Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Why Mohammed told He was the last prophet?
Rohit: Swami! In Quran, it is stated that Mohammed is not father of any one.
Further it is stated there that He is the last Prophet sent by God.
What is the inner meaning of this, if this verse is genuine statement?

Swami: Oh Rohit! You have picked up very crucial concept of spirituality.
This statement is original and therefore it entered your mind.
The inner meaning of this verse is based on the angle, which you take
For the word Mohammed, here the word Mohammed stands only
For the external human form and not the internal eternal God.
Islam does not agree to the concept of human incarnation.

When Bible says the word Jesus, it means the internal eternal God.
When the Gita says Krishna, He means the same eternal God.
Because both Christianity and Hinduism believe God in flesh.
We need not criticise Islam for not believing Human Incarnation,
Because the main idea is that there is always misuse of this concept.
The human beings claim themselves as human incarnations.
Every human being following the philosophy of Advaita in Hinduism
Feels that it is the Lord, this is very dangerous extrapolation.
Even devils and demons claimed themselves as eternal God
By doing certain miracles after achieving some super powers.

All these dangerous misleading cases harm the devotees.
In the name of idol worship also, priests have exploited devotees.
They keep idols in front and rob the wealth of devotees.
To avoid all these misleading misused concepts, Islam sorted
To the worship of formless aspect of God, we appreciate this.
But because of misuses we cannot deny basic system itself.
If copying is happening, it should be arrested by taking care.
We cannot cancel the very examination system for the fear of
This misuse, we are not avoiding the journey by buses and trains
Due to possibility of accidents, the human incarnation is important.

That is the only path to reach God as said by Jesus because
The human beings approach God only through human form.
The devotees can get full satisfaction and full guidance only
From the human incarnation and not from any other form of God.
Of course, if you fear for the exploitation of this concept here,
It is better to stick to formless God or God through statues.
But you should be prepared for the disadvantages in the above ways.
You will also loose the golden chance provided by God for your sake.

Yet, Islam should be appreciated because avoiding danger is good.
Such decision was taken by Islam depending on the circumstances
And the atmosphere prevailed over the society during the time of Mohammed.
We should understand the religion from the point of the circumstances
And the environment that existed during the propagation at that time.

But now the scientific logical analysis is well developed and one need not fear
For the exploitation by the false human incarnations who can be easily
Identified, so you should not avoid the system in the present circumstances.
Islam is not a new concept to the Hinduism because in Hinduism
The philosophy of Madhva says the same and preaches that the Lord
Can never become the human being nor vice versa and this is also stated
By Jesus when He told that He was the Messenger sent by God.

Thus Islam agrees with Hinduism and Christianity in its basic concept.
Mohammed told that He was the last prophet because He did not like
Another false human incarnation to come and mislead and exploit the mass.
It is only to avoid the danger of exploitation of cunning human beings.

What is the reason for Islam not to accept the human incarnation?
Even Mohammed said that He was only the servant of God and He did not claim
Himself as the human incarnation, even though He Himself knows the truth
That He is the God in Flesh like Buddha or Krishna or Jesus.
This reason enlightens the greatness of Islam Religion, the reason is that
Once a real human incarnation is accepted, several fraud human incarnations
Claim themselves as God and mislead the spiritual aspirants for their selfish ends.

Infact such concept was so much polluted and got so much diluted
So that every human being started thinking that he himself is God.
In Hinduism this misinterpretation rules the minds of several people
Even today and most people think “Aham Brahmaasmi”, which means
“I am God”, people say that service to human beings is service to God
Because every human being is God only, Sankara condemned this concept

Which was a religion called Loka Sevaka Matam, when Jesus was worshipped
By a lady who was using some special scent to wash His divine lotus feet,
A disciple told that the cost of the scent could have been used to serve the beggars
The disciple thought that service to society is better than the personal service
Of the Lord, but Jesus immediately replied, “Let her do this service, beggars
Are always present in this world but I come rarely to this world”, this shows
That the Lord is far greater than the society and the social service is valid only
When the Lord gives permission to do so, because the saviour is the Lord
And not the society, thus the background of Islam should be properly understood.

