Muhammad is a White Man?
-
It is not a question of denying that jinn is the white race, or alternatively, that they are offensive beings, as described in hadith. However Satan has gained his reputation.
You did not answer my question? Are black men morally superior?Mr. Deen,
I'll have to make this my last post tonight. But I think you can answer your own question. Of course black people aren't morally superior, each man woman and child has the free will to be of high moral value whether you are Jinn or Insan. First to be more precise, define black men. Is that anyone of a pure negroid race? Is Obama black etc etc. I think it is pointless to reduce morality to the color of our skin but as has been said before it can be useful in tracing our ancestry.
Second, our morals depend almost completely on our upbringing. Regardless of our skin color or blood line ancestry, if we are raised in a community of good moral values then chances are we will become a person with a strong moral character. Now keeping that in mind, imagine you are born to a very pure line of Iblis or the Jinn. And imagine that your family and peers were very headstrong about following Iblis promise of bringing as many Insan to hell as possible. This would be taught to you and become part of your character, thus you would most likely be of a low moral standard. Now perhaps, because you are of a pure Jinn bloodline, your skin may most likely be of a paler tone, but so what? That doesn't mean we can generalize and say white people are of lower moral stock.
Having said that, you cant deny that the world bankers and royal bloodlines that dominate world policy are almost exclusively white AND they have portrayed qualities of blatant racism, not to mention other Jinn like qualities as told in Quran. They are also strong supporters of eugenics policies. So put the dots together man, So what if the royal family have white skin. So what if they are Jinn. The fact is they are judged by their actions and intentions NOT their skin tone.
Peace and good night.
.....Because, because, because, because, because......because of the wonderful things he does. -
salam,
i know this is not my debate, but i like to ask a question, what color did the quran come in, black white green yellow maybe purple......... so lets assume mohamad was black so what, lets say he is white again so what, but i will say one thing, in the quran it says that, the quran came down in arabic so mohamad was arab, but in 997 it says al2a3rabo ashado kufron w nifaqan, if i am to compare what arabs are and what blacks are, i would say the majority of arabs are as god says ashada kufron and blacks have always been the kinder of the two, they might not all be muslims but when it comes to faith blacks with a majority have faith.therefore mohamad could not have been black. -
4913
O Mankind! Indeed, We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes so that you might (affectionately) come to know one another. Surely, the most honored among you, in the Sight of God, is the one who is best in conduct. Indeed, God is Knower, Aware.
-
Peace,
the quran came down in arabic so mohamad was arab, but in 997 it says al2a3rabo ashado kufron w nifaqan, if i am to compare what arabs are and what blacks are, i would say the majority of arabs are as god says ashada kufron and blacks have always been the kinder of the two, they might not all be muslims but when it comes to faith blacks with a majority have faith.therefore mohamad could not have been black
Anna, what is this? You can be black AND Arab!! And there are still many black Arabs. Arab is both a tribal and a linguistic classification. Al-Jahiz (famous black scholar from Iraq, in the 800's) names a number of Arab tribes who are Black (and Arab of course).
So there are only two ways you can be Arab, you assimilate into Arab culture and learn to speak Arabic fluently (best done from childhood through adoption, being the children of immigrants, imported slaves or the like). OR you (if you are female) bear children to an Arab male of a traditional tribe. Later on assimilated Arabs end up choosing the tribes they want to belong to. And both whites who came to the region as slaves and immigrants and blacks some of whom were orignally in the region and others who came as immigrants or were brought as slaves can be Arabs.
So you can be a white Arab of Caucasian descent, or a black Arab of original Arabian stock or African stock. You can even be an Arab of Asiatic descent. Or (the category that most Arabs fall in) you can be an Arab of mix of Caucasian, Black Arabian, Black African and Asiatic descent. And this mixture is among these 4 groups to varying degrees depending on the region and the family. Take 'Antar who was a famous black Arab poet and warrior. It is said he was so black his nickname was the crow. And take the Arab tribes that Al-Jahiz mentions as tribes of Black Arabs. The Red Arabs are mixed Arabs between these groups(with caucasion being over 50 percent). The darker the Arab the more black is in him, the lighter the more Caucasian or Asiatic he has. The asiatic also shows in more slanted eyes and wider faces especially from cheek bone to cheek bone. How did Asians get to Arabia? Trade, indirect mixture with incoming Muslims closer to China and the Moghul invasions. It is this same mixture (except all of the blacks involved are native Asian blacks, like the kind found in Bagladesh, southern India, Melanesia, the Negritos of the Philipines and Papua New guinea) that has formed the looks of the Pakistanis and the Indians. And the Philipinos, Thais, Cambodians and southern Chinese are mixtures of those black populations and the Lighter Mongoloids.
