Bakka/Mecca
-
We'll tackle the "oxford book of late antiquity" later. You and I both have the translations of the inscription provided by the website you linked. Where in that translation do you get the idea that the tribes or places mentioned are in the Hejaz?
The Ma?add tribal confederacy was controlling the Hejaz at that time. Next to that Turban is identified by some as a place in the Hejaz.
Peace -
The Ma?add tribal confederacy was controlling the Hejaz at that time. Next to that Turban is identified by some as a place in the Hejaz.
Peace
Can I have some references to this? And by references I mean actual old inscriptions that validate such a view point.
-
Can I have some references to this? And by references I mean actual old inscriptions that validate such a view point.
There is historical evidence of at least one attack made by Abraha in the Hejaz. I can't link you to any source you will have to consult specialized literature to find out. But it's quite besides the point. There is no discussion Abraha tried establishing a hegemony in Arabia. It would be highly improbable Hejaz was excluded from that agenda.
Peace
-
https//www.google.be/maps/place/Turbah+Saudi-Arabi%C3%AB/@21.2070422,41.6377544,13z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x15ec3dd18aacb6970x4288a5e162b4856c
https//www.google.be/maps/place/Turbah,+Asharqiyyah,+Taif+26523,+Saudi-Arabi%C3%AB/@21.2787275,40.4168821,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x15e9893a08f77bad0x8de4c1f9f2c6c901 -
There is historical evidence of at least one attack made by Abraha in the Hejaz. I can't link you to any source you will have to consult specialized literature to find out. But it's quite besides the point. There is no discussion Abraha tried establishing a hegemony in Arabia. It would be highly improbable Hejaz was excluded from that agenda.
Peace
"There is historical evidence of at least one attack made by Abraha in the Hejaz. I can't link you to any source you will have to consult specialized literature to find out."
He might have attacked the Hijaz at some time and then died doing it. But you referenced these rock inscriptions to prove that they were referencing his attack on the Hejaz. I have yet to see any proof.
Although to help you with the rock inscriptions .... some of the references we get from this rock inscription include names like "kinda" and "Qahtani".
The kindom of Kindah was located in the Nejad Rejion who later converted to Islam.
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindah
Qahtani reference
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Islamic_Arabia
This rock inscription is not talking about the Hejaz region.
-
https//www.google.be/maps/place/Turbah+Saudi-Arabi%C3%AB/@21.2070422,41.6377544,13z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x15ec3dd18aacb6970x4288a5e162b4856c
https//www.google.be/maps/place/Turbah,+Asharqiyyah,+Taif+26523,+Saudi-Arabi%C3%AB/@21.2787275,40.4168821,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x15e9893a08f77bad0x8de4c1f9f2c6c901I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. Please clarify.
-
Of course those identifications are only assumptions.
But I don't understand your logic OnlyOneGod.
Which of these facts do you dispute?
- Abraha trying to establish a hegemony in Arabia
- Abraha's epigraphy nowhere mentioning Mecca
- South-arabian places being mentioned that according to the hadith based Meccan qibla theory are inferior to Mecca in significance.
Peace
-
I don't understand what this is supposed to mean. Please clarify.
They are possible candidates of Turban as mentioned in the inscriptions. One is very close to Mecca.
-
Modern day Halban is in between Mecca and Riyadh.
-
Of course those identifications are only assumptions.
But I don't understand your logic OnlyOneGod.
Which of these facts do you dispute?
- Abraha trying to establish a hegemony in Arabia
- Abraha's epigraphy nowhere mentioning Mecca
- South-arabian places being mentioned that according to the hadith based Meccan qibla theory are inferior to Mecca in significance.
Peace
"1) Abraha trying to establish a hegemony in Arabia"
I have nothing to prove or disprove that
"2) Abraha's epigraphy nowhere mentioning Mecca"
According to what? Your reference to the rock inscription? They are talking of places in the Nejad and hence no mention of Mecca.
