Road of the Patriarch
-
Salaam Pazazu,
Lovely post as usual.. Your research is incredible! Its amazing how such gaping holes exist in religious history and nobody minds them...Big fan! Keep up the good work.
Just wonder why you got tat scary face as ur profile pic.... &
it doesnt match with the great content you keep posting yayPEACE.
-
Salam,
would it be possible that Isaac and Ismail are true brothers with the mother the same?
or better, and that will be truly mind exploding, Isaac and Ismail being the same person? after all, we hear Israel and Jacob being the same person too...
and the Israelites want Isaac to have been the object of a potential sacrifice... whereas the Quran tafseer tells us it is Ismail, even though the Quran does not mention him by name...
or more mind boggling, in a deep trance, Ismail is the father of Isaac?...
again I might be hallucinating... hypno
-
My only reservation about the whole article is that the inclusion of Muhammad as one of the said messengers from that area contradicts 3444 as well as the lumping of Abraham and his progenies as the patriarchs of the jews seemed to be wandering away from the Qur'an 2140. That aside, the article was an excellent read.Peace
almarh0mMay i add my understanding here on 3444, like Abraham and Lot, although they are from same region and time which seem not far by distance from each other, they have different target audiences (qaum) and both are addressing the specific location of audience where no nazir seem to came before. The Asir/Yemen is vast area and there are many potential target audiences.
On 2140, the articles by Pazuzu doesnt lump Abraham and progenies as Jews, as far as i could comprehend his writing so far..
Peace
-
Thank you Pazuzu for this mostly awaited new thread!
How remarkably clear and logical things now do fit.
I might consider myself lucky for not being much polluted in the past by false notions, as I am learning all this afresh from your threads.
Thank you
-
May i add my understanding here on 3444, like Abraham and Lot, although they are from same region and time which seem not far by distance from each other, they have different target audiences (qaum) and both are addressing the specific location of audience where no nazir seem to came before. The Asir/Yemen is vast area and there are many potential target audiences.
That's part of the answer, actually. The word "qaum" in the Quran does not mean a "nation" in the modern sense of the word. It can be a single tribe, clan, group of people with homogenous beliefs , or the inhabitants of a single city. But besides this fact that SW Arabia is a vast area, there is also another reason that many have not been aware of, and it has to do with the relation between what is called the "eloquent tongue" (which is translated as "Arabic" and the "a3jami" tongue(s) described in the Quran, which existed during the time of Muhamad. Once this relation is understood, we can then fully grasp the implications of 3444.
Also, I might add that if we were to understand 3444 as purely designating a geographical region, then the official FM belief would also not fit. Since the people behind this website are advocating that Muhamad lived in the Palestine- Jordan area, and that Bakkah is in Jerusalem, where all the prophets were previoulsy, then you will have the SAME problem with 3444.
So it is not simply a case of the geographical area. It is something that has to do with the LANGUAGE of the previous scriptures as well.
Anyway, I will fully address IMHO's question further down this thread.
As for 2140, I never claimed, in any of these threads, that Abraham or the original Israelites had anything whatsoever to do with Judaism. The children of Israel were the descendants of a man whom the Quran calls "Israel" by name. This is why I am doubting that Israel and Jacob are the same person. Anyway, they existed many centuries before Judaism appeared. The ISraelites were a TRIBE, where as Judaism is a RELIGIOUS CREED. This is the same as the diference between Islam and Quraish (the tribe which existed long before Muhamad came with the Message).
So I don't see how 2140 contradicts what I have been saying.
would it be possible that Isaac and Ismail are true brothers with the mother the same?
or better, and that will be truly mind exploding, Isaac and Ismail being the same person? after all, we hear Israel and Jacob being the same person too...
Yes, it is possible they were from the same mother, and no they are NOT the same person.
The Quran relates to us Abraham giving thanks to Allah by saying
{Praise be to Allah who has granted me in my old age Ishmael and Isaac; my Lord is Hearer of the prayer}...
As you can see, they were brothers, in fact, and they were born when Abraham was an old man (probably in his 60's). However, the Quran doesn't tell us if they whether they were from the same mother or not. Also, the order of the names shows that Ismael came before Isaac.
As in
{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob}...
The order shows Isaac came before Jacob. Also, who is the "wife" mentioned in this verse who laughed when she was given the tidings? Was it Sarah or Hagar? And what about Ismael? Was he already born when these tidings were given? The Quran doesn't say for certain, so better to leave it at that, rather than to conjecture.
My hunch is that Ismael was the elder, based purely on
1- The order of the names
2- Ismael was the one who helped his father clear the Bayt of idols and establish the first monotheistic system in Arabia.The avatar is a relic from my years of watching Zombie flicks )
Peace...
