The Sabians are a community of which there are different reports. Some believe that the Sabians were the worshippers of stars and according to some other scholars the Sabians were a people who belonged to some prophet of the book, but later, like other Christians, like other people, Christians and Jews, they started deviating from the right path until they ended up into a completely different denomination from the original one. But apart from that, the Sabians was a popular title given to the non-idolaters by the Arabs.
They generally dubbed people who did not belong to their cult as Sabians. This is why the Prophet and his followers were dubbed as Sabians by the Arabs generally. And this was something understood by the Arabs of the time, to be belonging to cults or religions other than the idolatrous religion which they followed. So because it covered all other religions, I think the word Sabian in the Holy Quran is mentioned in this context. Because Jews and Christians and those earlier to them, they have been mentioned by name. What about the rest of the world, about whom the Holy Quran says that there were prophets everywhere in every region in every nation? So one single title should be found for covering those regions and those people.
So because we know positively that the Arabs considered the name Sabian covering all the non-Arab religions, alien religions, and this is why the Prophet was condemned under the title of Sabian. They said this was a foreign religion, this is an alien religion to the Arabs. So that the word Sabian is kept particularly to cover the rest of the religions. And because we know the Arabs generally gave this name to the non-Arabs, non-Arab religions, so this has authenticity, this answer.
Also it appeals to our conscience that if the Holy Quran is discussing other religions, it should have at least some reference to them. And this is a very good name, otherwise the Holy Quran would have to offer a complete list of the entire world religions, every area and every era. It would be not possible naturally. Any other questions? In different order, which order did you expect and you don’t find it there? I mean what is the difference in order which is disturbing you? The first place I mentioned, we get most of the Hebrews, the Jews, the Sabians and Christians.
The other place is the Hebrews, the Jews, and then the Christians and the Sabians. Could you kindly refer to the verses so that I could have them before me, before answering that question? And later on, I’ll find out, the Sabians are referred to only in a very few places in the Holy Quran, so I’ll get the verses. You have the Holy Quran here, can you find it now? No, flag the places, both the places where they are mentioned, so that I could see the difference in order and find out why. He’ll do it, you better leave it with him, he’ll do it for you, please. You know, the very reference to the Sabians is a guarantee that they were not idolaters and the claim of some scholars that they were star worshippers is wrong.
I mean originally, not originally. So the Holy Quran could not have referred to them unless, according to the Holy Quran, the Sabians originally belonged to the people of some books. So, we have the authority of the Holy Quran that this is the only acceptable interpretation of this word, that they are a people belonging to certain books originally.
One reference, but where is the second one? Okay. Hayat Sahib, in the meantime, you can occupy the floor, please. You got it? Two places. Verse 70. That again tends to give support to my interpretation or the suggestion which I have made that the word Sabi refers to other peoples of the books because their order has been changed. They are not a particular people who occurred after the Christians. So their order was changed to indicate that this word applies to so many. Some belong to this age and some belong to the other age. Thank you.