As for black people having faith. That is a postive stereotype, but a stereotype none the less. There are many faithless Kuffar among black people (muslim and non-Muslim alike). Just as there are faithful. And the same can be said for the Arabs. The faithful are few among all of humanity. I think that that translation of ashhadu as the most is wrong. In MSA it means the most. Example huwa ashaddu kufran = He is the most unbelieving/unfaithful. But in Classical Arabic a phrase like that means = He is most unbelieving/unfaithful. not the most.
But the Quran does imply that the Arab tribes on the most part have not believe in the message. Which tells us that no one can look to the Arabs (black white or inbetween) and their culture for guidance, but rather we need to look to the Quran, knowledge and wisdom.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
I don't believe that the Africans to the Americas were Children of Israel, and to be honest I'm not sure where these pictures came from. But it's food for thought. I will be looking into it some more
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i_cUvZRBPk&feature=related
Godbless,
Anwar -
Salaam Amin74,
I believe you are mistaken about the Black race not being able to reproduce a recessive gene. I learned this in High School biology. The black race contains genetic information for both dominant and recessive genes. In fact there is a 7 to 9% chance that two black couples and give birth to a child that displays recessive qualities in one generation. The chances are slim but it is possible. Therefor, the black race could have fathered different skin tones in the long run. This is scientific fact my brother.
You are correct in this matter, but I was speaking specifically about the time of Adam and Eve. Since they were the first humans, they didn't have any of the characteristics necessary to produce recessive genes, and therefore, together they could've only produced black children. However, since white people have genetics bases of recessive genes, it is physiologically impossible for them to produce black children, and this has been the same way throughout history... Either way, it boils down to a case of genetic ancestry. If Adam was black, then white people cannot be decendants of Adam. On the other hand, if Adam was white, then black people cannot be decendant of Adam. Either way, only one group is part of his lineage.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Do you have any idea how inappropriate and offensive it is to paint entire races with 'character traits' ? To say the "white race" (THERE IS NO SUCH THING) is characterized by arrogance and pride is as bad as saying the "black race" (again, NO SUCH THING) is characterized by ignorance and violence. Why do you insist on broad characterizations based on COLOR, the most superficial of all things? What you are basically doing is JUDGING the character of every white skinned person BEFORE you even speak to that person. That's PREJUDICE. I know that you are using the Qu'ran to give divine authority to your point of view so anything I say contrary to it is just going to be my own unacceptance of holy wisdom, right? This reminds me a lot of the European settlers who arrived in America and used the Bible and the gun to systematically exterminate an entire continent of people based on similar preconceptions. You may not commiting the acts but the same mindset is there. You think you are better?
-
I don't know what color any of them were, but I'd wager a bet they weren't white. History is pretty clear on how the "white Jesus" myth came about. We can find out in the hereafter, GOD-willing.
But my question for you is why does it matter what color they were? I understand that you want to learn and spread truth over ignorance, but why this particular topic ("race" of prophets/of original man)? You are putting a lot of emphasis on their skin color -- what is your goal in asserting this information?
Salaam
If it doesn?t matter then why did they change the image of the Prophets? Truth can stand on its own but we need to go out and destroy falsehood. The purpose of the white race whether they are Christian or Muslims for changing the color of the Prophets, Angels and even in Christianity God is design to make people of color feel inferior and at the same time exalt their whiteness or their superiority so its necessary to refute this ignorance/racism committed by them since they are the one?s who created this lie, myth, falsehood. Al Jahiz a great high esteemed scholar who was an Arab-a Black or African Arab at that back in the days wrote a book addressing the color of Prophet Muhammad?s family because of the racism by the pale arabs during his time and Saudi Arabs gov. banned the publication of his (Al Jahiz) book in our day and time. Its funny that the Saudi so-called Arabs done this but yet they are exalting the false hadiyths which states that Muhammad is a white man and there are hadiyths which says he (Muhammad) has white-reddish skin which is a common complexion among the white race. I know TRUTH IS HARD TO DEAL WITH. You see we are victims of this lie, this racism and really your questioned should be channelled at white people for changing the image and exalting their whiteness. We all agree that it does not matter what color they are but as long as we have this racism existing in Christianity and in Islaam we have to address it, we have to expose it from its root to DESTROY IT!
