Talk:Prophecy (Shia Islam)

Infallible

The article states that:

"Shi'a believe that the prophets and messengers (Adam being the first prophet and Muhammad the last) appointed by God are impeccable and infallible in every aspect (i.e., in their beliefs, thoughts, actions, speech, etc)."

But isn't it an accepted view that Adam was the first human being to "fall from grace" for disobeying God? I think this needs to be clarified in order to match with the entry on Adam. Seems like a contradiction.

There is only a contradiction if you take the story of Adam and Eve literally. Cuñado - Talk 02:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

But do a large majority of Shi'as view the story as literal (since the Qur'an is considered the literal word of God)? Perhaps the entry can we re-worded in such a way that doesn't make the description so extreme ("impeccable and infallible in every aspect (i.e., in their beliefs, thoughts, actions, speech, etc"). I'm not trying to argue whether a particular group is right or wrong. It seems to me that Muslim scholars have resolved this contradiction and it should be reflected on this entry.

No, we belive the Qur'an does not say Adam (pbuh) sinned, but we can see why some people might conclude that. --Striver 02:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I found some stuff on it over the weekend and would like you to confirm it. It appears that from one source Adam is described as being tricked by the devil and thus absolves him from the wrong doing. Also it shows the arabic writing and the two versions (one that says he sinned and the other that he was tricked) is very similar in shape.

However, I suppose that brings up the problem again. If we define 'impeccable' and 'infallible' as having no flaws and incapable of erring then we run into trouble again. There's another source that says Adam was infallible and impeccable in matters of sin/morality as opposed to other things. Like flipping a coin and guessing the wrong outcome.

You should differentiate between the Adam of the creation myth (the first man), and Adam the Prophet. The Bible also seems to have two different stories in Genesis, a subject that most people don't even notice. If you take the story of Adam of creation to be completely literal, then you will end up believing in some erroneous conclusions, like that the universe has a beginning, or that all of mankind's sins and problems are the result of one single man eating an apple, or a number of other ideas that are difficult to accept and imagine, given the detail of the story. The Adam of creation represents signifies the heavenly spirit of mankind, and Eve the human soul. The story of creation is eternal, not describing an actual historical event. There is also a Prophet named Adam, which is the story of a historical figure. Cuñado - Talk 00:46, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Very interesting! So there's Adam the literary figure and there's Adam the Prophet (and first man)?

Sunni View

The concept of Nubuwwah or prophethood is not unique for Shias & applies to Sunni's as well. Hence i removed the word "Shia" from the introduction line. -- Đõc §aмέέЯ  03:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

where are salafist editors

I saw all salafist editors editing their salafism related articles or attacking sufism related articles. Many important articles like nubuwwah are untouched by them. I request them to edit wikipedia honestly. How this important topic is not written in a manner that is needed. Nowhere in the article the term nubuwwah or the term nabi are defined properly. Even the article prophet in Islam doesn't tell about prophet's nature and how they are different than other human beings. Zikrullah (talk) 20:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Title of the article

According to the WP:CRITERIA, the best title for the article is "Prophecy (Shia Islam)". Because as mentioned in reliable (English) source (that some of them had been used at the article), the prophecy is more [notable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability] than Nubuwwah. Lstfllw203 (talk) 18:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

What is the radical addition?

@Ogress: can you explain about your edit? why do you remove a theory from a famous author?what is your mean of "radical addition"? Thanks.Lstfllw203 (talk) 06:33, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

The added material was Neoplatonistic-based interpretations of the Orientalist Corbin, had incoherent grammar, and is generally problematic. First, this page should assume the reader does not understand much or anything about the topic. Now let me remind you what I removed: "Henry Corbin believed that the “divine science” is not an ordinary science, it Cannot be communicated in the conventional manner. There is only need to the prophet for mediating. ... According to the view of Ayatollah Ja'far Sobhani, the prophet who are in fact the middleman of grace of God to human. When human had been a worthy to get the grace of God, it came down to them until the era of Muhammad prophet of Islam."

That's just... terrible. I'm sorry, it's thoroughly awful. I mean no offense but what in the hell does that even mean? And it just goes on and on like that. I do not know what "Henry Corbin believed that the “divine science” is not an ordinary science, it Cannot be communicated in the conventional manner. There is only need to the prophet for mediating." means or why we care what Henry Corbin thinks.

This is not a place for speculation, presenting specific esoteric views, or the like. We need to provide short, concrete, and coherent material on the topic of what nubuwwah means to the Shia. We need this to include space for Twelver and Ismaili interpretations and not to exclude the basic information. It must not be a personal essay or apologia. What I removed was peculiar, incoherent, and definitely apologia. It is not encyclopedic and definitely not helpful. Ogress 06:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

And while we are at it - you moved the page to one that specifically excludes Sunnis and other Muslims. Why did you do that? Ogress 06:58, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ogress: this page is just about the prophecy in view of shia. At this pages Prophecy and Prophet, prophecy was reviewed about other sects of Islam. At here i explained my reasons to changing he name of this page and article to prophecy.

At these edit i used reliable sources and try to do great edit. you can compare the text of article with the source and removed the problem by disscusing at talk page. According to the WP:ED you should improve the article instead of deleting the text.Thanks for your attention.Lstfllw203 (talk) 17:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

It's like I'm talking to a bot, you aren't even responding to me. Ogress 01:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The article was reviewed and edited for second time.Lstfllw203 (talk) 18:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)