"3) South-arabian places being mentioned that according to the hadith based Meccan qibla theory are inferior to Mecca in significance."
Please elaborate. Which south arabian places being mentioned and where are they mentioned that defy Mecca as the Qibla?
-
"1) Abraha trying to establish a hegemony in Arabia"
I have nothing to prove or disprove that
"2) Abraha's epigraphy nowhere mentioning Mecca"
According to what? Your reference to the rock inscription? They are talking of places in the Nejad and hence no mention of Mecca.
"3) South-arabian places being mentioned that according to the hadith based Meccan qibla theory are inferior to Mecca in significance."
Please elaborate. Which south arabian places being mentioned and where are they mentioned that defy Mecca as the Qibla?
- That's the academic (non-Islamic) consensus. But you will have to consult specialized literature to find out. I dont have any online links for them.
- See my previous posts. Halban, Turban.
-
They are possible candidates of Turban as mentioned in the inscriptions. One is very close to Mecca.
So now a public hospital called turbah is the site of Abrahas attack? What about kinda? Like he says in the inscription and which is historically verified?
-
Modern day Halban is in between Mecca and Riyadh.
How does that prove the non-existence of mecca?
-
-
That's the academic (non-Islamic) consensus. But you will have to consult specialized literature to find out. I dont have any online links for them.
-
See my previous posts. Halban, Turban.
-
Lets look at actual academic work and not fantasies.
-
You quoting me halban and Turban and not talking about Kinda. Where the actual battle as per the inscriptions took place?
If you just intend to dance around the issue then I'm not interested in wasting further time.
You do not want to accept the fact that the inscription you posted had nothing to do with Abrahas attack or rule over the Hejaz. You do not want to tackle the issue of Bacca mentioned in the Quran and bible, where the bible says that its the name of a bush found around Mecca.
If you have nothing solid to add to this argument then I will end it right here.
-
-
You don't even manage to focus out on google maps, but you rather stay zoomed in to find some strawman you can punch....
Figure it out by yourself OnlyOneGod.
Halban and Turban are examples of how far north the expedition must have gone. You have a tendency to dance around issues. Not me.
Some of use are made deaf dumb and blind. I can't change that. If you are refusing to see how the historical record of Abraha and South-Arabia contradicts the hadith stories about Mecca then that's just stubbornness.
Ask any historian. They will all agree Abraha most likely had interest in the Hejaz region as a documented attack on a southwestern place proves. All of them will agree Mecca was not mentioned nor important to Abraha at all.
The placenames Turban and Halban are all situated pretty far north into southern arabia. It's very unlikely Abraha would have known those places but NOT Mecca - if it existed as a place of pilgrimage at all. Kinda is irrelevant as a placename, as you aren't disputing Abraha conquered Yemen but you seem to ignore, against all historians, he didnt rule Hijaz as well.
Most (non muslim) historians will agree Mecca is non-existing before the 4th century AD.
Bacca is not a bush. It's a proper placename. Still used for that neighbourhood in Jerusalem today.
I'm done discussing with you OnlyOneGod. You have bias that only accepts evidence that is compatible with a Mecca-thesis. Anything contradicting it you ignore. In that sense you are like the majority of muslims taking the words of hadith writers more seriously than those of modern historians.
Please continue your pagan tradition of praying in the direction of a stone and a pagan shrine that has no abrahamic roots whatsoever.
Peace
-
This stubbornness of yours also shows when dealing with linguistic evidence. You totally ignore the Quran was never written originally in any Hijaz known script.
Moreover the placename of Mecca itself is ENTIRELY non-arabic but an aramaic word.
This only leaves two options
- Mecca was populated by Canaanites
- Mecca is a pretty late placename that borrowed its name from the aramaic placenames in the Quran and Torah
Everyone knows there never were Canaanites in Mecca.
Peace
-
If you have nothing solid to add to this argument then I will end it right here.
