Could it be that Sri Ram, Sri Krishna, Gautama Buddha, Zoroaster and Confucius were Prophets of God? This is not a new question and has been asked many times before. As I argue further that while we cannot proclaim strictly based on the Quran and Hadees (as they have not been mentioned by name) yet based on these very sources we tend to move towards possibly accepting them as such.
There is a well-known Hadees that there have been 1,24,000 Prophets sent by God in the history of mankind. But in the Quran only 25 have been mentioned by name. When this is joined with the Quranic verse that “to every nation We have sent Messengers” various interesting corollaries emerge. But before that let us go through a few verses of the Quran on this topic.
And there is a Guide for every people (13:8)
There is not a people to whom a warner has not been sent (35:25)
We sent not an apostle except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people, in order to make (things) clear to them. (14:4)
And, indeed We have sent Messengers before you; of some of them We have related to you their story and of some We have not related to you their story (40:78)
The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believes in God, His angels, His books, and His apostles. “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His apostles. ( 2:285)
It is very clear from these that wherever there was human habitation Prophets were sent. Further it is very clear that obviously they spoke in the language of the people to whom they were sent. It is also clear that only a few have been told in the Quran and others have not been mentioned. It is but natural that the All Merciful God would endow every section of humanity with His Guidance.
The above understanding has been a classical understanding though not that well understood by the common people. The 25 Prophets mentioned by name in the Quran were all from the region of Middle East where the initial audience of Quran was present. They have been mentioned as part of moral stories that are around them in the Quran since the people there already had heard about many of these Prophets. But at the same time the Quran repeatedly mentioned that these are only some of the Prophets.
So what about the rest of the world? We know that in the Indian subcontinent and in China each have had around 20% of the human population for quite some time. Similarly there has been human habitation in the Far East, Africa, in Australia (through the aborogines), South America (Mayan and Incatha civilization), native Indians of North America, the ancient Romans and so on. Going by the Quranic verses it is quite apparent that Prophets of God would have been sent to all of these places. (See the last section of this post about the human journey through the ages as understood by the genographic project)
Again a Prophet appearing in India would have spoken Sanskrit, Pali, Bahmi, Telugu, Tamil and so on. In China he would have spoken Chinese. In Africa Swahili, Zulu, Malagasy, etc. In Korea or Japan it would have been Korean or Japanese and so on and so forth. The stupendous variety of the human disposition and celebration of the same is at various places in the Quran. The below verse clearly states that a multi-cultural world is a part of God’s plan.
“O people! Behold, We have created you from a male and a female and have made you into nations and tribes to that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.” (49:13)
Similarly though there are only four divine books that have been mentioned by name in the Quran -Bible, Torah, Zuboor and Quran – there is a Hadees that there have been around 110 divine books in the history of mankind. The same point is corroborated by these Quranic verses
Say: “We believe in God, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to God (in Islam).” (2:136)
Without doubt it is (announced) in the mystic books of former peoples. (26:196)
…For each period is a book (revealed). (13:38)
Based on all this understanding, from the Islamic viewpoint, there is absolutely no doubt that many Prophets came to India and some would have had books assigned to them. The point of contention can never be that whether any Prophets came to India. The point is only that who those Prophets were.
In a place like the Indian subcontinent, which has had around 20% of the world population for quite some time, there would definitely had been many Prophets. If there are 1,24,000 Prophets throughout history then definitely there would had been thousands in the Indian subcontinent alone. The Hadees citing the number of Prophets is sometimes mentioned to be relatively weak but there is another Hadees in which the Prophet said that the club of Messengers is like a splendid palace. The palace was completely ready with only one brick missing and he came as the last brick which completed the palace. The analogy of the Prophet to the club of Messengers to a splendid palace is pretty apt as a palace would need thousands of brick to stand instead of just a handful.
Maulana Sayyid Sulaiman Nadwi, in his book Seeratun Nabi, wrote “According to the teachings of the Prophet, it is necessary to believe that in countries such as China, Iran or India there have appeared Prophets before the advent of Prophet Muhammad. No Muslim can deny to the people in these lands, the truth of the faiths, ascribed to the mentors venerated by them” (emphasis mine). Shah Waliullah, the noted theologian from the subcontinent, had the opinion that the Quranic reference to the Sabaeen community was in fact a reference to the Hindus of Aryan origin. Also many Indian ulama in the past have accepted Hindus as the ‘People of the Book’.
