So the picture emerges (sort of)
-
Here is the Namrah inscription with the information on Imru-l-Qais
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/namarah.html
Also, here is the earliest of Arabic passages. Basically Aramaic, followed by two lines of Arabic written in Nabataen script, so Ayman is correct in his findings!
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/avdat.html
-
-
Later the Abbasids break away from the Sassanids and Kharijis but keep Zoroastrian roots. Haroon-ur-Rashid's mother Khaizran was a Maggian/Zoroastrian. Abbasids also sponsor canonized Imams who create piles of books with fabricated ahaadeeth that would favour Abbasid rule. They also introduce the Zoroastrian Gah-like 5-time prayer/namaz and concoct the Mi'raj story of how the prophet used Pegasus/Burraq to ascend to the heavens (please note that Pegasus used to bring down Zeus' thunderbolts or BARQ from the heavens according to Greek mythology that found its way later into Persian astrology). This was done to ritualize the Deen of Islam and to take it as far away from the Quran as possible so that the masses do not ponder on the Quran but listen to the Imam or the Mullah such that the state can control them at will.
All could have been done to gain support of the masses for power and control... In short, both Ummaiyads and Abbasids propagated their own agenda and propaganda. Both sides came up with the wierdest stories and even fabricated the volumes of ahhdeeth to support their claims as if in a competition. Fabrications, no matter how detailed, always have loose ends that become apparent to those who think.
And what about the third group, the shia ?
How do you explain that their beliefs are nearly the same as the sunni today ?
Peace
-
And what about the third group, the shia ?
How do you explain that their beliefs are nearly the same as the sunni today ?
Peace
Salaam /JM/
Excellent, I could have not said it any better, you took the words of my mouth! )
For further information on this subject, here is a good post
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=4790.msg105297#msg105297
-
And what about the third group, the shia ?
How do you explain that their beliefs are nearly the same as the sunni today ?
Dude what are you talking about? ???
The Shia beliefs are NOTHING like those of the Sunnis. The Shias belief in the doctrine of Imamate, as an essential pillar of their faith (he who does not believe in the legitimacy of their alledged "imams" is considered an apostate".)
Also, Shia's beliefs can be traced back to Persian roots. Didn't you ever wonder why the shia population of the Arab world are more tied to Iran than they are to their own countries? (The belief in 12 infallible imams has Persian as well as Jewish roots).
Also, something else that was said on this post caught my attention
'Abd-ul-Muttalib is a fictional character Logical Conclusion ... based on the above factors
Only Abd-ul-Muttalib is a fictional character?
If I told you now that Abu Bakr, Othman, Ali, Omar, Fatima, Hassan ,Hussain, etc.. are ALL fictional characters, and that there's no proof they actually existed from a historical point of view . What would your reaction be?
All we have is a compilation of a book called "Quran", which was somehow inspired to a human being who was described as being "praiseworthy", (Muhammad ) and who lived somewhere in the Jordan/Palestine area sometime in the 7th century A.D
The sad truth The religion of Islam which is being practiced today by over 1 billion people is based on nothing but hearsay and mythological folklore.
-
Dude what are you talking about? ???
The Shia beliefs are NOTHING like those of the Sunnis. The Shias belief in the doctrine of Imamate, as an essential pillar of their faith (he who does not believe in the legitimacy of their alledged "imams" is considered an apostate".)
Also, Shia's beliefs can be traced back to Persian roots. Didn't you ever wonder why the shia population of the Arab world are more tied to Iran than they are to their own countries? (The belief in 12 infallible imams has Persian as well as Jewish roots).
These are the differences.
But they pray nearly like the sunnis, they condone the veil, lapidation, cutting the hand of the thief, and they accept many sunni hadith...And what about the kharadji ?
Peace
-
These are the differences.
But they pray nearly like the sunnis, they condone the veil, lapidation, cutting the hand of the thief, and they accept many sunni hadith...And what about the kharadji ?