-
.... The children of Israel were the descendants of a man whom the Quran calls "Israel" by name. This is why I am doubting that Israel and Jacob are the same person. Anyway, they existed many centuries before Judaism appeared. The ISraelites were a TRIBE, where as Judaism is a RELIGIOUS CREED. This is the same as the diference between Islam and Quraish (the tribe which existed long before Muhamad came with the Message).
......
{Praise be to Allah who has granted me in my old age Ishmael and Isaac; my Lord is Hearer of the prayer}...
The order shows Isaac came before Jacob. .... And what about Ismael? Was he already born when these tidings were given?
Peace...Salaam brother Pazuzu
Thank you for addressing our concern. There are two more issues I would like to discuss;
- 3;33 Allah did choose Adam and Noah the family of Abraham, and
the family of Imran above all people.
19;58 Those were some of the prophets on whom Allah did bestow His Grace of the posterity of Adam, and of those whom We carried (in the Ark) with Noah, and of the posterity of Abraham and Israel of those whom We guided and chose; whenever the Signs of (Allah) Most Gracious were rehearsed to them, they would fall down in prostrate adoration and in tearsThe posterity of Abraham is mentioned along with Israel, so the question is who is this person Israel; was he alive at the same time as Ibrahim(as)? And what about Lot; he migrated to another place so could Israel be from Lot's side?
However in 333 The family of Imran is mentioned, in the context of prophets, as the one chosen above all so was Israel perhaps from the family of Imran? hmm
{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob}...
- We learn from the Torah that Jacob is the son of Isaq, and was later named Israel, thus only the children of Jacob are considered 'chosen', but the Quran does not confirm that. It seems to me that the verse above could be interpreted to mean that the good news of two sons was given to Ibrahim(AS) and his wife (Sarah). In contrast to the Bible version, where Sarah is shown to be a jealous wife she could have been a kind and paticent wife who accepted Ismael, thus Allah(swt) who rewards patience may have rewarded her with two sons despite her old age.
As they were both old it seems unlikely, if this news indeed referred to a son and a grandson, that they would have lived to see the son of Isaac. Allah knows best.
Jazakallah Khair
peace
- 3;33 Allah did choose Adam and Noah the family of Abraham, and
-
Salam IMHO, pazuzu,
Now this is getting me confused...
I thought Jacob was the son of Isaac...
It seems from 1171 that they were brothers? brickwall
Unless that means that the glad tidings are of a son and a grandson...
which could mean that Ismail might then be the father of Isaac after all? elektro
-
Salam IMHO, pazuzu,
Now this is getting me confused...
I thought Jacob was the son of Isaac...
It seems from 1171 that they were brothers? brickwall
Unless that means that the glad tidings are of a son and a grandson...
which could mean that Ismail might then be the father of Isaac after all? elektro
Salaam brother confused
Where did we learn that Jacob was son of Isaac
Hadith hypno who in turn got this info from Bible brickwall
peace -
Peace Bro IMHO
What makes things complicated is that Allah points us in the Quran to the Scholars of the Jews to clarify some points from what was revealed to them..
Another point is that there is another huge body of religious books the Jews follow and that is the Talmud, in fact the Talmud was their Hadith, plus notes and edicts "fatwas" of later scholars/rabbis, and still now it is being added to...
It is possible the Jews / Israelites in Yemen might be more reliable than the ones who migrated up north? and info from them might be useful... as if pazuzu is right, they were the ones Allah was addressing and speaking about in the Quran...
-
The posterity of Abraham is mentioned along with Israel, so the question is who is this person Israel; was he alive at the same time as Ibrahim(as)? And what about Lot; he migrated to another place so could Israel be from Lot's side?
However in 333 The family of Imran is mentioned, in the context of prophets, as the one chosen above all so was Israel perhaps from the family of Imran?I am not sure who this Israel was, either. But yes, it seems he lived after the age of Abraham.
The family of Imran appeared on the scene later on. Imran was a person (a man), and he had a daughter named Maryam. The Old Testament mentions he had 3 children Moses, Aaron, and Maryam. The Quran says that when Moses went to confont Far3oun, he brought Aaron along with him, because he was a more convincing speaker. Also, Maryam is referred to as "sister of Aaron". So, Maryam, Moses and Aaron were contemporaries. These people were all descendants of Abraham, but of a later generation.
We learn from the Torah that Jacob is the son of Isaq, and was later named Israel, thus only the children of Jacob are considered 'chosen', but the Quran does not confirm that.
This is because the Jews wanted to attribute to themselves "purity of race". This will become evident later on in the thread. OF course, the Quran does not confirm it.
Now this is getting me confused...
I thought Jacob was the son of Isaac...
It seems from 1171 that they were brothers?
But what about 2133 ?