There seems to be nothing solid you'd accept outside some meteorite stone that you can worship in the fashion of the ancient arab pagans. The only thing you'd accept from me is saying "yeah bukhari tabari and all those other liars were actually right concerning mecca".
Peace
-
The qiblah/bacca is only the tip of the iceberg. You have no idea how many lies you have been taking for granted as truths.
Another one of them is the very origins of islam. I do not locate those to be in the Hijaz. The earliest versions of proto-Islam can be found in the Qumran scrolls.
http//rootsofislamtruehistory.com/subpages/Genealogy-Islam.PNG
As you can see we both consider ourselves to be muslim but other than that we have nothing in common.
Peace
-
Even the word muslim itself is Christian in origin
The Aramaic Gospel of Matthew (of which Syriacs and Chaldeans possess an accurate text originating from the Aramaic Peshitta written in the original language of the New Testament) is more enlightening than a grammar. The root slm appears under a variety of forms therein (58 times in total), taking on multiple meanings, beginning with the most evident of all, peace
?And when you enter into a house, greet the household. And if the household is worthy, let your peace (?lama) come upon it.
But if the household is not worthy, let your peace return to you.? (Mt 1012-13)
The notion of perfection or completion follows from it, as in
?Again you have heard that it was said to those before you ?You shall not swear falsely, but you shall bring to completion (t?alem) your oaths to the Lord.?? (Mt 533)
?? And so it was, when Jesus had completed (?alem) these sayings, that the crowds were astonished at His teaching (Mt 72 ??
Jesus answered and said to them Elijah is coming first to bring to completion all things.? (Mt 1711)
Or again that of transmitted perfection
?Why do your disciples transgress the tradition (ma?lmanouta?) of the elders and do not wash their hands when they eat bread?? (Mt 152)
Next, a semantic variation appears with the sense of delivering. What is perfect, completed, is so made to be transmitted (this meaning of handing down or passing over to, is unknown in Hebrew )
?And it came to pass that when Jesus had completed (me?tlem or delivered in the sense of handed down) all these sayings, He said to His disciples
?You know that after two days is the Passover, and the Son of Man is to be delivered up to be crucified.? (Mt 261-2)
And he said to them ?What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you?? And they promised him thirty (pieces) of silver.
And from that time, he sought opportunity to deliver Him. (Mt 2615-16)
Judas the ? deliverer ? (ma?lmana?) answered and said ?Rabbi, is it I? Jesus said to him ?You have said so.? (Mt 2625)
?Then they will deliver (= submit) you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for my Name?s sake.
And then many will be offended, and they will hate one another, and will deliver each other up.? (Mt 249-10)
We thus end up with the equivalent of the 4th Arabic form against which emerges the religious connotation of to commit or hand oneself over (or again to submit) to God, which Jesus uses in reference to Himself
?Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man is handing Himself over to the chief priest and to the scribes.
And they will condemn Him to death, and deliver (hand over) Him up to the Gentiles.? (Mt 2018-19a)
This form has systematically been rendered in Greek by use of the verb paradidomi. The same connotation of to commit or hand oneself over to, is found occurring in that section of the First Epistle of Peter which precisely refers to the Passion of Jesus
?He committed no sin, nor was deceit found in His mouth; reviled, He did not revile in return;
when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself (entrusted or again handed Himself over) to the righteous Judge.? (1P 222-23)I'm sure for most of the readers this will be easier to ignore than to suffer an identity crisis that requires them to completely review their own spiritual identity.
Peace
-
Salam more than likely has an origin much older than that spanning thousands of years back.
It means "(a) spirit such thereof" implying that your Spirit resembles that of God's and means in practice that you are sound and have a clarity of mind rather than "lifeless" sheep.
It is not possible to see Quranic words as loan words. It is a special language this A - Rabbic language, together with Aramaic. People have twisted it, made some paranormal creature called Jinn, a devil called Shaytaan and also Ebless while the truth is not so. Satan is yourself, if you fare that way, giving in to the impulses of your body (jannateh) rather than finding the spirit (naas).
Be well