I am making an attempt to see the possible Prophethood of highly venerated figures in Hinduism. Some Muslims may ask how does it matter since by the logic of progressive revelation we are anyway following Islam and supersede the earlier revelations. The point is that whatever one may personally believe there is another point in the Quran where God says that ‘make no distinction between one and another of His apostles’. So whatever one may believe in from the Islamic perspective, it becomes important that we take care to refer the possible Prophets with respect and understand that the diversity of religious traditions around the world would have had divine origins.
This is important in having a better understanding, inter-faith dialogue and tolerant and respectful coexistence with various people across the globe. We do not agree on many things about Hazrat Isa (Jesus Christ) but we give him the highest level of respect. Similarly in the case of Hazrat Musa (Moses) we do not agree with the Jews on many things yet we accord him the highest respect. This facilitates relationship and co-existence with divergent religious viewpoints. Even if we disagree with others yet we respectfully agree to disagree.
Based on this if we try to understand the different religious traditions it is important to deconstruct a few things. We need to go beyond our fixation on languages and move towards a deeper meaning.
The classical Islamic understanding is that Islam was not “founded” by Prophet Muhammad but instead revived by him for the last time with a new Law. In fact we believe that he proclaimed the Primordial Religion back out of the moral confusion that had crept everywhere. We believe that all the Prophets preached Islam and the followers were Muslim. There are two words here that need to be looked into. “Islam” and “Muslim”. Both are Arabic words. “Islam” means ‘submission’ or ‘peace’ and “Muslim” means ‘one who submits’. But now what would the name of this Primordial Religion had been when a Prophet was preaching in India or China or Africa or Korea? Not “Islam” because that is the Arabic word and the Quran itself says that the Prophets preached in the language of the people. There should be some corresponding words in those languages.
Similarly as I have earlier argued, the name of God would not be Allah as that name of the Almighty was prevalent in the Middle East alone. He would be called by other names in the various languages that proclaim His Omnipotence and Beauty.
Prophet Muhammad said ‘I came to clarify morality’ and the Quran asks him “Say: ‘I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the apostles…” (46:9). Both point to the fact that the Prophet came to revive the same Primordial Religion but with a new Law.
So who could possibly had been the Prophets in India? My disclaimer is that I am just putting forward some observations for further thought. One of the Hadees of the Prophet is that there are three signs of Prophets; first they worked as shepherds in their childhood, second that they married (with perhaps the only exception of Jesus Christ/Hazrat Isa) and third that they used perfume. Their working as shepherds during their childhood was God’s way of building leadership capabilities for their later life role.
One of the names that come up immediately is of Sri Krishna. From the Hindu traditions we know that he worked as a shepherd where he would take care of the cows. We also know that he had various marriages. On the third point I am not aware. Over and above this we know that there is the Holy Book of Hindus, the Bhagwat Gita that is linked to him. One may say that the Hindus consider him to be God incarnate so how could he be a Prophet. That point from the Muslim point of view does not take anything away as the Christians have a similar belief about Jesus Christ and yet we consider him as a Prophet and accord him the highest respect.
So is it that what I stated above really a new thought? Not exactly. When I was a kid, I heard a speech of the world renowned Nadwi Islamic scholar and a Padma Vibhushan awardee, Maulana Ali Miyan, in which he mentioned that Sri Krishna and Sri Ramchandra could have been Prophets of God but we cannot say for sure as they are not mentioned by name in the Quran but we should take their names with respect and there is a good possibility that they actually were Prophets.
