the article is complete. joturner 05:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! Now we need to improve all the prophet articles. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 16:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a WikiProject is in the works here. joturner 16:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing. Okay so wikiproject Prophets of Islam? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 16:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created it. See your talk page. joturner 17:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great. We may need some more editors too but it won't be a very hard job. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 17:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seth?

Seth#Seth in Islam BTW nice job on the project, very nicely organized. Esquizombi 03:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seth is a prophet of Islam? --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 06:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, hence the question mark. Esquizombi 14:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I don't think it is a name of any of the prophets. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 15:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He was a son of Adam and hence is casually regarded as a prophet of Islam within, IMO the Muslims population living in the West, those who have been exposed to the Biblical prophets. Most scholars do not regard him as a prophet simply because of the fact that the Qur'an does not do so. Using the USC Qur'an search, there is no mention of a "Seth" within the Qur'an. Pepsidrinka 15:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he was the son of Adam. I changed this in the Seth article. I think the hadiths say something about Seth but I can't remember. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 15:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a google search which found a hadith claimed to be in Bukhari but I couldn't find it in the USC-MSA hadith database. It said "Allah sent down one hundred four psalms, of which fifty were sent down to Seth."[1] Variant spellings of Sheeth and Shiith popped up. This site gives some citations to Shiite sources: http://al-islam.org/jesus_shiite_narrations/6.htm I can't help much more than that, maybe you'd be able to find out more. Esquizombi 03:01, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that Abu Dhar hadith too. Yes I think this will help with the short Islam section on the Seth page. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 03:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://muslimhope.com/IslamIndex.htm claims al-Tabari mentions Seth, Jud, Bishr and Jeremiah as prophets. I wouldn't cite to that site, but if anyone has access to Tabari or a translation, that would be good stuff to add I think. This site http://red-sulphur.org/book/print/348 mentions a sufi tradition about Seth. Is Sheikh Muzaffer Ozak al-Jerrahi=Jerrahi? This Shiite text http://www.wofis.com/publications/003/003.pdf mentions Seth as a prophet, and incidentally isn't sure who al-Yasa is, speculating Esau rather than Elisha. Шизомби 03:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kept?

"He was created by Allah but brought to life forty days after being kept." I do not understand what this means. Tom Harrison ^Talk 03:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...as a dry body. The sentence has been fixed. joturner 03:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apostle of God

I think that stub could be redirected here, what do you think? Esquizombi 22:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a merge here or a merge to Muhammad would be appropriate. Perhaps a redirect here with a comment under Muhammad that when the Apostle of God is mentioned, it often times refers to him, though it can refer to any prophet of God. Pepsidrinka 01:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

313 messenger citation?

...25 prophets are mentioned by name in the Qur'an, a Hadith ... mentions ... 124,000 of them in total throughout history

Only a tiny minority are believed to have been sent holy books (such as the Tawrat, Zabur, Injil and the Qur'an), and those prophets are considered "messengers" or rasūl. ... The difference between prophets and messengers is that although all received revelation (wahi) from Allah, the messengers received a divine code of life or "Sharia" in the form of a holy book. It is believed that there were 313 messengers.

I have looked for the original citation of 313 messengers and cannot find it. I searched around Google and found the number 313 to be significant in Sufi, Bahai and minority Shia belief systems. The rest of the search just points to copies of the original Wikipedia article. One of the searches returned a little bit of an explanation:

Sheik ul Mashaik Suleiman Jurumi was one of the Rijalullah which means that he was one of the 313 top ranking Saints in the World. At any given time there are 313 special Saints who represent Allah Almighty in this world. They are the high powered Saints .Sheik ul Mashaik Suleiman Arzurumi was one of these 313 Saints in the world at that time. This number 313 is fixed and does not change as when one passes away another is appointed to make the number 313. This is in keeping with being the representatives of the 313 Mursaleen or Messengers who were the most powerful of the 124,000. Prophets. These 313 were Prophets and Messengers while the rest of them were only Prophets. In the same manner every one of the 313 Awliyas (Saints) have their secrets from these 313 Messengers. source

I find it strange that such a claim would be made and not clearly cited. A search of the Qur'an also does not find this number being mentioned anywhere. The only thing we know for sure is the Qur'an, since it is accepted by all Muslims, mentions 25 prophets by name with many more unnamed. I'm removing the sentence until someone can find a proper citation. 24.7.141.159 13:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A number of sites say 315, some say 313 or 315. Those that do mostly cite to Hanbal, e.g.:

Saint Prophète de Islam a dit: "D'Adam à moi, Dieu a envoyé 124 000 prophètes, 315 parmis eux ont apporté des Messages (livres) divins. " Musnad d'Ibn Hanbal

“On the authority of Abu Dharr, the Messenger of Allah is reported to have said: The Prophets were 124,000 in number while the Messengers were only 315. The first of them was Adam... and the last of them being Muhammad.” (Narrated by Ishaq ibn Rahuya, Ibn Abi Shaiba, Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Amr and Abu Ya’la - quoted from the glosses on al-Masamara (Cairo edition, p.193) as also narrated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih etc etc...[2]

Retconning?

Are there any knowledgeable scholars here willing to address what is essentially a retcon by Islam, in designating Jesus and Adam as prophets of Islam? Perhaps as a device used to achieve legitimacy? I have considered an atheist and even as a novice making a neutral reading of this article I can already detect what must surely have been addressed by historians.

Dear contributor: I am a researcher holding a BA in Islamic and Arabic Studies. The point you are asking about is that I only here to just make "facts" published. Neutrally. I put some references too to support this fact. The "fact" here is that "Islam considers" those persons to be prophets and "Islam names" their message as "Islam". All this is both reported verbally and in writing through the 1400 years since Islam emerged. Documents, archealogical artifacts and historical documents are availble in many countries' libraries for authentication all over the world. like this one, and this wonderful Islamic Manuscripts and archealogical artifacts from Africa, Library of Congress Collection . Research2006 15:28, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The pink elephant in the living room

Qu'ran is just an adapted version of the Judeo-Christian scriptures in circulation in the region around in the 8th Century. Its that simple. Where do you think the list of prophets came from , a winged creature in a cave mysteriously whispering in Muhammad's ear or the Judeo Christians teachings of Syrian Christian missionaries in the region at the time? --CltFn 02:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your perspective on all things Muslim is well known. Kindly refrain from allowing your own pov warp articles. --Irishpunktom\^talk 11:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)...............[reply]

Introduction

This "introduction" is a bloody mess.Timothy Usher 06:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

S.A.W

Should this be included or not? (87.74.34.16 06:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

No. As Wikipedia is for all people - Muslim and non-Muslim - we must remain neutral. Using (saw), (pbuh), or other honorific statement following the names of Islamic prophets (or prophets from any other religion) gives them unnecessary praise with which many people would not agree. As a result, they should not be included. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 08:17, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surah references please

For each of these prophets, could someone please add Surah references to the main passages discussing them? (I understand that the Quran tends to mention a Prophet on several different occasions -- but even a selection of the mentionings would be useful.) And, even hadith references. This would make this article more useful to those just beginning in their study of islam. --144.136.123.112 00:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Imran?

I'm sure Imran is a Prophet, why is he not on the list? He was the father of Maryam and the brother of Zacharia, the second largest Surah in the Qur'an is named after him. But I don't think he is mentioned in the Bible, I maybe wrong. M2k41 22:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize to everyone who is sure that some Quranic figure is a prophet, the number of mentions or the title of Surahs is irrelevant, orthodox Islamic scholars, Imams and sheiks agree on 25 prophets, they also agree that God sent many other prophets but they have no proof within the Quran that they are.

So please when we are talking of prophets in Islam please bring a reference before trying to add some new prophet raraa 13:31, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Wrong

The introduction needs to be corrected. All Messengers are Prophets but not all Prophets are Messengers.--JuanMuslim ^1m 16:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Names

As the article is about prophets of Islam, I was thinking that perhaps when the names of prophets are mentioned, their Arabic versions be used - e.g. Nuh instead of Noah. The subsections titles do the translation for us, so there is also no need to write both versions. Exceptions include Adam and Muhammad (that's all, I think). It has been agreed that Allah be changed to God in Islam articles (I can't remember where this agreement took place, but I'll find out). MP (talk) 10:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest that the names should be conventional English names. The article is currently very unreadable to a Western reader, and confusing. This is English Wikipedia. Cuñado

- Talk 05:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sulayman

Please express your opinion in Talk:Islamic account of Sulayman about renaming Islamic account of Sulayman into Islamic view of Solomon, which was made unilaterally by user:Striver without any previous discussion, who now refuses to discuss the name claiming that "Solomon" is "English name". Mukadderat 16:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]