TRUTH IS TRUTH
-
Mr. Deen
You mean ridiculous right? Anyway what is so ridiculous about it? I was hoping for a more insightful comment. I have been researching this for a long time and the only conclusion of Al Jinn as mentioned in Quran that does not cause contradiction is the one that they are a race of people on Earth. I have followed the claims that Al Jinn represents the so called fiery side of man and the claims that they are invisible spooks but both sides always bring up terrible contradiction when studied from a Quranic perspective. If it contradicts it is not from God, nor is it the truth.
I think one thing people have missed is that Al Jinn and Al Insan are uniquely Quranic words. They have no English equivalent which is why there has been so much confusion in translation. Bashar means a human or humanity and is an Arabic word predating Quran but Insan is not nor is Jinn. The best translation of Al Insan would be 'of the blood line of Adam' and Al Jinn would be 'of the bloodline of Iblis' its quite simple actually. Also, I have found no evidence of Al Jinn as it is used in Quran existing in pre-Islamic Arabia. There are other uniquely Quranic words such as saqar but few people have looked into this phenomenon which is why I would like others opinions on it here. I'm still looking into these things and need some help.
Another thing to consider is that both Insan and Jinn are always prefixed with the definite article Al, meaning they are not a general term but refer to a unique and specific name or title. Of course the silly notion of spooky Jinn comes from pre-islamic paganism and originated first from Armenia (a white race) and migrated to northern Italy and Rome almost 4000 years ago, but the name used for them was Genius in Latin, which later became Genie in French and from that became the English word Genie we know today. The only other existing Arabic manuscript which speaks of spooky Jinn that I know of, and this came after Quran, is the story's of 1001 nights. The one about Alladin and his lamps and other fairy tales from the area. Most of these were written by Persians and this book can be dated to almost the exact same time that the Hadith we read today were being penned. Coincidence? I doubt it.
Even the translator of the most famous English translation of 1001 Nights could find no pre-Islamic Arabic roots for Al Jinn as is found in Quran. The word just did not exist until Quran came around. What happened is that the spooky concepts of Genius migrated East of Rome about 1000 years before Muhammad and penetrated some areas of Northern Arabia. These concepts were known to pagan Arabs as Ginayye. Phonetically very identical to the Genius. These superstitious concepts were only later inserted into Quranic tafsir around when the Hadith were being penned, again at the same time 1001 Nights was being written.
There is an entire Surah in Quran dedicated to Al Jinn. This is because they are a race of men descended from Iblis but have always made their presence hidden to Al Insan. And this is because they consider themselves mortal enemies to Al Insan. Muhammad and his companions who witnessed the revelation of Quran knew very well of this race of people and their origins. They were told to be careful of them.
Allah made everything in pairs including the human race which includes Al Jinn and Al Insan. A black race and a white race. There is a lot of archeological evidence which points to a white race which evolved independently of an African black race and came from the areas of Armenia and the Caucasus Mountains. 6000 year old Nubian writings have also been found which tell of a white race which appeared from the north and caused trouble. So much so that they had to be physically escorted from the area. This white Al Jinn race of course still exists and they exist in their purest form in some of the richest and most dominating families in the world today. These include the blue blooded European Royal families, The DuPonts, The Rothschilds, The Rockefellers, The Van Duyns, The Disneys...to name a few. All of these families still try to only marry cousins or second cousins. They want to keep their blood lines as pure as possible. Remember why Iblis was cursed in the beginning? Because he was so arrogant and believed he was the superior race to Adam. The families of Al Jinn for the most part still think this way. I'm being serious man. This is the way it is. Allah created a pair of races to populate the Earth and one would, in a sense, be enemy to the other.
Some mixing must have occurred. The Jinn only mixed when they were faced with the inevitable consequence of genetic deficiency which occurs through excessive inbreeding. Funny how God created these two races that inevitably would be forced to mix. Anyway, this undesirable effect of inbreeding was felt by a lot of the above mentioned families in the early part of the 20th century and late 19th century when many of their inbred children were still born or born with mental and physical defects. All popular concepts of genome collecting and eugenics comes from these people.
You should really look into this more and take it seriously because I know for sure that the Jinn take it very seriously. BTW, I doubt you or I have much Jinn in us at all if any. They are very selective. And unless you are related one of the 13 richest families in the world I doubt you are a Jinn. If you were you would probably be off creating world policy and manipulating world finances somewhere, not playing around on these message boards.
I have loads of information on these human Jinn so feel free to ask.
peace
And please feel free to talk about what you KNOW.... OR what you THINK. I would hate to censor peoples thoughts. After all how can we come to know anything if we don't first think?
Salaam Amin74
Its nice to see you in here.