Shaykh Faraz Rabbani, a Sunni Path scholar, wrote in the context of the possible prophethood of Sri Krishna, Gautam Buddha and Confucius “It is very probable that many of the great religious figures of other traditions were true prophets”. Mazhar Jan-i-Jana, an eighteenth century theologian and mystic, regarded both Sri Krishna and Sri 
Ram as Prophets of God and Vedas as divinely inspired. The same we can say of Maulana Hasrat Mohani’s thoughts (who was a Deobandi scholar and a member of India’s constituent assembly) whose annual Haj pilgrimage never completed until he visited Barsana in Brinda Ban for Radha’s darshan. He wrote various poetries in praise of Sri Krishna’s childhood. Also some ulama in the famous Firangi Mahal of Lucknow held Sri Krishna in great respect.
I found a Hadees but I am not sure of its authenticity, as I could not relate it to a well-known collection of Hadees. It claims that Prophet Muhammad said “Kanna filhindhi nabiyyun asvadhul lavni ismuhoo Kahina” meaning “A Prophet appeared in India. He was black in complexion. His name was Kahina”. This is reported to be mentioned in the book ‘Firdowsul Akbar’ by Hazrat Thylami. If this is true, which I could not find a way of ascertaining, it quite clearly mentions about Sri Krishna who had a dark complexion and was in his childhood lovingly called kanha.
Similarly there would have been many more such personalities throughout the Indian landscape that will give similar indications. I read one paper, which argued that Prophet Nuh (Noah) was a Prophet in India. It is interesting to note here the similarity of his with Manu mentioned in Hindu traditions. The descriptions of the rain and the Great Flood described for Manu and Prophet Nuh are strikingly similar in their details. As so is the similarity in the names Nuh and Manu.
Some Muslim scholars have been of the view that the person mentioned as Dhul’ Kifl in the Quran is actually a reference to Gautam Buddha as the word means ‘of Kifl’ and since the phonetic sound ‘pa’ is not part of Arabic language it is actually a reference to ‘of Kapil’ which is the shortened form of Kapilvastu. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was one of the prominent scholars who was of this view and he so mentioned in his Quranic commentary Tarjiman ul-Quran. Similarly many scholars have given reasons as to why Gautam Buddha’s teaching focussed on personal behaviour instead of focussing on God.
There is another name that I have often found linked together which again I am not sure of but just mentioning as something that I observed but I dont find more basis to it. It is the mention of Brahma with Abraham or Ibrahim. The more striking part is that Sri Brahma’s wife is Saraswati and Prophet Ibrahim’s wife was Sarah. If you look for the name Saraswati you would find that it is actually the join of Saras and wati where wati means woman. Though we know that Hazrat Ibrahim lived in the Middle East yet I mention here something which I observed striking.
I believe many of these thoughts that have been explored in quite detail in the past history of our land need to be highlighted to increase our understandings of each other. Islam has often been accused of not respecting diversity. Is the concept of plurality really alien to Islam? I leave with a few verses of the Quran as some food for thought. These are the normative verses of the Quran on plurality which are ignored by the extremists and the critics who both pick up very contextual and specific verses from the Quran and make an offensive attempt to use them in a normative discourse. I can hardly think of a text more than a millennium old, which would be so liberal in this thought at a time when the thought of racial supremacy was the norm.
Mankind was one single nation, and God sent messengers with glad tidings and warnings (2:213)
Unto every one of you We have appointed a [different] law and way of life. And if God had so willed, He could surely have made you all one single community: but [He willed it otherwise] in order to test you by means of what He has vouchsafed unto you. [Vie], then, with one another in doing good works. Unto God you all must return; and then He will make you truly understand all that on which you were wont to differ. (5:48)
If it had been your Lord’s will, they all would have believed – all who are on earth. Will you, then, compel the people, against their will, to believe? (10:99)
For had God so willed, He could surely have made you all one single community; however, He lets go astray that wills [to go astray], and guides aright him that wills [to be guided]; and you will surely be called to account for all that you ever did! (16:93)
And had thy Sustainer so willed, He could surely have made all humanity one single community: but [he willed it otherwise, and so] they continue to hold divergent views. (11:118)
And do not abuse those whom they call upon besides God, lest exceeding the limits they should abuse God out of ignorance. Thus have We made fair seeming to every people their deeds; then to their Lord shall be their return, so He will inform them of what they did. (6:108)
1,24,000 Messengers – Making sense of the number
If we really believe that Reason and Revelation take us to the Ultimate Truth together then this rejoinder may help us further.
