The incorruptible mighty book
-
Peace brother mhsultan,
The link for where the discussion originally started is as follows
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3834
-
Peace brother Tanveer,
Thank you for your comments, your thoughtful questions, and for providing our kind brother mhsultan with the link.
Thank you for your detailed, informative and thought provoking analysis. Your exposition of the facts is the best I have encountered so far and clarifies a lot of things.
I have couple of questions for you, in the context of the ongoing discussion.
2224 Those who have rejected and repel from the path of God and the Restricted Temple that We have made for mankind, for the dweller or the visitor to it; and whoever inclines to evil action in it, We will let them taste a painful retribution.
From this sign it appears that masjid alharam is made for mankind, which implies all mankind. However from 929, it appears that the idolaters are not allowed to approach masjid alharam
929 O you who believe, those who have set up partners are impure, so let them not approach the Restricted Temple after this calendar year of theirs; and if you fear poverty, then God will enrich you from His blessings if He wills. God is Knowledgeable, Wise.
-
How can these 2 signs be reconciled ? How can masjid alharam be for mankind when idolaters are not allowed to approach it ?
-
The wording "for the dweller or the visitor to it" in 2224 and "let them not approach masjid alharam after this calendar year" in 929 implies masjid alharam being a physical place. How can this be interpreted if masjid alharam is a non physical place ?
Let me try to answer your question, by providing an alternate translation
- Those who have rejected/unappreciated and repelled from the path of The God and the institution of obeying the restriction that we had made for the people, equally the one committed in it and the one who left to find clarity. And whoever deviates in it with falsely attributing with injustice, we will cause them to taste from a painful suffering.
4140-42. Those who falsely attribute in our signs are not hidden from us. Is one who is cast into the fire better, or one who comes safe on the day of resurrection? Do what you will. Surely, He sees what you do. Those who have rejected/unappreciated with the reminder when it came to them and it is a might book. Falsehood does not enter it from the present or from the past, a revelation from a Wise, Praised.
Notice the similarities between 2225 and 4140-42.
Next, notice the similarities between 929 and 5677-82
929 O you who had faith, those who have set up partners are impure, so let them not approach the institution of obeying the forbidden after this year of theirs; and if you fear poverty, then The God will enrich you from His blessings if He wills. The God is Knowledgeable, Wise.
5677-82. It is an honorable reading in a protected book. It is not touched except by the cleansed. It is descended by the Lord of the worlds. Do you frown on this saying? And you make your sustenance that you lie/falsify?
My interpretation is that "al-masjid al-7aram" (the institution of obeying the restriction) is a non-physical institution of authority like "sabil Allah" (the path of The God) is non-physical. Those who rejected repel from both in the same way. One can "falsely attribute" in The God's signs in the book and in "al-masjid al-7aram" (the institution of obeying the restriction). Those who setup partners are impure and will not come near "al-masjid al-7aram", while those who are purified will touch the honorable reading. Also, those who had faith feared poverty from not letting those who setup partners approach "al-masjid al-7aram", while people can earn a living by falsifying the honorable reading as per 5682.
I interpret "al-masjid al-7aram" and the honorable reading to be two facets of "the truth from our Lord". Namely, "al-masjid al-7aram" is the implementation of the honorable reading by those who have faith. How do we implement it? We implement The God's system by orienting ourselves towards "al-masjid al-7aram"/the truth from our Lord wherever we are. For example, our institutions of authority (such as government) should be based on the principles of the truth from out Lord in the great reading. Naturally, those who setup partners would not implement such system but will try to undermine it for personal gains. Thus, we should not allow them to be in authority or even come near positions of authority. On the other hand, "al-masjid al-7aram"/ the truth from our Lord is for people who are committed to it ("al-3akif") and people who have left where they were to search for clarity ("al-badi").
I hope this helps.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
-
Salaamun alaikum brother Ayman,
Thank you for your translation and understanding of the relevant signs, which clarifies al-masjid al-haram being a non-physical place. I understood how "al-3akif" should be translated as "the one committed in it" instead of "dweller" but can you please explain what you mean by "the one who left to find clarity" instead of "visitor" as the translation for "al-bad" ? Where did one leave from ?