I agree with you that Muhammad (from a Muslim perspective) is clearly the last prophet and messenger from God. Furthermore, Jesus is the Messiah and only Jesus (no one else) will appear for the second coming.

Anyone coming afterward claiming that they're inspired by Jesus (the second coming of Christ) or are yet another prophet/messenger is clearly a false prophet (again, from a Muslim perspective).

It's unfortunate to see that some have been hoodwinked by the teachings of false prophets - including many former Muslims who should know better.

Muslims believe that some of these false prophets were in fact agents working for the British colonialist enterprise to keep Muslims and non-Muslims from revolting against British occupation.

From a non-Muslim perspective, then, some of these false prophets were invaluable tools for keeping the colonialist grip on India strong and for their service to the Queen, were allowed to play White God (i.e., Promised Messiah) by the British.

freefromrats wrote:I agree with you that Muhammad (from a Muslim perspective) is clearly the last prophet and messenger from God. Furthermore, Jesus is the Messiah and only Jesus (no one else) will appear for the second coming..........ritish occupation.

From a non-Muslim perspective, then, some of these false prophets were invaluable tools for keeping the colonialist grip on India strong and for their service to the Queen, were allowed to play White God (i.e., Promised Messiah) by the British.

The human incarnation comes in every generation but you are not coming in every generation. The rebirth as human being is almost impossible and completely impossible as per Christianity. In such case you are having only one chance to contact the human incarnation present in your generation. If you miss this, never again this luck comes. The next meeting with God is direct where He acts as judge. Therefore, there is no second coming of Jesus for you and you will meet God finally only.

In this way the second coming of Jesus at the end can be understood. But if you say that you cannot meet the human incarnation in your present generation, you are not having the opportunity even for once. In such case, why a particular generation in which God came in human form as Jesus was only blessed? They had the extra fortune and this means God is partial to that generation. Therefore, every person in every generation will have the equal chance of coming in contact with the human incarnation once in his or her life and the final contact with God in the energetic form as judge.

Therefore, the impartial God comes again and again for every generation (Yada Yada hi…..Gita) but you are not having the chance to meet the human incarnation again since you have no human rebirth. One may get the human rebirth in extreme exceptional situation and you should not depend on that because it involves high risk. The human birth, the urge for salvation and coming in contact with the human incarnation are the three real fortunes and the importance increases from left to right in the order. Therefore, simply having the human birth and having the urge by taking orange robe are not sufficient.

Unless you contact the Lord in human form and get the right knowledge for correct implementation, every thing is waste (Manushyatvam Mumukshatvam, Mahapurasha Samsrayah, Durlabham—Sankara). There is no quarrel if you say that the second coming of Jesus is only at the end because every one is having the equal chance. But if you say that I have to worship the past human incarnation only even in the present generation, then the equal opportunity is not given to Me when I am compared to the human being present in that generation in which Jesus came directly and clarified all the doubts face to face. I must have such equal privilege and here the quarrel comes with you since you deny the equal opportunity.

The second coming is final with respect to every human being but not with respect to God because in such case several human generations miss the chance of direct contact with God in human form except that one particular human generation. Even if you say that Jesus told that His second coming is only final, it is true with respect to every human being and not with respect to Him. You have misinterpreted this statement by extending it with reference to Jesus also because you want to exploit the people in the name of past Jesus and get personal fame and other facilities from the devotees. You are in no way different from the priests present in that time of Jesus.

Both of you do not admit the human form of Lord. Both of you keep the past which is invisible (invisible Jebhova or invisible Jesus) before the devotees and earn money and fame. The only difference between you both is that that priest got Jesus killed through the court and you cannot do that in the present time. The repulsion towards the human form before eyes is common to both the priests and devotees. But in the case priests there is an extra factor that they may lose fame and offerings from the devotees because they get benefited standing at the back ground of the invisible form of God or inert form of God.

In the case of devotees, this extra factor does not exist because they are prepared to sacrifice for God and they are not losing since they do not receive. Any Guru or Priest immediately resists human form of God based on these two factors since he fears that the human form may get the fame or their offerings. Thus, there is political, economical and social issue of psychology in this spiritual line. Attraction to fame and money associated with jealously and egoism is the main back ground and Lord Datta brings out the truth that is buried up to any depth. All the details of truth are known to the omniscient God. Veda says that the knowledge of God is always based on truth (Satyam Jnamam).