The human genographic project which is tracking the genetic footprint of human migration through history has thrown up some very interesting results. It shows that the humans lived first in Africa and started their migration from that abode some 60,000 years ago after already living in that region for more than 100,000 years. But then how did they move to such such wide-apart land masses as Americas and Australia which are separated by oceans. The answer is the continuous tectonic plate shft that is happening.
As the picture shows below, the land masses of Americas and Asia were joined together near Alaska and the Australian land mass was just 100 km away from today’s Sumatra and that was intervened by various small islands. This as well as the lower sea levels around 50,000 years ago allowed the humans to move throughout the earth land mass leaving Antarctica. But after that these land masses broke and shifted away from each other.
(Source: https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html)
The first set of migrations happened on two paths taking humans across the Middle East and way upto Australia as early as around 55,000 years ago. When the sea levels rose and the land masses separated the Australian section of the humanity was separated altogether from the rest of the world upto modern times. The second migration happened around 35,000 years ago with the humans moving across to most of Europe and Asia and going as far as the cold areas of Siberia. The next significant achievement was the migration of humans from the Siberian area to the Alaskan area around 20,000 years ago which again got separated from the rest of the land humanity when the ice age receeded and the ocean levels rose.
These numbers may appear just numbers but to really fathom this extent just imagine that according to this study the last 2,000 years of human presence is just 1% of the total time humans have been on earth! These sections of humanity kept on moving searching for new lands with abundant hunting and food opportunities. At the same time they would have had their spiritual lives guided by various Great Souls. It takes some contemplation to understand the complexity of this journey of our ancestors who went bare foot (when horses were not yet domesticated) and took 40,000 years to cover an area which we can today in a flight of fifteen hours!
Asif @ 56 & 57: WELL SAID!!! Or should I be saying it to Baba Bulle Shah?
____
manik,
I think our definitions of modern man differ a little.
Wiki’s notes on Anthropology reveal various divisions & nomenclature like, Archaic Homo Sapiens, Early Homo Sapiens, Homo Sapiens, Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
Other related evolutionary divisions mentioned are Paleolithic, Mesolithic & Neolithic.
What is important to note is that bipedalism, usage of tools, hunting gathering etc. were common features throughout this Evolution. The skull of Homo Sapiens Sapiens too continued to change & habits etc. too changed.
Cro Magnon man, one of the main types of Homo Sapiens lived until 10000 ago. Then that type died.
Wouldn’t it follow that the modern type of surviving species is therefore 10,000 years old?
Assuming that my postulate above is flawed, (It could well be. I’m no expert.) you may want to consider the Eras that I mentioned.
I doubt if you would call the hunting-gathering, stone-tool wielding human of 15,000 years ago (pre-Neolithic), Modern Man…
It is the Neolithic Era which is known for animal domestication & agriculture, and this Era began only 10000 years ago. Settlement was to begin later and the earliest known civilization was still about 3000 years away!!!
That was my understanding (from my school History, now hurriedly verified on Wiki) of Modern Man. Possibly our definitions are different.
Metal tools were to happen even later, in the Chalcolithic Era. So metal arrows, swords etc. were probably not around. It is therefore unlikely that “Dwarka” existed 9000 years ago!!!
____
I DID NOT say the Zora~ians buried their dead. Please re-read my comment.
The other desert/forest logic you’re giving is again PURE CONJECTURE…. I thought we’d transitioned to talking facts?
___
Ram,
In a HUGE hurry. Will try & reply to your comment tomorrow (if I’m allowed on the comp, it being a Saturday), else Monday.
Regards.
Ram,
Back as promised.
There’s no real need to mock my desire to seek proof. I agree with you almost totally on the counts you’ve mentioned.
1. I’m personally, more inclined to believe Darwin’s theory of Evolution than that of Biblical Creation (which could be at best symbolic).
However, I am told (I haven’t read it for myself) that the Old Testament contains a genealogical record of the Abrahmic family tree. It’s said to be a rather dull read, the X was son of Y, who was son of Z type, but such documentation is said to exist.