{Or were you present when death came to Jacob and he said to his sons "Who shall you serve from after me?" They said "Your god, and the god of your fathers Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac; One god and to Him we submit."}....
So, according to this verse, Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac where predecessors (ancestors) of Jacob. To compromise between 2133 and 1171, we would have to say that in 1171, Abraham's wife was given tidings of a lineage to come. It does not mean that Jacob and Isaac were brothers (because that would then contradict with 2133).
The question is who is Israel , and where does he fit in? The Quran does not say for certain, that Israel and Jacob were the same person. So until now, this is a mystery. But I will definately look into the matter eventually.
Peace...
-
But what about 2133 ?
{Or were you present when death came to Jacob and he said to his sons "Who shall you serve from after me?" They said "Your god, and the god of your fathers Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac; One god and to Him we submit."}....
Salaam Pazuzu
Thank you for reminding 2;133 this sliped my mind.
Jazakallah Khair -
-Salam
It seems you guys are missing 2132
And Abraham enjoined his sons and Jacob "O my sons, God has selected the system for you, so do not die except as ones who have submitted."
The above translation is FM translation, I believe it should be translated like this
And Abraham enjoined his sons and likewise did Jacob "O my sons, God has selected the system for you, so do not die except as ones who have submitted."
Salaam Pazuzu
Thank you for reminding 2;133 this sliped my mind.
Jazakallah Khair -
-
Bro pazuzu, Salam
now 2133 seems to encourage the interpretation that Ismail is the father of Isaac...Salaam
Abrahim(as) already has Ismail, it was his wife who was given the good new news of son followed by grandson ;{And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her the good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob}...[1171 -
- The Jealous Wife
Going back to the Quran, we find that Abraham and Lot left their original homeland and made their way towards a land that Allah described as ?blessed to the worlds?. And in that land, somewhere, was a secluded and previously UNSETTLED (uncultivated) vale where Abraham SETTLED his progeny.
{Our Rabb, I have resided part of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Rabb, so that they may uphold the salat. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks}...
Had those who claim to be the followers of Muhamad?s message paid close attention to the word ?settled? (askantu) which appears in the above verse, they would have abandoned the Jewish myth that they have embraced for centuries, which tells them that Abraham ?expelled? his ?wench? Hagar and her infant son. The truth is that the word ?settled? used in the FM translation does not even come close to doing justice to the original Arabic word which appears in the text ?askantu? . Abraham is saying ?My Rabb, I have askantu from my progeny in an uncultivated valley?. The word is derived from the root ?sakan? which carries the meaning of peaceful habitation.
Does this sound to you like someone who leaves his infant son and his mother all alone in a desert land so they can die of thirst, on the whims of a jealous wife? Or does it sound more like he migrated and settled WITH THEM, and provided them with all the means of a peaceful habitation?
While you ponder over this issue, I will move on and tell you where the Muslims get their beliefs from
Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had borne him no And she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar. 2 So Sarai said to Abram, "See now, the LORD has restrained me from bearing Please, go in to my maid; perhaps I shall obtain children by her." And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai. 3 Then Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. 4 So he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress became despised in her eyes. 5 Then Sarai said to Abram, "My wrong upon you! I gave my maid into your embrace; and when she saw that she had conceived, I became despised in her eyes. The LORD judge between you and me." 6 So Abram said to Sarai, "Indeed your maid in your hand; do to her as you please." And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence. 7 Now the Angel of the LORD found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And He said, "Hagar, Sarai's maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?" She said, "I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai." 9 The Angel of the LORD said to her, "Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand." 10 Then the Angel of the LORD said to her, "I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude." 11 And the Angel of the LORD said to her "Behold, you with child, And you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, Because the LORD has heard your affliction. 12 He shall be a wild man; His hand against every man, And every man's hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren." (Genesis 16 1-12)
This is how the Jews distort Abraham?s personality, by picturing him as a weak old man, who is easily swayed by his wife?s emotion, and by picturing his son Ismael as the ?savage son?, who is the descendent of ?savages? (the Arabs, sons of the ?servant wench?). And what is even stranger is the translation of ?Msri? to ?Egyptian?, concerning Hagar?s nationality. So the Arabs, technically, are a bastard hybrid race of half Mesopotamian half Egyptian....
