The Search for Muhammad has Ended
-
...Nobody has been perfect an complete in the world since its creation and ...
Salaam,
Slightly off topic The sectarians believe their scholars, the chains of transmissions, and their opinions are perfect and complete, being first conceived in late antiquity (mid 7th century). Just saying.
-
oh ok my bad, then probably it may best to bring umbrella and skin protection cream, should sister huruf decide to come along on pazuzu expedition
And why you behave like that, brother?
If you truly listen and obey Allah's messages in the Qur'an, then you should not behave like that.
Who do you serve? If you serve Allah, then please behave righteous.
In my opinion, ridiculing other people is like "serving the satan". So, please be careful.
When we do not agree with other's understanding, then we don't have to ridicule them, right?
I like sister huruf and brother Pazuzu. Maybe you should know them more, I think they're nice, and I respect both of them. I hope you could respect them as well.
Salaam.
-
Salaam,
Pazuzu's research is interesting in many ways although I consider the center of the ancient clergy to have been in Mesopotamia and part of the Persian Empire's faith system that developed over time. Obviously there were multiple branches (sects) too.
Today's Israel has little to do with Judah etc.
Bible's Old Testament shows a very strong influence of Zoroastrianism and to such extent it actually is the practice of Zoroastrianism in many parts, e.g. "high places", fire altars etc. If one honestly examines OT they will clearly see it is a Zoroastrian faith system in it.
There are no traces of a mighty empire of David and Solomon. The empire is suggested in scriptures to have been enormously huge with great wealth and no historical rulers fit it for this region except the Persian Empire. The Persian Empire, mostly controlled from Susa (Shush), had such extent it could have hosted kings like David and Solomon. During several hundred years the Persian Empire controlled today's Israel region. It collides with David and Solomon. The Persian Empire is also the largest recorded empire, particularly during the first kings.
Few rich cultures develop where there are no or few possibilities for agriculture and Arabia is too arid and probably why the Persian Empire never chose to expand (settle) on the Arabian Peninsula. It was not interesting to them. If you see old Persian Empire maps you see it mainly stretched over fertile soil regions.
Mesopotamia had a great river system and has been a potential agricultural site. Abraham was born in Ur which is in Mesopotamia.
Today's Persia had more water with rivers in the past. I have studied the geography on site. There are many dried out river systems.
By the way, 'Herod' in the Biblical Gospels is a title for the kind of king which ruled during this period. If you look at Persian rulers you will see 7-8 kings named Herod during which time the alleged Jesus event took place.
Just 'rud' is also a typical ancient Persian word. Nimrud is an example. And in old times you greeted each other 'Durud' (hello) and 'Bedrud' (goodbye) there.
Jesus visited a city called Nain. There is an ancient city in today's Iran which is called Nain.
If there were settlements on the Arabian Peninsula they were probably next to the sea, Yemen etc.
In today's Iraq there are many places starting with Tel in the name, just like Tel Aviv. Today's Israel was only an extent of 'Judah' and part of the Persian clergy.
I still consider the main events of the Bible and prophets to have occurred in Mesopotamia. You also have Nineveh there where Jonah lived.
A question is of course where Quran was written and by what people. But as how it is it seems to never have been fully understood due to the gross misinterpretations available. Of course, if we are to defend Pazuzu's work a little, Yemen seems to have been involved with Quran's early time, but I still feel Persia was greatly involved with the clergy. It is strange that Ali allegedly moved his family into today's Iraq according to Shia ideas. It is a Persian history fabrication perhaps, but I think it may have been true. He may have retreated into the Persian clerical region.
I also share mmkhan's thinking that there may never have been any man called Muhammad or Ahmad. I think Ali ibn abu talib wrote Quran. It was a prophecy just as Isaiah wrote about future prophecies. He was offered shelter with his family elsewhere (Mesopotamia) after heavy persecution. Eventually his whole family was massacred, if we are to believe the official story, over Quran.
What is told in hadith I have a hard time believing at all. That Muhammad is not even righteous and do not act like a prophet. A prophet would not order conquest and he would not go to a place where people are spiritually shallow.
Today's Quran is a hijacked scripture by a clergy who could hardly understand a word. They sat down and tinkered and tinkered, guessed and used their doctrinal knowledge to interpret Quran and inserted their doctrine's religious rules and practices where they saw fit even if it was not necessarily right. Early transcripts do not have diacritical marks and this they added in their own studies according to their understanding and it is not original with the Arabic.