If one chooses to dismiss those texts, on account of them being religious texts, one may want to refer to a (citation deprived, but useful to those interested in greater research) section from Wiki on his conjectured historicity; and to various historians (Jewish & non) about Moses.
One may choose to dismiss these as well, but the references to them (as men & not god) in 3 different religions, 1 of them differing even in place of origin, too seems to suggest existence.
So while I’m inclined to semi-agree with you up to this point, I found your preposterous, your proposition that their being imaginary figures will put the very religions in the realm of mythology! How can a religion become mythology??? A religion may have mythology associated with it & indeed does, but this is the first time I’ve heard anyone refer to religions as mythology. If you’d have said, “based on mythology”, that I’ve heard before.
I do wonder why you didn’t bring up Jesus’ hisoricity, or Muhammad’s….?
All that said, I remain disinclined to believe anything that doesn’t seem to have been corroborated amply by historians, anthropologists or archeologists (& other scientists).
Apart from historians & proof, the other distinguishing factor in my mind about History & Myth/Legend is whether or not it is in the realm of “believabile to my mind”. So while I can believe in the existence of Abraham, the existence of Archangel Gabriel is a rather grey area for me. Ditto Zeus, Jupiter, Indra, Eros, Cupid, Kama, Aphrodite, Venus, Thor etc…
That is my distinction between History & Mythology.
2. Who said the Indus Valley civilization didn’t exist? It did, there were stories from the locals about an ancient city, there was a (rather late) dig & they were unearthed.
The real search for Atlantis that you mention hasn’t come up with anything yet. It’s been spoken of for well over 2000 years, but no discovery yet!!!
In contrast the Indus Valley civilization was discovered without many references in popular literature! Or are there any that you can quote, that I don’t know of…??
Men have searched for Noah’s Ark, The Lost Ark, The Holy Grail for centuries. Legends about them abound, but we don’t have conclusive evidence about them yet! So we hold off believing until such time!
Trust me, I will be more excited than most people at the discovery of places like Atlantis, Dwarka, Hastinapur, Indraprastha etc. etc., since I’m so interested in History & Archeology! But until proof is found, I must put all of it in the realm of Mythology! I’ll be only too happy to be proved wrong!!!
You may want to read through these two very important articles:
Pseudoarchaeology
&
Marine archaeology in the Gulf of Cambay
3. Like I explained in my comment right above this one, I was referring to Modern Man & not prehistoric man. My failure to specify that made my statement appear flawed. One can argue that anthropologically Modern Man has been around for much longer, but to me Modern Man = Civilized Man.
Modernity is an ongoing process. And therefore, for the purposes of this discussion, my definition seems fairly accurate, as what is being disputed here is the “modernity” of man, in 9000 year old “Dwarka”! (Like I said before, being proved wrong, is a vastly more exciting prospect than being proved right, but as with “life in outer space”, scepticism is my preferred stance.)
Yes, I’ve heard of Mehrgarh, but you will find that your statement about it is at loggerheads with logic: 10,000 years is > 7,000 years! Your statement seems to suggest that Mehrgarh predates my 10,000 year claim.
Am I confused or are you??? It may help to re-read your statement (as I missed earlier), before hitting “Submit” to avoid creating such confusion!!
I’m with you in the rest of what you say, except for one little point. The secularism that common Indians practise is in grave danger today. WE, the People of India, MUST defend it from the forces that seek to usurp it!
Ram,
A few more links that you may want to refer to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_of_the_Covenant#Fate_of_the_Ark
I just want to illustrate that blind faith exists everwhere, but a scientific mind always questions.
Dear Opinionated,
I was very impressed to read about your conformity with my belief that there is a lot of ‘blind faith’ to contend with to practice any religion ‘by the book’. Therefore I always take religion as a ‘cultural tradition’ rather than the final ‘word’. There is a saying coined by Hindu preachers for the ‘thinking’ people who always asked a lot of questions, for which there were no satisfactory answers. ‘Biswase miley Hari, torquay bahu dwoor’ [you can find Hari by blind faith, by questioning you would be far from Him]. But then science has come a long way and throws up a lot of questions, especially from scientific minds like yours. I would like to meet you sometime if I can! I think we are on the same wave length!