Peace
Salaam All,
I am glad on this site we keep away from Fitna between Sunni/Shia/Ibada... The Holy month of Ramadan
Al-Qadr ? Power, Fate, Destiny
Chapter 97 ? Complete Sura
With the name of God, the unconditional Mercy, the eternal Mercy!
We have indeed revealed this (message ? Koran) in the night of destiny (1) And what will explain to thee what the night of destiny is? (2) The night of destiny is better than a thousand month (3).
Therein come down the angels and the (revered) soul (Gabriel) by God's permission, on every errand (4) salaam! shalom! peace! ...This until the rise of morn! (5).
Ameen, Ya'Rabbi!
Mohamed
-
I do not need to go into a lengthy discussion about the Shia. Before calling themselves Shi'a-e Ali, this group was referred to as the Kharijee, or those who were expelled... their version of what happened after the exalted prophet passed away is even worse in my view. But the discussion on Shia doctrine does not concern me since to me it does not make a lot of sense ideologically in the first place. The discussion I started was geared towards the reality of the Hajj, ka'bah and Makkah than anything else...
And what about the third group, the shia ?
How do you explain that their beliefs are nearly the same as the sunni today ?
Peace
-
Only Abd-ul-Muttalib is a fictional character?
If I told you now that Abu Bakr, Othman, Ali, Omar, Fatima, Hassan ,Hussain, etc.. are ALL fictional characters, and that there's no proof they actually existed from a historical point of view . What would your reaction be?
All we have is a compilation of a book called "Quran", which was somehow inspired to a human being who was described as being "praiseworthy", (Muhammad ) and who lived somewhere in the Jordan/Palestine area sometime in the 7th century A.D
The sad truth The religion of Islam which is being practiced today by over 1 billion people is based on nothing but hearsay and mythological folklore.
Yes Pazuzu ... that indeed is a scarey thought isn't it... btw nice hijaking of a demonic name
-
Peace Maxq, all,
In the 700's AD onwards, there seem to have been two dominent forces within the muslim geopolitical framework ... the Abbasids or bani-Hashim (backed by remainders of the Sassanids/Persians/Zoroasterians) and the Ummaiyads or banu-Ummaiyah (both groups are of Arab decent, notably from the Hijaz).
To assert their legitamacy, the bani-Hashim, who would later become the Abbasids create stories of the victory of the Arabs lead by Abdul-Muttalib against Abraha... no wonder the Abbasids "officially based their claim to the caliphate on their descent from Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib" They try to portray the Hijaz as the place from where the prophet originated.
I think that geopolitical framework is one aspect of the overall cultural tensions and assimilations from which post-conquests Arab culture emerged. The Arabs conquered peoples with varying and sometimes overwhelming cultural heritage. The Arabs on the other hand had no culture of their own to speak of since the decline of the Nabataen kingdom. Their recourse (as is the recourse of many peoples throughout history) was to go to the wilderness to invent a culture.
This can be seen in the history of culturally shallow empires. For example, early American culture was no different than the European cultures from which the settlers came from. The culture of wilderness emerged to give Americans an identity of their own. Even Bostonians and New Yorkers took on this cultural identity and "the wild West" became the American identity. From that point on, anything that is distinctly "American" had to come out from the wilderness.
The same exact phenomenon can be seen in the Arab culture where everything "Islamic" had to come out from the wilderness. So for example, they made it so that the prophet goes out to the wilderness to get the revelation in a cave. They made it appear so that every scholar who wanted to learn had to go to Hijaz despite the centers of learning being in Syria and Iraq. They made it so that the script of the great reading came from Hijaz despite it being called the Kufic script and despite the fact that it is in fact not an Arabic script at all but is a foreign Nabataean script.
This way the Arabs could borrow from and assimilate other cultures while maintaining their identity. They could borrow the Persian Arta-i Viraf Namak and its stories of the ascension of Arta Viraf on a winged horse to heaven but now Arta Viraf is the prophet who came from the wilderness. They could also borrow the victory of the Persian Sassanids over the Abbasynians but now the victors over the army of Abraha are not the Persians but are the Arabs from the wilderness.