A lot of Muslims are under the false impression that the Jinn (while on earth) are invisible spirits floating around in the air when the Qur?aan addresses the Jinn as a human race on earth.
Below are two links that any body can download to get a pdf document on the Jinn. Basically I wrote this to refute Arnold?s research on the Jinn and there are two versions of this
This version contains my research and Amin74 research
http//www.freewebs.com/tawhiyd2/jinn.htmThis version contains my research
http//kushite.webs.com/jinn.htm -
Dear brother, Al Khidr
I think you are as racist as the white men you condemn. Here are a few points
- Differences in colors are not major differences... It is only skin deep.
- Adam being created from black clay or mud does not necessarily make him black nor mud. But, Adam, our homo sapien ancestor was most likely from Africa and had dark skin.
- Muhammad was an Arab and Arabs are not black.
- Arabs were cousins of Jews and they are not black either.
- God sends messengers to every nation; to blacks, to whites, to yellow and brown people.
- Remember that Satan disobeyed God's instruction because he bragged about its genealogy.
- Beware of charlatan leaders who live like kings while some of their supporters struggle for food.
- Remember 4913
Peace
Edip YukselPeace,
Edip YukselWhite or black, racism originates from ignorance and arrogance and as an Satanic ideology, it plants the seeds of hostility among the children of Adam.
Peace,
Edip
Peace,
EdipBrother Edip
No I'm not a racist as you say but you are the BIGGEST RACIST, you can't even acknowledge Adam in Qur'aan 1528 as a Black man so you mistranslate that verse knowing that hamaa means Black. Can you demonstrate how hamaa means ?hardened? like the way you translate it? Again Edip you are the biggest racist. And the points that you have mentioned a pure racist lies, for example
The original Arabs are Black and the Africans were the first to migrate to the Saudi Arabia or the middle east as it is called today, not Europeans
You also deny that jews are Black, you are very very much wrong, again the original Jews are Black and should not be confused with the European Jew. The first Jews are the Ethiopians not the Europeans, the continant from which you are from. Get your facts trait racist.
Another point, you cannot equate Black people with White people in the context of being racists. Black people are not in position of power but the white people are in global position of power and have the power to institutionalize and impact people?s lives on that level.
-
Salaam RSW,
Do you have any idea how inappropriate and offensive it is to paint entire races with 'character traits' ? To say the "white race" (THERE IS NO SUCH THING) is characterized by arrogance and pride is as bad as saying the "black race" (again, NO SUCH THING) is characterized by ignorance and violence. Why do you insist on broad characterizations based on COLOR, the most superficial of all things? What you are basically doing is JUDGING the character of every white skinned person BEFORE you even speak to that person. That's PREJUDICE. I know that you are using the Qu'ran to give divine authority to your point of view so anything I say contrary to it is just going to be my own unacceptance of holy wisdom, right? This reminds me a lot of the European settlers who arrived in America and used the Bible and the gun to systematically exterminate an entire continent of people based on similar preconceptions. You may not commiting the acts but the same mindset is there. You think you are better?
I don't think anyone is literally painting all white people with particular character traits. One person can't be judged by the character of others, and doing so would show prejudice. However, I don't think there's anything wrong with pointing out the reality of physical ancestry. Their skin color doesn't determine their reward or punishment, so this isn't the issue. It's still not accurate, however, to say groups and societies of separate races don't exhibit separate qualities. By nature, white people behave differently than black people, they have different attitudes and characteristics, they have different viewpoints and interests, and as a whole, they appear to be completely different than black people, almost like a different species. Even scientists have looked into this separation of the races, and they agree that these factors do NOT depend on background and upbringing. White people are INHERENTLY different from blacks. It doesn't mean anyone is wrong or right, more or less righteous; it just means we are different and have different forefathers. Some people may be decendants of Adam while others are decendants of Iblis; this is a theorized conclusion, but it may very well be the case. Regardless, though, according to chapter 72 of the Quran, the "Jinn" are also capable of repentance, acceptance, forgiveness, and salvation (7213, 14), so ancestry doesn't have anything to do with GOD's mercy upon us. Throughout the Quran, men and jinns are considered equals; both can be saved, and both can be exterminated.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Salaam
If it doesn?t matter then why did they change the image of the Prophets? Truth can stand on its own but we need to go out and destroy falsehood. The purpose of the white race whether they are Christian or Muslims for changing the color of the Prophets, Angels and even in Christianity God is design to make people of color feel inferior and at the same time exalt their whiteness or their superiority so its necessary to refute this ignorance/racism committed by them since they are the one?s who created this lie, myth, falsehood. Al Jahiz a great high esteemed scholar who was an Arab-a Black or African Arab at that back in the days wrote a book addressing the color of Prophet Muhammad?s family because of the racism by the pale arabs during his time and Saudi Arabs gov. banned the publication of his (Al Jahiz) book in our day and time. Its funny that the Saudi so-called Arabs done this but yet they are exalting the false hadiyths which states that Muhammad is a white man and there are hadiyths which says he (Muhammad) has white-reddish skin which is a common complexion among the white race. I know TRUTH IS HARD TO DEAL WITH. You see we are victims of this lie, this racism and really your questioned should be channelled at white people for changing the image and exalting their whiteness. We all agree that it does not matter what color they are but as long as we have this racism existing in Christianity and in Islaam we have to address it, we have to expose it from its root to DESTROY IT!