Well, you are one of the very few reasonable guys on this blog, definitely shouldn’t be mocking. Coming to Abraham and moses, 1.old testament mentions family tree, so does ramayana and mahabharata or for that matter may be even for Indra. That doesn’t count.2. Founders of the other two religions were aware of old testament, so that doesn’t count too.Well rama and krishna are mentioned as men too, but in Hinduism men and god are simply different states of conscious, so men (or women)can be gods(like budhahood). You are right ,I meant religions based on mythology. Mohammad’s existence is as much established as that of Buddha, so didn’t question. Jesus’s is in doubt, but it is not as bad as that of abraham or moses or rama and krishna.I didn’t really get Your distinction between history and mythology , needs elaboration. do you beleive moses and his crossing red sea part? Now I mentioned indus valley civilization to say that evidence keeps coming up over time for different things, something may come up for these too including Atlantis, for which many skeptics may see no need for further research.So though we can debate on the authenticity of these accounts, we can’t completely brush them aside, simply because the archeology guys still didn’t get to digging the 10th layer in the right place. Blind faith is something to be discouraged ,no doubt but, I have no problem with useful imagination,especially if not proven otherwise. Take, harmful superstitions, they definitely are of concern and come under a different category of proven to be wrong and are based solely on blind faith.As your links indicate, History and archealogy are not some perfect sciences, but can be manipulated and are highly politicised.how seriously we take these is another issue.Anyway good to know the gulf of cambay findings are seriously doubted.
Mehrgarh is dated as 7000BC, not 7000 yrs old. That makes it 9000 yrs old as those of dwaraka. Now the mehrgarh were settled agriculturists, that is known and also had contacts with afghans, Iranians and central asians.
My beleif is that king named krishna did exist and was well liked by people and some of the incidents as mentioned in mahabharata did take place and
mahabharata is a story of him and other kings told in an exaggerated way to make the point clear. Also,I think Rama or Krishna are not founders of Hinduism, so ther not being real doesn’t really change much(the message or the way one can lead Dharmic life). But, wonder what impact would such a case for abraham or moses would have on abrahamic religions in general and Judaism in particular.
Secularism in India is definitely under attack, and it is going to get worse. Indians are far more religion and caste conscious now than they were in my childhood. I think when individuals feel insecure, they tend to over emphasise their group identities. Once one group does that , others feel thretened and do the same. Many Indians are now richer and more optimistic about their future yet, very insecure in global markets,rapidly changing culture and add to that terror attacks and riots.
It is not really necessary to prove the historicity of each individual.
What is important is to assess whether we can draw positively on the behavior and philosophy of the individuals concerned.
For example, even if Adam were to not have existed, his approaching the “forbidden tree” is an indication of the spirity of inquiry of human beings, and definitely this spirit of inquiry is what has resulted in the progress of mankind.
Similarly, Abraham being ready to sacrifice his son is indicative of a spirit of sacrifice.
After reading the text of Deuteronomy I was very surprised to read Moses [ the nabi Musa of the Muslims!] saying repeatedly, “The Lord your God to the Israelites.” What I realised is that ‘The God of the Jews’ was like a tribal Deity of the Israelites. Just read some of the lines below and you will realise that He was not perceived as a universal God by any stretch of the imagination, rather as a partisan God of the Jews only, who followed Moses. In fact in one of the commandments from God, Moses says to his people that He will be jealous if you pray to other gods. I can’t help thinking of the God of the Jewish people, just like the God of the Bengalis for e.g., ‘Ma Kaali’. Hear are some of the Lines from Deuteronomy. God, in fact helped in slaughtering of the men, women and children of number of cities captured from Sihon, king of Heshbon!!
24 ‘Arise, set out, and pass through the valley of Arnon. Look! I have given Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land into your hand; begin to take possession and contend with him in battle. 25 ‘This day I will begin to put the dread and fear of you upon the peoples everywhere under the heavens, who, when they hear the report of you, will tremble and be in anguish because of you.’
“But Sihon king of Heshbon was not willing for us to pass through his land; for the LORD your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, in order to deliver him into your hand, as he is today. 31 “The LORD said to me, ‘See, I have begun to deliver Sihon and his land over to you. Begin to occupy, that you may possess his land.’