I have found old inscriptions with Arabic passages from Quran in Persia (Iran today) during my studies (I am on site) and they all lack diacritics, even over ALLAH (ه. I could upload photographs I have taken at some point. In my point of view, ALLAH comes from the root (alif-lam-lam), the same as the article (al) which means "near as/such as". The (ha) is just a suffix. ALLAH means "to be (such) as it", just as GOD said to Moses in the Biblical scriptures "I am that am I". ALLAHEM means just the plural version, i.e. when you refer to several people who are like The Rabb who tread in the same symbiotic image. I have never had a stronger ability to explain this than now, and this also using ancient Arabic dictionaries.
It is hard to explain ALLAH. If people have watched the fantasy science fiction Star Trek they can refer to 'the Borg'. ALLAH works like the Borg with the mainframe being The Rabb which all nodes (individuals) are interconnected with.
There is no separation to be made between user (you) and The Rabb (the mainframe). This is the idolatrous mistake people make when they vainly worship an image of something in their sect. There is no worship. Moses and those who understood his teachings knew this 4000 years ago already and it is in the 10 Commandments on stone tablets which were twisted in interpretation in later times and the original tablets lost somehow. Statute number two says "Take no image of anything in Heaven (the invisible realm) and Earth (what is visible) and worship it". It did not say OTHER, it said worship any image, at all. And this is 4000 years ago, roughly. The first statute says "Immerse/involve/serve in ELOHIM alone" meaning treat in the one and same image without separation. There is no separate GOD image.
Sorry for covering more than only about Muhammad in my post, but it is all related. People are so beguiled by ancient sectarian doctrines.
Salaam
-
Maybe Man of Faith, one also needs to be in Yemen on-site,
look for other explanations and make alternative conjectures,
as denying Muhammad's Prophethood and attributing it to Ali is in fact an Alawite concept I cannot accept,
unless you rule out The Quran as revelation, which I cannot agree with.
Now if your agenda is to push an Alawite/Zoroastrian/Shia narrative, you are free of course, but I don't share your conclusions, and I know many in this forum do not.
-
Salaam theNabster,
It is of course not without consideration I am saying what I did. I have no agenda but I like the truth probably just as much as you like.
I have actually not convinced myself concerning the existence or non-existence of Muhammad, but there is a lot that does not add up. It does not really matter since I have Quran and a way of interpreting it, even if I am curious about who wrote Quran.
Whether Ali wrote Quran or not is also figuratively speaking and as far as I am concerned I wrote "I think" based upon what I have seen and heard and logical considerations. Concerning hadith and hearsay this Ali has the most righteous wordings attributed to him.
As I wrote in the earlier post, the Persian empire did severely affect the faith system in the Middle-East and were involved in more than people care to admit. The greater part of the so-called Old Testament and also Book of Moses testify to a big Zoroastrian influence to an extent that the practice is in fact Zoroastrianism all out. I study the origin of Zoroastrianism myself and their practices.
The important thing with this is not whether it is authentic or not but how Persians had influence in the region on religious matters with their clergy because the Persians were not really Pagans all of them but they adhered to what is called Zoroastrianism which could be considered a monotheism. If you have dominance somewhere you also have dominance of religious matters.
It is not without research that I talked about Jesus whereabouts and it is true that much of the events of faith involving the tradition of the Abrahamic faiths are taking place in Mesopotamia (today's Iraq) and also Elam, but possibly westward too. Nineveh was there, Ur was there, Babylon was there.
I am not pushing a Shia ideology if you think that I am doing this. But I know Quran has been mistreated and not exactly kept in high regard through the years. Yemen is interesting from the Arabic perspective. However, history is not as officially relayed but very different. Persians WERE very influential in perverting modern Islam and it is not exactly that one can deny that in their right mind. I am not speaking positively in my previous post about Persians if that is what you think. I am speaking of a corrupting clergy with great influence due to the greatness of the old empire(s) Persia. It is denial to think they had no finger in this.
I think Persian rebels and clerics rallied the Arabs against Persia's weakened state due to political disputes and took the right to interpret Quran in a currently to me unknown way except through hypotheses. The alleged conquest of Persia happened early according to traditional reports. That Sunni hadith are written by men of Persian descent is a hint of that. Actually it was just a power struggle and hunt for loot and world domination.
The Persian Empire(s) are also known for adopting other languages than their own as offical language. Aramaic was made the Imperial language (Achemedian), probably for religious reasons. Later Arabic was made the Imperial language for religious reasons (as the caliphates of Islam). Still Persians were behind it. You all the time have to regard who control empires everywhere for they control religious spread and the clerics fabricate things for convenience.
Persia, despite their power, never really officially conquered the Arabian peninsula even if they probably could have.
Many people have to tone down on their Arab nationalism too.