TRUTH IS TRUTH
Do you believe 'the white man' got together at some grand white man meeting and came up with some great plan to change the skin color of religious figures in order to systematically shift a pretense of authority to their 'master race'? or do you think they maybe just imagined their religious idols as looking like them and it was expressed in their art? People are simple, they don't read so far into things. They just know this book is from GOD and they try to dipict what they imagine it looked like. If you grew up in a white society surrounded by countries in a white continent you're probably going to imagine these storybook figures in your color. The same is true for any people. Saudi Arabia is a schizophrenic totalitarian third world state. Everything they do is to hide the truth about Islam. They aren't perpetuating that image for the greatness of the white race. They're doing it for political control. It's not about exalting whiteness but about keeping people from questioning a religion that doesn't make sense (Sunni Islam). How do I channel these questions to 'white people'? Do I ask the Pope or something? There's no organization of white people. Most people don't even believe the prophets lived. The ones that do either know they weren't white or just haven't thought about it for more than five minutes. I don't know any Christians or Muslims who sit around and try to convince people the prophets were white.
Truth is truth. Truth is we don't know if it was on purpose or not. But the truth is that it doesn't matter.
-
Peace,
I bought a translation of al-jahiz's fakhru-sudaani 'ala al-bidaani. Al-Jahiz was also a Mu'tazilite, which is probably the real reason why his work is banned. In it he only endorses mutawaatir hadeeth, which happen to pass the Quranic test for being able to accept rumor (that doesn't contradict the Quran obviously). And most Sahih hadeeth aren't mutawaatir hadeeths, but ahadi, which mu'tazilates rejected for good reason; because they can not even be considered reasonable becuz of how they are preserved. If anyone doesn't know, mutawaatir hadeeth have more than 4 witnesses at each level of the chain, from the companions down. Al-Jahiz stated that with a mutawaatir narration there are so many witnesses and separate chains of witnesses for the same hadeeth that it makes it impossible for that hadeeth to have been invented. I think 2411-16 agrees with that logic. But it is obvious that if the saying goes against the Quran or reasonability then it can be explained away as a common misinterpretation of what the prophet said or did at some time. Or a common misperception of some event in history passed down in a mutawaatir fashion. The Quran was preserved in a mutawaatir fashion as well, and what we have is very consistent and there is no good reason (that I have ever seen) to deny that the book is from God as it says it is.
But hardcore sunnis, like wahhabists, hate (among many other things) mu'taziles and mu'tazilite logic. So that is probably the reason they banned the publication. As far as the race issue is concerned, I think that it was during the Colonialist period that the light skinned Arabs became so allergic to black (even their own fellow Black Arabs). I think the European colonialists promoted that in order to separate the society and capitalize on divisions as well as cement their own traditional caste system into the society. They intentionally had the people they colonized look more to the white in them as their best side and closer to the "superior". Hence no one reminds the lighter Arabs of their mamluk (slave) ancestry. But many Arabs daily remind many of the blacker Arabs among them of their 'abid (slave) ancestry. This mindset of lighter is better was rampant among Afro-Americans pre-1960's and is still rampant in Latin America from the Spanish being the ruling element of society over their black servants, mulato children, mestizo children and their native American servants and outcasts.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Salaam RSW,
I don't think anyone is literally painting all white people with particular character traits. One person can't be judged by the character of others, and doing so would show prejudice. However, I don't think there's anything wrong with pointing out the reality of physical ancestry. Their skin color doesn't determine their reward or punishment, so this isn't the issue. It's still not accurate, however, to say groups and societies of separate races don't exhibit separate qualities. By nature, white people behave differently than black people, they have different attitudes and characteristics, they have different viewpoints and interests, and as a whole, they appear to be completely different than black people, almost like a different species. Even scientists have looked into this separation of the races, and they agree that these factors do NOT depend on background and upbringing. White people are INHERENTLY different from blacks. It doesn't mean anyone is wrong or right, more or less righteous; it just means we are different and have different forefathers. Some people may be decendants of Adam while others are decendants of Iblis; this is a theorized conclusion, but it may very well be the case. Regardless, though, according to chapter 72 of the Quran, the "Jinn" are also capable of repentance, acceptance, forgiveness, and salvation (7213, 14), so ancestry doesn't have anything to do with GOD's mercy upon us. Throughout the Quran, men and jinns are considered equals; both can be saved, and both can be exterminated.