32 “Then Sihon with all his people came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz. 33 “The LORD our God delivered him over to us, and we defeated him with his sons and all his people. 34 “So we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed the men, women and children of every city. We left no survivor. 35 “We took only the animals as our booty and the spoil of the cities which we had captured.
In the following lines Moses seems to be asking his people to compare his God, the Lord God of Israel to other Gods that existed at the time.
“Indeed, ask now concerning the former days which were before you, since the day that God created man on the earth, and inquire from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything been done like this great thing, or has anything been heard like it? 33 “Has any people heard the voice of God speaking from the midst of the fire, as you have heard it, and survived? 34 “Or has a god tried to go to take for himself a nation from within another nation by trials, by signs and wonders and by war and by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm and by great terrors, as the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes?
In the following lines from the Deutronomy, Old Testament, Moses is preparing some safe cities for the people of his Clan who may slay some one!
Then Moses set apart three cities across the Jordan to the east, 42 that a manslayer might flee there, who unintentionally slew his neighbor without having enmity toward him in time past; and by fleeing to one of these cities he might live:
I am confused! If the God of Moses was so partisan towards the Jewish people, how can He be the same God of the Arabs and other races?
“Hear, O Israel! You are crossing over the Jordan today to go in to dispossess nations greater and mightier than you, great cities fortified to heaven, 2 a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim, whom you know and of whom you have heard it said, ‘Who can stand before the sons of Anak?’ 3 “Know therefore today that it is the LORD your God who is crossing over before you as a consuming fire. He will destroy them and He will subdue them before you, so that you may drive them out and destroy them quickly, just as the LORD has spoken to you.
http://nasb.scripturetext.com/deuteronomy/4.htm
The Jews have always regarded themselves as the chosen people. This is why they believe that God is exclusively theirs.
The Jews reject Prophet Muhammad and Jesus. The Christians accept Jesus, but reject Prophet Muhammad. The Muslims accept both. This is how the levels of tolerance and acceptance expand as you move across the communities.
I agree with you. The Jews concidered themselves the chosen people. But then they were chosen people by their Lord The God of the Isrealites. There were gangs of decoits in Bengal who concidered themselves the chosen people of Ma Kali. They even performed human sacrifice to please her. So how does being the chosen ones make any difference?
Even if the other nations who the Jews fought with beleived in Idol worship, what kind of an Universal God help them in exterminating men, women and children? Indians do beleive in Idol worship, although are just the images/symbols of Mythological Theological Supreme Beings. So would the Lord God of the Jews help them to kill our men, women and children just because they were the chosen ones and not us?
@Manik ghoshal:- I did not get your point in an attempt of going through your last comment roughly, though let me pen down some lines hurriedly.
I think you are questioning the autheticity of such verses in OT which seems incomprehensible to your rational thinking. But let me interpret it for you. The verses cant be discarded as illogical outrightly coz they doesnt completely contradict sensible explanation. Here God is commanding a certain tribe of people to submit themselves to the guidance of God, for that God has send a messenger(Mosses) to the tribe, to forbid them what is wrong and invite them to the true path of God. Now in the attempt of getting guidance from God they confront many nations ruled by oppressive regimes and sinful people who are well equipped and stronger than jews, so God is only trying to increase their morale by inspiring them in the form of verses of OT. As far as the term ‘partisan’ is concerned, God is partisan about anyone who is right and who obeys God. Dont interpret the verses to think God is tribal or racist, but this is just a war between good and evil, where jews were on the right side guided by Mosses and other people were on the wrong side. It just happened as point of coincidence that jews were on the right side, as had it been for any other tribe to be on the right side, God would had definitely taken the side of that tribe. Though there may be some verses in OT which could not be explained in the light of reason, still what matters is how we interpret it unless it is very clear about the meaning.
Milind,
First of all being loyal or believing in some prophet has nothing to do with tolerance. Plenty of jews and most christians have proved to be very tolerant. The countries they live in are usually secular and constitution ensures equality for all.
and muslims too believe they are chosen, they are the followers of the true and last prophet. So they don’t accept jesus as the one with final word. acceptable only to the extent jesus’s words are in conformity with what koran says.
