TwelverShia.net Forum

Nubuwa vs Resalah - the proofs.

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Soccer

Nubuwa vs Resalah - the proofs.
« on: September 18, 2020, 08:14:31 PM »
Proof 1: Clear conveying and manifesting the truth

The clear conveying with emphasis on it being clear, suggests, that it's not really about the Quran, since the Quran is recited by Mohammad (s) but is not his own words, and hence there is no obligation on making anything clear in this regard.   The emphasis on clear conveying suggests it's about Mohammad (s) teaching the truth in a clear manifest manner and making sure God's message is delivered to the mind of the masses.  Also the Quran distinguishes between reciting it (Quran) and clarifying it both which is upon God to do. Also, the emphasis on clear, suggests more subtle teachings although are a message, is not what is meant by the role as a Messenger or the messages, the messages themselves refers to what should be conveyed to the masses in clear terms with clear proofs.  The Quran has in it a  clear message, don't get me wrong, but the Messenger plays no role in making that clear by Quran own words, rather, it's the words he speaks that clarifies it. This suggests the role as a Messenger is to clarify to the masses the truths that God wants them to.  This is while what Mohammad (s) receives of knowledge and wisdom is much more than he can convey to the masses, and must be layered in Quran and Sunnah for the seekers of knowledge to seek. 

Proof 2: Suratal Hajj - "not from a Rasool nor a Nabi (or maybe I have this inversed)"

The Quranic verse in this regard in Suratal Hajj grammar wise means these two are not interchangeable. As someone pointed out in the other thread, to receive a message the purpose is to convey it. Also the word "arsal" is used for both, so they are both sent.  It's not the case there is a Nabi who is not sent or a Rasool not sent. Again, it doesn't make sense to define Nubuwa as in reception of the message nor a Messenger as is the Nubuwa is the message. This would make them interchangeable, but they are not.  Again, it makes more sense to look at God's book as not the message of the Messenger, but rather, what he has received and channeled from God to humanity in form of scripture. And it makes sense then to see the conveying role of a Messenger as in clarifying the truth which his role and compliments his Nubuwa (the Quran with respect to Mohammad (S)) but it's two separate roles.

Proof 3:  Verse of Ghadeer declaration

5:67 suggests something needs to be clarified that Quran already does and that Mohammad (s) already clarified, but has become unclear in the minds of masses, and that Mohammad (s) has to guarantee is conveyed to all generations.  To be simply saying you have to convey the Quran to convey the Quran, jump if you didn't jump you didn't jump, frankly, is a stupid statement.  This suggests Resalah is something that is on top of Quran or compliments Quran. Historically, this was about Ghadeer, and despite Ali (a) being in Quran and Sunnah before that, Allah (swt) was emphasizing on Mohammad (s) to make a historical emphasis so to be conveyed generation to generation, because blindness to Quran can take place with respect to the position of Ali (a) and Ahlulbayt (a).

Proof 4: There needs to be a definition purely about channeling of Scripture.

Mohammad (s) roles are emphasized in Quran, there needs to be a word, about the function of receiving scripture from God and handing to the people. I argue that is Nubuwa.  There also needs to be a word that is about clarifying the truth and manifesting it, as did Musa (a) and Harun (s) before they were given the Tablets, and this I argue about their role as Messengers.  Also, simply defining the messages as any words of truth is not fair definition. There is a lot of truth that Mohammad (s) knows and wishes to teach, and did teach some people, but there has to be a word for the role of manifesting the truth in a way that reaches the mind of the masses.  This role is the difficult role - because - say someone like me received a holy book from God, I might have the capacity to write it down and publish it or something, it's a whole different thing making the truth of it reach the minds of people.  That takes effort. The only time a Nabi doesn't need to be Rasool then would be when the message is clear in the minds of people and people are not going back to ignorance - so then God can reveal a scripture that is not about the basics but is continuing to communicate to them and guide them or confirm them and give them good news.

Proof 5: The Mahdi and ultimatum.

The Quran talks about ultimatum humans will face again, accept God's Messenger or be destroyed, and this ultimatum and term only comes with a Messenger that manifests to them. Since there is no more Nubuwa, the definition of Rasool with respect to the Mahdi, is not about revealing a scripture, but rather the scripture he must work with is the Quran.  God only destroys and punishes in this sense when a Messenger delivers the clear conveyance and comes with clear proofs.  The waiting for this day is clear in Quran and it's a promise binding on God.

There is more proofs but I believe these are sufficient.  I will add more after the dialogue with respect to these.
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3632 Views
Last post July 08, 2015, 03:29:12 AM
by Ebn Hussein
1 Replies
584 Views
Last post May 14, 2017, 07:43:43 PM
by Rationalist
10 Replies
490 Views
Last post August 10, 2020, 12:01:30 AM
by Soccer
0 Replies
115 Views
Last post September 06, 2020, 06:55:17 PM
by Soccer