Dattaswami - another thread of long and interesting posts which seem to miss the point by a country mile.

A case in point, you say in the first post:

Islam is not a new concept to the Hinduism because in Hinduism
The philosophy of Madhva says the same and preaches that the Lord
Can never become the human being nor vice versa and this is also stated
By Jesus when He told that He was the Messenger sent by God.

Jesus clearly does not state in the Bible that he is the last Messenger of God, on the contrary he makes the point that there will be a messenger after him (the 'comforter') who will inform the people of things that Jesus had not yet informed them.

Or perhapsh you have a quote from Jesus that I overlooked?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Dattaswami - another thread of long and interesting posts which seem to miss the point by a country mile.

A case in point, you say in the first post:

Islam is not a new concept to the Hinduism because in Hinduism
The philosophy of Madhva says the same and preaches that the Lord
Can never become the human being nor vice versa and this is also stated
By Jesus when He told that He was the Messenger sent by God.

Jesus clearly does not state in the Bible that he is the last Messenger of God, on the contrary he makes the point that there will be a messenger after him (the 'comforter') who will inform the people of things that Jesus had not yet informed them.

Or perhapsh you have a quote from Jesus that I overlooked?

Cheers,
Shafique

I & Father Are Same, Son Of God, Messenger Of God

To a deserving devotee, Jesus told He and His father are one and the same. When Jesus saw a devotee who was slightly affected by jealousy and egoism, Jesus came down by one step saying that He was the son of the God. The word son is indicating that He is different from the God but the same spirit is present in both like the same blood in the father and the son. This means that He is different and smaller than the God but at the same time has the same essence. It is like the relationship between the mighty ocean and the tiny water drop. The father is major and the son is minor component. They resemble qualitatively but differ quantitatively. This is the visishta advaita of Ramanuja.

When Jesus met a devotee who is fully bacterialised by jealousy and egoism He told that He was the humble messenger of God. This is the Dvaita of Madhva. Therefore the human incarnation will declare its level based on the level of the receiver. Mohammad told that He is the messenger of the Lord. Thus there is a gradual degradation of spiritual obedience and the gradual growth of jealousy and egoism. Jesus stands as a transition bridge between the Advaita of Krishna and Dvaita of Mohammad.

I like the word 'bacterialised' - I think it is the first time I've come across this.


However, I don't see in your quote how you infer that Jesus said that there would not be messengers of God after him. Could you explain further.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I like the word 'bacterialised' - I think it is the first time I've come across this.


However, I don't see in your quote how you infer that Jesus said that there would not be messengers of God after him. Could you explain further.

Cheers,
Shafique

God is impartial and He comes down in humanform in every human generation to preach and ulift the souls thorugh His divine knoweldge. If He favour only one human genearation then it is injustice. And Hence He comes in every human generation by entering the most deserving devotee present (Son of God) in this world.

Thus He is known as Human Incanration a mixuture of God and Son of God.

This concept Mohammad did not preach, since the level of people at that time and the circumstances are not conducive for that. But in Gita (a scripture) Lord Krishna Preached this concept very clearly.

Jesus was the Human incarnation of God as did Krishna.

God is impartial and He comes in Human form even after Prophet Mohammad and even after Jesus also.

When even if one devotee cries for God to see Him, talk to Him and co-live with Him, God comes in human form.

I apologise for not being clearer in my question.

Let me try and rephrase it - where does Jesus say that there will not be messengers from God after him?


Additionally, if - as you have argued - Muhammad, pbuh, was an incarnation of God, does that not mean that what is written in the Quran is from God and should be followed?

(To avoid confusion, I've asked two questions in this post)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I apologise for not being clearer in my question.

Let me try and rephrase it - where does Jesus say that there will not be messengers from God after him?


Additionally, if - as you have argued - Muhammad, pbuh, was an incarnation of God, does that not mean that what is written in the Quran is from God and should be followed?

(To avoid confusion, I've asked two questions in this post)

Cheers,
Shafique

Jesus never told that there will not be any messengers. IN fact He asked people to pray God to send messengers into this world.