I don’t believe in prophethood itself so, should i be branded as intolerant just for that reason? How about atheists, they reject all , are they be automatically declared intolerant?
My point is absolutely clear. It is wrong to exterminate all the people, men, women and children of any race, or community, be they right or wrong. The Children were innocent wern’t they. More over I dont beleive all people in any Kingdoms can be evil. From Israeli point of veiw Hamas could be bad, but not all the palestinian people. So if Moses and his Lord God of Israel helps in genocide, I feel then that was like a crusade and the Jews [and Moses] have been paid back during Hitler’s regime. Any people who do harm to other innocent people, especially women and Children got to have it coming.
So beware others who have and are planning genocide. You have it coming! The Jews did Jihad with the help of their God, and see what they had to face over millenia.
Ram,
Atheists are remarkably intolerant. Unlike agnostics who really couldn’t care much either way, if you are a believer atheists get on to your case in a manner that would put the most ardent proselytizer to shame.
Read Richard Dawkins or listen to some of the DMK people in the South and you will see the contempt in which they hold believers.
If you don’t believe in prophethood, that is your personal choice – as long as you do not deride others for believing in it.
Although the idea is sweet sounding but, Why Lord Shri Ram and Shri Krishna can not be prophets of India:
The Vishnu incarnation idea is suggestive of the theory of evolution and Man’s social progress. Beginning with Matsya, the fish; followed by the amphibious tortoise, Kurma the mammalian boar Varaha; followed by the half beast half man Narasimha, to the dwarf Vamana, the axe wielder Parasurama and the warrior king Rama, the cultivator Balarama and the cowherd Krishna to the enlightened Buddha. The last incarnation Kalki is yet to appear.
Do you see the incarnation of Lord Vishnu have nothing to do with the Prophets of Abrahamic religions but they are suggesting the evolution of mankind.
Niceguy,
There is a theory which links the Kalki avatar to Prophet Muhammad. It talks of his mother being Sumana (which apparently means peaceful in Sanskrit), while the Prophet’s mother was Amina (which means peaceful in Arabic), and also his father’s name being something in Sanskrit which is equivalent to Abdullah (Slave of God) in Arabi. There are references to to concepts similar to the Prophet’s seclusion at Hira as well as to his steed Boraq.
However, I am not too sure whether all this is believable or is an attempt to show the similarity of the religions
Milind Kher
“If you don’t believe in prophethood, that is your personal choice – as long as you do not deride others for believing in it.”
—Does the same logic applies vice versa?
Amit,
People are free to believe whatever they like, as long as their belief does not harm other human beings.
People like the Ku Klux Klan, for instance are not entitled to their beliefs. I didn’t quite understand why you posed that question.
Aam Insaan,
Typed your name as Amit. Pl excuse the typo. The comment still remains the same
Milind,
The KKK is definitely entitled to their beliefs. What makes you think they aren’t? That doesn’t mean they can’t avoid the consequences of their belief according to the laws of the land, reasonable restrictions on freedoms applying.
I think Amit meant “whether one can deride the Prophets and take cover under freedom of speech and expression”? Basically, can one question another person’s Holy Grail and not be harmed by a person or group? Basic premise behind MF Hussain, Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, the banned book on Shivaji, the Da Vinci Code movie ban, the “Jo Bole So Nihal” episode, Karunanidhi’s “Lord Rama wasn’t an engineer and Rama Setu wasn’t built by him” talk and countless other daily “newsworthy” items. Certainly freedom of expression isn’t only about political correctness and sweet talk, is it?
For instance, I may not believe in the concept of Prophethood and I may ridicule someone who believes so. Does that mean the other person can attack me physically?
Moreover the reasonable restrictions are to be defined by the State and not by arbitrary special interest groups. For example, the culture goons have no business attacking lovers on Valentine’s Day. Only the police or other arm of the state may do so
provided the reasonable restrictions are defined so.
Almost the whole Fundamental Rights section in our Constitution is directed to the State and not to individuals if you look at the wordings. (“The State shall not do this or that”, “Nothing prevents the state…” and so on).