The true story about the so-called "Islamic Golden Age" we probably have to search further for. I think it was just an endless fight for dominance and spoils and much unrighteousness, as usual. And the twisted Islam religion as a weapon of seducing the masses with an interpretation far from the original Arabic Quran is written in. I have doubts anyone ever even interpreted Quran as intended. It feels like someone stole the freshly compiled book and started wreaking havoc on it. It suits certain hadith involving Ali too.
How you draw the conclusion that one has to rule out Quran as a revelation because of Ali I do not understand though.
I am going to research more on Muhammad as a person at some point and how he fits linguistically in Quran. I am not ruling him out but I am also not absolutely sure about his existence.
Salaam
-
You are in doubt over the historicity of Muhmammad? This while even non-islamic historians agree he was beyond any doubt a historical figure?
Maybe you should change your name to Man of Doubt/Confusion?
Peace
-
Is it so?
Before you arrogantly accuse others with your usual venom and biggotry, and spew your legal vomit and political correctness in here, you should know that most of the "garbage" you read on these threads has been updated and put into a series of e-books. At the beginning of these e-books is a disclaimer page which clearly states that the books are simply compilations of what other researchers and academics have said regarding the issue, quoting articles, statements they made in seminars, passages from books (showing the reference at the end of each book), and that the compilers have not sought any material gain, nor do they hold any rights to the materials therein. In fact 90% of what is written can be downloaded for free off the net, albeit in Arabic, not in English. Therefore it is not the theory of Pazuzu, nor did Pazuzu ever, in any way shape and form, claim it as his own.
That's from a legal perspective. As for what you actually think of the research itself, and the credibility of the subject, this is something each individual reader will have to decide for himself. And in the end, your opinion and the soles of my shoes are about equal.
Have a nice day.
Does anybody no where one can access these e-books??
Please and thank you
-
Please leave Jesus out of this. The subject of "Jesus" cannot be done any justice, unless it is kept in a seperate thread.
I can't post in 3 threads at the same time.I have one more post to make in the "Pharaoh of Moses" thread, and then I will permanently sign out from there, and focus my attention here.
Does anybody also know
-
What other 2 threads he was referring to?
-
If he still somewhat active and available to take questions and discuss ideas?
-
If not does anyone know what happened to him and why?
Thanks
-
-
Does anybody no where one can access these e-books??
Are you interested to read Pazuzu's e-books?
If you want to get the copy of his e-books, I suggest you to send PM (Personal Message) to Pazuzu.
Don't hesitate to contact him via PM. I think brother Pazuzu is very kind and helpful.
If you have difficulty to contact him, then please let me know, perhaps I could help you to connect with him. )
Salaam.
-
Are you interested to read Pazuzu's e-books?
If you want to get the copy of his e-books, I suggest you to send PM (Personal Message) to Pazuzu.
Don't hesitate to contact him via PM. I think brother Pazuzu is very kind and helpful.
If you have difficulty to contact him, then please let me know, perhaps I could help you to connect with him. )
Salaam.
I assumed he was no longer active.
Sorry, you're right. I will try to contact him via PM.Thanks
-
Pazuzu has indeed made amost commendable and self-less work in questions touching any aspects of the Qur'an that touch the historical. That work was and is vary necessary because a lot of confusion and folklore has taken the place of the truth and and burdened the real doctrine of Qur'an with details that are meaningless and tinge the Qur'an with notions aliens to it and its meaning subordinating it to historical would be events that distract from the understanding of the real divine order.
Do contact him via e-mail. As Java says, he is most helpful, and I most certainly miss him.
Salaam
-
You are in doubt over the historicity of Muhmammad? This while even non-islamic historians agree he was beyond any doubt a historical figure?
Maybe you should change your name to Man of Doubt/Confusion?
Peace
He may be real, but I consider that it was an impostor who took the name Muhammad based on an interpretation of Quran. The stories of an unrighteous and violent man is obviously not of a righteous prophet. The "non-islamic" scholars also mainly portray a cruel conqueror even if they may confirm he existed.
Quran is not addressing a prophet called Muhammad as far as I have deciphered it but it is giving an instruction on how to teach its model of spirituality, which no one has been able to teach for over thousand years because they simply have not been able to decipher it as intended by its Author.
Be safe
Amenuel -
He may be real, but I consider that it was an impostor who took the name Muhammad based on an interpretation of Quran. The stories of an unrighteous and violent man is obviously not of a righteous prophet. The "non-islamic" scholars also mainly portray a cruel conqueror even if they may confirm he existed.
I believe an impostor who went by the name "Muammad ibn `Abd Allh" who died in Madinah was part of the hijacking of The Reading(Quran). The tomb in Madinah is not of the real messenger but an impostor. Bukhari & Co could not have achieved such mega deception without the help of an impostor.
-
Do you have any evidence to back up what you said in your last post brother invalid?
GOD bless you.
Peace.