God bless,
Tanveer
-
Peace brother Tanveer,
Thank you for your translation and understanding of the relevant signs, which clarifies al-masjid al-haram being a non-physical place. I understood how "al-3akif" should be translated as "the one committed in it" instead of "dweller" but can you please explain what you mean by "the one who left to find clarity" instead of "visitor" as the translation for "al-bad" ? Where did one leave from ?
If you look under the Arabic root "BDW", you will find that it has meanings such as "made apparent/clear" (3947-48, 4533, etc.), "occur to/think of" (1235), and left where they were (3320). The word "badw" is applied to people who leave where they are to search for something such as grazing places or water. So you can see that the themes of leaving, searching and making clear/apparent are the main themes that run through that word. Thus, "al-bad" in the context of 2225 is someone who left what they were on (examples include Christianity, Sunnism, or any inherited dogma). They left in order to search for what? From the other meanings of "BDW", it can be deduced that they left to search for clarity. Thus, my translation of "al-bad" is "one who left to search" or "one who left to search for clarity".
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
What is interesting to note here is that Jacob refers to three entities, Muhajirin (Muslims), pagans, and Jews. What is surprising is that according to Jacob, Arab paganism continued to exist as late as the beginning of the eighth century. This is in line with the Ummayyad policy of secular tolerance towards other beliefs as long as they paid taxes as other contemporaneous eye witnesses reported in their manuscripts as we saw earlier.
Peace Ayman,
We never heard about the shia in these reports. What were they doing during these times ?
Why would not the shia be those called pagans ?And what about the persians ?
And what do you think about that ?
4.Fredegar, a Frankish Chronicler (wr. 650s).The Hagarenes, who are also called Saracens . . . a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus on the shores of the Caspian in a country known as Ercolia
Peace
-
Peace JM,
We never heard about the shia in these reports. What were they doing during these times ?
Why would not the shia be those called pagans ?We don't hear about Muslims, Sunnis or Shias. Up to this point the religion whose proper name is Islam hasn't been invented yet.
Sunnis and Shias started out as political groups and later morphed into sects. This is what naturally happens when people use religion to further political agenda.
And what about the persians ?
And what do you think about that ?
4.Fredegar, a Frankish Chronicler (wr. 650s).The Hagarenes, who are also called Saracens . . . ?a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus on the shores of the Caspian in a country known as Ercolia
Thank you for the interesting quote. I think that the quote from Fredgar is in line with Saracens being from an area on the border of the Persian empire. I think that given the fact that there were no accurate maps at the time, he perhaps mixed the shores of the Caspian with the shores of the Persian gulf. The area on the Arab side of the Persian Gulf was the domain of the Lakhmids who were allies of the Persians.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace Ayman, all,
I think that given the fact that there were no accurate maps at the time, he perhaps mixed the shores of the Caspian with the shores of the Persian gulf.
a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus on the shores of the Caspian in a country known as Ercolia
I think it is highly unlikely that he mistook the Caspian for the Persian gulf for several reasons.
1.) He mentions the Caucuses which are located near the Caspian Sea. (He would have had to be wrong about both the Caucuses and the Caspian).
2.) Even assuming that they didn't have accurate maps, which is unlikely, the geography is very different between the Caspian and the Persian Gulf, including the land that must be crossed to get to those regions .
3.) The waters of the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf are quite different.However, he does say
a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus
,which seems to infer that they had originated from that area, but no longer lived there.
peace
-
Peace David,
I think that given the fact that there were no accurate maps at the time, he perhaps mixed the shores of the Caspian with the shores of the Persian gulf.
a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus on the shores of the Caspian in a country known as Ercolia
I think it is highly unlikely that he mistook the Caspian for the Persian gulf for several reasons.
1.) He mentions the Caucuses which are located near the Caspian Sea. (He would have had to be wrong about both the Caucuses and the Caspian).
2.) Even assuming that they didn't have accurate maps, which is unlikely, the geography is very different between the Caspian and the Persian Gulf, including the land that must be crossed to get to those regions .