Peace,
Ahmad
As Salaamu Alaykum Ahmad Bilal
Alhamdulillah, you have raised some good points, strong points that make us all think deeper.
One of the biggest problems with white folks is that they are suffering from a complex deep down inside as one of the reasons they cannot acknowledge racism particularly in their own race which is on the global level. None of them will never address why is it only the white race (not people of color) who is trying to dominate the entire planet.
When ever we address racism, expose racism from and about them, they hate it and can?t take it. Just like the website that I presented exposing racism behind white Muslims who are guilty of changing the image of the Prophets and making the white and mistranslating the Qur?aan to conceal the fact Allah created Adam BLACK, just like white Christians and then they will try to turn things around and call me or us a racist for exposing this. This is the typical case where they blame the sheep but not the wolf. Who do they think they are fooling. When Malcolm X was on the scene the white man called him a racist because he spoke out against their racism as to why Black folks could not vote, were being lynched by them and even in the constitution they wrote that we were 3/5 of a human being which is saying that Black people are less than an animal.
-
Peace,
I bought a translation of al-jahiz's fakhru-sudaani 'ala al-bidaani. Al-Jahiz was also a Mu'tazilite, which is probably the real reason why his work is banned. In it he only endorses mutawaatir hadeeth, which happen to pass the Quranic test for being able to accept rumor (that doesn't contradict the Quran obviously). And most Sahih hadeeth aren't mutawaatir hadeeths, but ahadi, which mu'tazilates rejected for good reason; because they can not even be considered reasonable becuz of how they are preserved. If anyone doesn't know, mutawaatir hadeeth have more than 4 witnesses at each level of the chain, from the companions down. Al-Jahiz stated that with a mutawaatir narration there are so many witnesses and separate chains of witnesses for the same hadeeth that it makes it impossible for that hadeeth to have been invented. I think 2411-16 agrees with that logic. But it is obvious that if the saying goes against the Quran or reasonability then it can be explained away as a common misinterpretation of what the prophet said or did at some time. Or a common misperception of some event in history passed down in a mutawaatir fashion. The Quran was preserved in a mutawaatir fashion as well, and what we have is very consistent and there is no good reason (that I have ever seen) to deny that the book is from God as it says it is.
But hardcore sunnis, like wahhabists, hate (among many other things) mu'taziles and mu'tazilite logic. So that is probably the reason they banned the publication. As far as the race issue is concerned, I think that it was during the Colonialist period that the light skinned Arabs became so allergic to black (even their own fellow Black Arabs). I think the European colonialists promoted that in order to separate the society and capitalize on divisions as well as cement their own traditional caste system into the society. They intentionally had the people they colonized look more to the white in them as their best side and closer to the "superior". Hence no one reminds the lighter Arabs of their mamluk (slave) ancestry. But many Arabs daily remind many of the blacker Arabs among them of their 'abid (slave) ancestry. This mindset of lighter is better was rampant among Afro-Americans pre-1960's and is still rampant in Latin America from the Spanish being the ruling element of society over their black servants, mulato children, mestizo children and their native American servants and outcasts.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam Anwar
You are a ridiculous UNCLE TOM. That is not the reason why they banned his book. The original title of his book was ?The Glory Of The Black Race Over the Whites? and the reasons why he gave his book this title was because of the racism the original Black Arabs were enduring from them (the White Arabs). He was a soldier and stood up for truth. The reason why the so-called Saudi?s banned his book is because his documentation refuted their white arab supremacy and them making the Prophets white including Muhammad through their hadiyths and them re-writing their HIS-STORY along with them enslaving and colonizing the Black race. I will present more information about Al Jahiz later on our website exposing the truth.
Anwar all you are is just a puppet for them; you are being used as a tool to keep their racist lies alive.
Al Jahiz
http//www.cwo.com/~lucumi/jahiz.html -
If what you're saying is that the prophets weren't white, then please, tell everyone the prophets weren't white. Nobody is going to argue with you about that because it's obvious they were not white. You have a logical and sound belief here.