After their conquest, the Persians seemed to be quite ticked off at the Arab conquerors and start weaving false stories regarding how the ancestors of the Ummaiyads slaughtered Hazrat Hussain, the grandson of the prophet. They even fabricate the so-called Dajjal and his subsequent demise by the illusive Imam Mehdi -the true decendent of the prophet- as well as the returned Jesus. Keeping "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" theory in mind, the Persians back the Abbasids and the Shi'ah-e-Ali or Kharajis against the Ummaiyads. Abbasids are a better option since they seem to have integrated well with the Persians.
The story of the slaughter of a religious holy son and the redemption it brings of uniting the empire under the leadership of a holy authority has been around for millennia. It is the through the murder of Osoris (Hussein) that redemption is achieved through the Egyptian north and south being united under the Egyptian kings who manage the universe (the Imamate). Such story has been borrowed in various forms throughout history. For example, in Christianity the murder of Christ brings redemption through his return to establish the Kingdom. It is also borrowed in a variant form by the Jews in the destruction of the Temple and the redemption through the rebuilding of the Temple that heralds the Kingdom of Zion. Such stories have always served to unite religious and political aspirations.
Why should anything hold the Ummaiyads back? They come up with stories of their own regarding how they are guardians of the Ka'bah and Maccah, and how they were the of prophet's tribe. In doing so they also revive some of their own pagan beliefs. They even erect their own version of the Holy Temple-like structure with the Ka'bah, the pagan structure as its centre, and in doing so, perfectly integrate the Aswad rock on it.
In the culture where everything that is good had to come out from the wilderness, it is natural that in order to survive, paganism had to be given a home in the desert.
This was not the only attempt at making paganism and worship of females goddesses survive. Another "Black Stone" hangs above the shrine of a female saint in Cyprus who is alleged to be the foster mother of the prophet (Don't even ask what the supposed foster mother of the prophet was doing in Cyprus, the island of Aphrodite, the Hellenized Allat, out of all places). This seems to be a failed attempt at a pagan sanctuary for Allat like the one in Mecca. So finally the wilderness culture and identity is the one that survives.
Note that pagan Arabs used to worship idols made of clay, such as cubes, as well as rocks they thought to be sacred. If the prophet was indeed following Allah, why would he keep a pagan stone even as a marker in a holy place and why would he not have it destroyed like the rest of the supposed 360 idols in the ka'bah? Also, supposedly the first idol to be brought down is that of Hubal. Why is this deity not mentioned in the Quran but Allat, Manat and Uzza are spoken of? Why destroy Hubal first and not the three binaat-ul-Lah? Moreover, does the personality of the prophet as portrayed in the Quran even hint that he may be capable of destroying items of peoples' worship, even if they were idols? If indeed those idols existed, where are the inscriptions or documents to support their existance? Why is there such a discontinuity in these stories?
These are all good questions. There is no evidence of 360 idols from any Nabataean archeological sites. The stone block and the black stone are themselves the only idols.
Later the Abbasids break away from the Sassanids and Kharijis but keep Zoroastrian roots. Haroon-ur-Rashid's mother Khaizran was a Maggian/Zoroastrian. Abbasids also sponsor canonized Imams who create piles of books with fabricated ahaadeeth that would favour Abbasid rule. They also introduce the Zoroastrian Gah-like 5-time prayer/namaz and concoct the Mi'raj story of how the prophet used Pegasus/Burraq to ascend to the heavens (please note that Pegasus used to bring down Zeus' thunderbolts or BARQ from the heavens according to Greek mythology that found its way later into Persian astrology). This was done to ritualize the Deen of Islam and to take it as far away from the Quran as possible so that the masses do not ponder on the Quran but listen to the Imam or the Mullah such that the state can control them at will.