3.) The waters of the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf are quite different.However, he does say
a circumcised people who of old had lived beneath the Caucasus
,which seems to infer that they had originated from that area, but no longer lived there.
I don't disagree with you. All I am saying is that there could be different interpretations of Fredegar's words. From physical archeological evidence, we know that the script and language of the great reading wasn't used in the Caucuses but was used around the western and south western shores of the Persian gulf. So we have to evaluate all the evidence and not base anything on just one thing that someone said. This is especially the case if the person, in all likelihood was not from the area. So one of the possibilities is that, as you said, the chronicler believed that the ancestors of the Arabs (not the Arabs of his time) came from the Caucasus region.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salam maxq,
You will find the beginning of this thread that you brought forward here. Unfortunately I coudn't insert the hyperlink to go directly. I'm not sure what I did wrong, but anyhow this should help.
Free-Minds > General Issues / Questions > General Issues / Questions (Moderators TheNabi, Wakas, idolfree1, Tay, savage_carrot, Nadeem) > The problem with Islam
The problem with Islam
? on July 02, 2005, 061921 AM ?adjwi
-
Peace be with you
Thanks for bringing this thread to the open again
Peace Ayman
??This, then, which they call "stone," is the head of Aphrodite, whom they used to worship and whom they call Chabar.?
The above does not say the pagans call their temple ?Chabar? or ?Chobar? but that they refer to Aphrodite by this name. Aphrodite is probably Hellenized goddess Al-'Uzza the goddess of power. ?Chobar? I believe is the Greek/Latin mis-pronunciation for ?Kabir? which is to say ?Great?. As for John of Damascus the pagans probably refer to their pagan god Al Uzza as ?Great/Kabir?.
-
Peace Warner,
??This, then, which they call "stone," is the head of Aphrodite, whom they used to worship and whom they call Chabar.?
The above does not say the pagans call their temple ?Chabar? or ?Chobar? but that they refer to Aphrodite by this name.They refer to the stone by this name and the stone is a symbol of a fertility goddess who was hellenized as Aphrodite. Basically, the temple is this idol's temple.
You didn't quote the previous part about showering the stone with kisses. Of course, this is clearly refering to the black stone which the sectarians still shower with kisses to this day. We can see from putting all the evidence together that this stone is a symbol of the head of the re-born fertility goddess coming out of the vagina-shaped enclosure.
Aphrodite is probably Hellenized goddess Al-'Uzza the goddess of power.
It could be. However, it could also be the hellenized Allat who like Aphrodite was a fertility goddess. On the other hand, the name Al-Uzza suggests more a goddess of power as opposed to fertility. Keep in mind that those three godesses were often combined and reflected different aspect of a mother goddess. So their identification is not absolute but it depends on what was in vogue at the time.
?Chobar? I believe is the Greek/Latin mis-pronunciation for ?Kabir? which is to say ?Great?. As for John of Damascus the pagans probably refer to their pagan god Al Uzza as ?Great/Kabir?.
I disagree. The name John of Damascus is a Romanized name that he was given. He was in reality a Christian Arab whose name was Mansur (see Hoyland). Surely, as an Arab, he knew his own language and the pronunciation of words better than any later generation. His transliteration of the word must be taken as closer to the actual pronunciation at his time than our modern view of how the word should be pronounced. Keep in mind that Mansur predates the invention of Arabic vocalization marks by several generations. Moreover, the word "kabar/kabor" (which could have also been equally vocalized "kobar" and also mean "big/great" is a valid Classical Arabic word. It even appears in the great reading (4035). So if it is a valid Classical Arabic word and it was transliterated by an Arab, then why come here hundreds of years later and claim that it was mis-pronounced?
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace adjwi, maxq, all,
Here is the original thread
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=10220.0
-
peace all,
I just came across this, I haven't read it yet, thought it might be useful
ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE HISTORY OF EARLY ISLAM THE FIRST SEVENTY YEARS
http//www.krc.ox.ac.uk/Publications/Jeremy%20Johns/Johns%202003(a).pdfAlso, Bro Ayman wrote a post on "how kaaba became a pagan idol" here.