If you want to say the 'white race' is trying to dominate the earth or that people with light skin exhibit traits of arrogance and pride they inherited from their ancestor Iblis you are going to be told because that is pure racism. Whites have done their fair share of evil but it's in no way tied to skin color, any more than ghetto mentality is tied to black skin color. People are a product of their culture, not a slave to their race, and every individual is responsible for his or her own actions and nothing else. You can't say 'white people are doing this.' You can say there are 'racist priests and scholars' and you can say 'imperialist ambitions of european leaders' caused the proliferation of the beliefs of the racists but you can not make broad generalizations about whole masses of people based on their skin color.
I'm not ignorant like you think I know there are many racist whites, yes especially even today. Many of them are in positions of authority. I don't hate being told this and I agree with it; I've seen it first hand. The only thing I can't stand is seeing you imitate their disgusting mode of thinking. You've adopted the same racist attitude and dogma that you are fighting against. You can cry all day you're just exposing truths, and you are (prophets were not white, this is true) but you're also throwing in a lot of new lies inbetween those truths. I know you're not going accept what I'm saying because you think I'm just a brainlocked slave to my white skin color but I've been around this brand of rhetoric a few times (from many different issues, not just skin color) and I know it when I see it.
-
Wa'alaykum Asalaam Al Khidr,
When ever we address racism, expose racism from and about them, they hate it and can?t take it. Just like the website that I presented exposing racism behind white Muslims who are guilty of changing the image of the Prophets and making the white and mistranslating the Qur?aan to conceal the fact Allah created Adam BLACK, just like white Christians and then they will try to turn things around and call me or us a racist for exposing this. This is the typical case where they blame the sheep but not the wolf. Who do they think they are fooling. When Malcolm X was on the scene the white man called him a racist because he spoke out against their racism as to why Black folks could not vote, were being lynched by them and even in the constitution they wrote that we were 3/5 of a human being which is saying that Black people are less than an animal.
You are absolutely correct. Mistranslation and historical adaptations to make the prophets fit a certain WHITE description is not coincidental nor accidental. These people knew what they were doing when they changed things. It's been widely accepted that the original people migrated from Africa, and it's been widely accepted scientifically that they had dark skin. However, even TODAY, this still doesn't stop people from painting pictures of a "White Jesus" and "White Mohammed", even a "White Moses". They're intentionally changing history to fit their own culture.
Salaam RSW,
If you want to say the 'white race' is trying to dominate the earth or that people with light skin exhibit traits of arrogance and pride they inherited from their ancestor Iblis you are going to be told because that is pure racism. Whites have done their fair share of evil but it's in no way tied to skin color, any more than ghetto mentality is tied to black skin color. People are a product of their culture, not a slave to their race, and every individual is responsible for his or her own actions and nothing else. You can't say 'white people are doing this.' You can say there are 'racist priests and scholars' and you can say 'imperialist ambitions of european leaders' caused the proliferation of the beliefs of the racists but you can not make broad generalizations about whole masses of people based on their skin color.
This is true to an extent, but like I said, it's already been scientifically acknowledged that white people and black people are INHERENTLY different from eachother. For starters, if you take a black child in an all-black community and then introduce him to a white child, he will most likely be accepting, wanting to make friends. However, if you take a white child in an all-white community and introduce him to a black child, he will most likely reject him because he looks different that the white child's other peers. This is a clear indication that white people are inherently racist, arrogant, and judgemental, just like the Quran describes Iblis/Satan. Now, does that mean all white people are bad? Absolutely not. But their changes are choices. Many white people change their attitudes to an extent after being grouped with other people, and this is fine. But facts are facts. The fact that you said "ghetto mentality" is evidence of this as well, since only about 40% of black people live in "ghettos"; but you still grouped blacks into a "ghetto" realm like they make up the majority, even though they don't. As a matter of fact, other groups live in "ghettos" just like blacks (i.e. Jews, Asians, Latinos, Italians, etc.), but you only referenced blacks as exhibiting this "ghetto" trait. This is a form of arrogant racism as well, even though you may not realize it.
You've adopted the same racist attitude and dogma that you are fighting against.