Yes, the conquering Arabs borrowed and assimilated other cultural traditions by ascribing to them origins in the wilderness. The process also worked both ways. Zoroastrians and Jews who wanted their traditions to survive in the new culture had to simply ascribe to them Arab origins from the wilderness. Therefore Jews who wanted to institute the Talmudic laws into the conquerors' laws ascribed traditions of things like stoning for adultery to the prophetic traditions.
All could have been done to gain support of the masses for power and control... In short, both Ummaiyads and Abbasids propagated their own agenda and propaganda. Both sides came up with the wierdest stories and even fabricated the volumes of ahhdeeth to support their claims as if in a competition. Fabrications, no matter how detailed, always have loose ends that become apparent to those who think.
Hence now we have to sift through the pile of junk erected by these two groups, and must bear the burden of discovering who and what we actually ought to be in the first place... Unfortunate (
It is not unfortunate in that this is the normal course of all previous messages. They end up getting corrupted. If anything, we are fortunate to have the great reading preserved to guide those who listen so that they don't fall into this pile of junk.
Did I get it right or do you think I am not even close?
Criticism of the articles posted on this site
I have only but ONE question. If the prophet indeed migrated from Petra, what historical evidence do we have of it?
Petra has never been anything other than a Nabataean religious center. Therefore, naturally it declined in parallel with the decline of the Nabataean kingdom. Therefore, by the mid fourth century Petra was an abandoned religious city. Given the orthographic evidence from the great reading and pre-quranic inscriptions, the most likely area that the prophet migrated from has been identified in the following article
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/history/ayman1.htm
Peace,
Ayman
-
Yes Pazuzu ... that indeed is a scarey thought isn't it... btw nice hijaking of a demonic name
LOL. So you noticed... I think it fits well with my personality
-
Another smoking gun in my opinion is that we found Forth Century houses dug up in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine where we see the inscriptions which reads in Arabic "In the name of God al-Rahman al-Raheem" ...
I do not have the citation for this since I am reiterating from memory but I do recall reading this somewhere... if anyone else has kowledge of this and can cite the resource, that would be awesome!
-
Only Abd-ul-Muttalib is a fictional character?
If I told you now that Abu Bakr, Othman, Ali, Omar, Fatima, Hassan ,Hussain, etc.. are ALL fictional characters, and that there's no proof they actually existed from a historical point of view . What would your reaction be?
All we have is a compilation of a book called "Quran", which was somehow inspired to a human being who was described as being "praiseworthy", (Muhammad ) and who lived somewhere in the Jordan/Palestine area sometime in the 7th century A.D
The sad truth The religion of Islam which is being practiced today by over 1 billion people is based on nothing but hearsay and mythological folklore.
Salaam Pazuzu,
My friend, if you believe what you said in the above quote of you, then you will also believe in the following aya, by Free-Minds translation from this site http//yaqb.org/
Free-Minds The camel and goat heavy with milk are amongst God's decrees. So whosoever makes Pilgrimage to the sanctuary, or is merely passing through, commits no error that he should partake of them. And whoever donates for goodness, then God is Appreciative, Knowledgeable.
But all Muslim believe in the following literal translation of this aya and below is again from the same site http//yaqb.org/
Literal That the Saffa/rock and the Marwa/flint stones (are) from God's methods/ways of worship, so who performed hajj (to) the House/Home , or headed to/visited so no offense/guilt/sin on him that (he) circles/walks around by them, and who volunteered good , so that God (is) thankful/grateful, knowledgeable.
You see my friend the above aya confirms that Kaaba is in Mecca, unless you believe in the translation of Free-Minds that the above aya is discussing, "The camel and goat heavy with milk are amongst God's decrees...." rather than, "That the Saffa/rock and the Marwa/flint stones (are) from God's methods/ways of worship, so who performed hajj (to) the House/Home,...
Mohamed
-
Salam all those who are taking part in this discussion.
The Qur'an is not a History Book it is there to guide those who guard against evil.
People are getting an entire history out of a book that is there for guidance, use the Qur'an for guidance and use historical reports for history.
The conclusions some people are coming to are really unfounded.
Peace, People.
