@fmitchell:
The fourth fundamental article of faith in Islam is belief in all the prophets. This article is in fact a logical conclusion to the third one. The same philosophy as underlies the belief in all books also necessitates belief in all the prophets. The Quran speaks of the many prophets who mostly belong to the Middle Eastern line of prophethood, beginning with Adam upto the time of Muhammad. But there are exceptions to the rule. There are two things which are specifically mentioned in the Quran relating to this issue:
a) Although the names and short histories of some prophets were revealed to the founder of Islam, the list is in no way exhaustive. They are just specimen names, and there are a large number of prophets do not find mention in the Quran.
b) In the list of prophets who are specifically mentioned, there are certain names which do not seem to belong to the prophets of Israel. Many commentators therefore are inclined to believe that they are non-Arab prophets who are included in the list just for the sake of representation of the outer world. For instance, Dhul-Kifl is one name in the list of prophets which is unheard of in the Arab or Semitic references. Some scholars seem to have traced this name to Buddha, who was of Kapeel, which was the capital of a small state situated on the border of India and Nepal. Buddha not only belonged to Kapeel, but was many a time referred to as being 'Of Kapeel'. This is exactly what is meant by the word 'Dhul-Kifl'. It should be remembered that the consonant 'p' is not present in Arabic, and the nearest one to it is 'fa'. Hence, Kapeel transliterated into Arabic becomes Kifl.
Apart from the evidence of the Quran, there is one reference which is controversial among the commentators. There is a tradition reported from the Holy Prophet which speaks of an Indian prophet by name. In his words:
"There was a prophet of God in India who was dark in colour and his name was Kahan."
Now anyone acquainted with the history of Indian religions would immediately connect this description to Lord Krishna, who is invariably described in the Hindu literature as being dark of complexion. Also, the title Kanhaya is added to his name Krishna. Kanhaya contains the same consonants K,N,H as does the name Kahan -- in no way an insignificant similarity. But whether any non-Arab prophet was mentioned by name or not is only an academic discussion.
According to the Quran, God has sent His messengers to every nation:
"There is not a people but a Warner has gone among them" (35:25)
"For every nation there is a Messenger" (10:48)
The Muslims, therefore, believe that earlier religions were also founded by God's messengers. Below are given the names of some of the founders of other religions who could be equated to the prophets of the Quran and the Bible.
Luqman: mentioned in the Quran by name but his territory is
unknown. According to some scholars he was the
Greek "Aesop" while according to others he was a
Prophet in Abyssinia. Luqman does not correspond to
any Biblical prophet.
Zoroaster: The founder of Zoroastrianism, an ancient religion of Iran. Zoroaster's period is roughly placed at around 1500 B.C.
Krishna: Krishna is known among the Hindus as an "Avatar"
Ram Chandar or a manifestation of God. It appears that both
Krishna and Ram Chandar were the Hindu equivalent of the Quranic nabis. They, however, were not the founders of the Hindu religion.
Mahavira: Founder of Jainism, Mahavira lived in India in the
sixth century B.C. He tried to abolish the caste system
that existed in Hinduism.
Buddha: Siddhartha Gautama Buddha was the founder of the
Buddhist faith. He lived in India in the sixth Century B.C. The word 'Buddha' means the Enlightened One.
Confucius: Founder of Confucianism, a Chinese religion.
Confucius lived in China in the fifth century B.C. His
teachings placed great emphasis on social ethics.
Lao Tze: The founder of the Tao religion of China who lived in the sixth century B.C.
According to various Hadith there are 100s of 1000s of Prophets that were sent by God to every part of the world, and this is why Muslims are commanded to respect them. Presenting the Taliban destroying statues is not a good argument. They are hardly the shining beacon of Islam. Besides, that act was condemned by Muslims worldwide.