I disagree with this statement as well. In general, white people often accuse blacks of "reverse racism", and I think this is one of the most outrageous things in the world, seriously. What black people have is "consequential hatred", and it's only to a degree; in other words, some black people hate some white people because THEY ARE HATED. It's a defense. If a sheep hates a wolf, does that make him racist? Or if a rape victim hates a rapist, does that make the victim prejudice against the rapist? This is outrageous! A victimized black person is going to have a form of resentment against his oppressor, and this is reality. It's not racism at all. Now, do I think black people should hate white people? No, of course not, I believe in racial equality. The problem is there is no racial equality because white people have raised themselves to a level of racial superiority, and this in turn leads to the subjected state of black inferiority. And this happens all over the world. This is just reality. We have to address this issue in order to combat it and stop it, if that's possible.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Al-Khidr
haha. I was only explaining why Saudi Arabia (the modern country controlled by an Extremist Sunni Wahhabist Regime) banned the book. And just like it has been said here a number of times the Arabs never conquered, colonized or enslaved he black race. They bought slaves from other Africans. You yourself used to say that the pale, weak Arabs could never conquer black Africans. And I don't agree with that wording, but it is true that the Arabs (pale and otherwise) could not and never did colonized or enslave black Africans. But it was the Africans who unintelligently weakened their own empires so as to let the Europeans (NOT THE ARABS) in as colonizers. I don't know if you are using soldier as a metaphor but Al-Jahiz was a son to agrilcultural workers in the marshes in Basrah. He grew up to become a great scholar. And where do you think he got his information from about the blackness of the prophet? From hadeeths as well. There are certain Hadeeths that say that Islam is for the red (deeply tanned and brown skinned Arabs) and black peoples only. So just becuz you come across some hadeeths that the whiter elements of the Arabs (or Persians) invented, now you want to damn all hadeeths for that simple and silly reason? If we look into all the hadeeth that exsit we will find many claims as to the color of different individuals, black and white. But you can't blame all of this pro-whiteness on the Arabs. Because it doesn't come from them, and didn't exist in pre-islamic times. It comes from the whiter Persians and other Caucasians from the North that began to have a significant presence in the Islamic empire and began to assimilate into the Arab ethnicity. For instance the persians conquered Yemen and becuz of their fighting over the years with the native blacks and Abyssinian blacks the color scheme was created where lighter is better. But those treated the worse are the native black yemenis.
So I am telling you although the ancient Arabs were originally black, they look like they do now because of persistent give and take between the native blacks and Northern Caucasians who moved down into the area through conquest and immigration (did you ever notice how the word to speak unclearly, or barbarian is the same word for Persian; A'jami). The same happened with the Copts. And whereas the whites definitely did bring some anti-black sentiment from the long lasting tensions between civilizations in competition, the mixture between blacks and whites in the area lessened those tensions. But it was the influx of Caucasians into the region after the advent of the Quran and with the expansion of the Arab Islamic empire (a good example is that Bukhari came all the way from Tajikistan) and the rebellion and demonstration of power of the Black Zanj people from Zanzibar, that atleast in Al-Jahiz's era, created some tension between the purely black Zanj and the mixed arabs and whiter Northern Persians in the region.
But what you fail to understand because you have a totally wrong agenda of making the Arabs white people, is that things got really bad when the European Colonist came. They were the ones who encouraged the strong anti-black sentiment that we see today in Arab countries and they fomented that sentiment so that the Arabs woud look to all things white as superior and all things black (even the black that runs in their blood) as inferior. That's what kept them in a position of power for so long.
So who is really the Uncle Tom, Khidr? Because it is the Eurocentric white man who wants you to think that the Arabs are really white and enslaved and colonized Africans. And the Eurocentric white man has always tried to say that the Arabs (and the Indians) were apart of the Greater Caucasian race. At least Elijah Muhammad rejected that. But here you are just eating up the Eurocentric white man's garbage. The same garbage designed to keep both you and the Arabs (and Indians) in the dark about who they really are. Don't let a few hadeeths obviously from Muslims of Northern Persian descent be a reason for you to damn all hadeeths (becuz that would be a stupid reason) or Europeanize the Arabs. (becuz again you will just be spitting the same Eurocentric garbage that you would claim to be against)
So again i'll ask you, who's the real UNCLE TOM?
Godbless,
AnwarYou are a ridiculous UNCLE TOM. That is not the reason why they banned his book. The original title of his book was ?The Glory Of The Black Race Over the Whites? and the reasons why he gave his book this title was because of the racism the original Black Arabs were enduring from them (the White Arabs). He was a soldier and stood up for truth. The reason why the so-called Saudi?s banned his book is because his documentation refuted their white arab supremacy and them making the Prophets white including Muhammad through their hadiyths and them re-writing their HIS-STORY along with them enslaving and colonizing the Black race. I will present more information about Al Jahiz later on our website exposing the truth.
Anwar all you are is just a puppet for them; you are being used as a tool to keep their racist lies alive.
Al Jahiz
http//www.cwo.com/~lucumi/jahiz.html