Let?s read on a bit more to see what other half-truths we find in the Torah
She also said, "Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? For I have borne a son in his old age." 8 So the child grew and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day that Isaac was weaned. 9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing. 10 Therefore she said to Abraham, "Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, with Isaac." 11 And the matter was very displeasing in Abraham's sight because of his son. 12 But God said to Abraham, "Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called. 13 "Yet I will also make a nation of the son of the bondwoman, because he your seed." 14 So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting on her shoulder, he gave and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba. 15 And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs. 16 Then she went and sat down across from at a distance of about a bowshot; for she said to herself, "Let me not see the death of the boy." So she sat opposite and lifted her voice and wept. 17 And God heard the voice of the lad. Then the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said to her, "What ails you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the lad where he 18 "Arise, lift up the lad and hold him with your hand, for I will make him a great nation." 19 Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink. (Genesis 21 7-19)
And so here we see the source of this delusion the Muslims believe in, which claims that Abraham ?kicked out? his ?Egyptian servant wench? Hagar, and left her to become lost in the wilderness with her infant son. Of course, the Quran does not mention Sarah, nor Hagar, nor a ?miraculous spring? by the name of Zamzam. Although we concur that is IS possible Abraham had two wives (the Quranic verses are not clear on this issue) ? to say that the second was a ?servant wench? is marketing of racist Jewish allegations, which insists on attributing ?purity? to the Israelites, while picturing the Arabs as bastard half-breeds, descendants of a savage race. And the Muslims are not even aware where their beliefs have come from (they insist that their creed has not been contaminated by Jewish corruption?Oh No! Allah forbid it! They are above such allegations!).
The Quran says that Abraham migrated WITH his wife, to the blessed land. His first child was born in that land. He did not make the initial trip with them. Abraham provided his family with the means of peaceful habitation. He did NOT expulse anyone. There is a HUGE difference between the words ?askan? and ?tarada? . But because of their blindness, they cannot see it.
The Torah also tells us that he left Hagar and her infant son to wander alone in the wilderness of a place called "Beersheba", which they believe is in Palestine. And this of course is the natural result of hijacking the geography of the prophets of Allah, and projecting it onto the Levant. And soon, I will show you where this Beersheba was.
Of course, the Muslims decided to change the details of the story a little bit, to make it fit more with their culture. They claimed that it was ALLAH who commanded Abraham to travel 1200 kilometers from the Levant, drop his ?wench? and infant son in a deserted valley in the middle of the Hijaz region, and travel back to the Jerusalem (al-Quds) which didn?t even exist (Applause and drums, please!)
Do you believe this story ladies and gentlemen? Would Allah command such a thing? Of course, they must have found a problem with the Jewish version of the story, which speaks of Sarah?s jealousy. They must have said to themselves ?Well if he wanted to keep Hagar away from Sarah, he could have moved her to some other place in the Levant, not far from his home. So why go all the way to the heart of Arabia, over 1200 kilometers away ? a trip that would take several weeks? It must be because ALLAH SAID SO!!?.
This is the tyrannical expression that shackles the intellectual mind, and prevents anyone from questioning the story.
And I?m telling you now with 100% confidence Abraham was NOT in the Levant, and he did not send his second wife ? assuming he had 2 wives in the first place - and infant child far, and no spring was ?miraculously? dug by the wings of angels (as the Muslims claim); but in all probability it was Abraham HIMSELF who dug it (I will soon show you how the Torah contradicts itself in this matter). Furthermore, Abraham travelled with them and STAYED with them, providing them with the means of a peaceful habitation ? hence the meaning of ?askantu? - in their new land of migration, as will soon be made clear. And the location of the valley (the Bayt) was not far at all from his tents.
Now, going back to the previous passage in (Genesis 21), we recall the following
So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting on her shoulder, he gave and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba. 15 And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs.
Of course the Muslims, again, changed the details a bit, and replaced the ?loaf of bread and water skin? with ?knapsack of dates and water skin?, to make the story fit better with their culture (Apparently, they believe dates are "Holy". But what about the glaring geographical absurdness itself? How did they go about solving that?
Let?s contemplate the story a little bit
It has become a part of the Muslim creed that Abraham expulsed Hagar and her son from the Levant to the heart of Arabia. And what did Abraham equip Hagar with for her trip, which was 1200 kilometers long? A single water skin and a knapsack of dates.... And so Hagar became lost in the wilderness, the distance required to consume a single water skin, and lo and behold! She found herself in one of Tahama?s valleys, in the south of Hijaz!!
And now I ask you this Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Hagar made the trip all by herself; how far can a woman travel, while carrying her infant son in her arms, and equipped with a single water skin? I will say anywhere between 5 and 20 kilometers. So how far was the distance between Abraham?s tents and the valley (location of the Bayt)?
Is it 5-20 kilometers as logic dictates, or 1200 kilometers as the diseased traditions of the Muslims tell us?
In fact, this very question was asked by the ancient Muslim historians, who found themselves giving various outrageous explanations for it. Some claimed that Abraham travelled with Hagar from the Levant, left her near "Mecca" with the waterskin and dates, then went back to the Levant. Or, if you want something even better, listen to what Al-Suhaily says in his book ?Al-Rawd al Anf? (page 55)
.
Here is the exposition of Al-Suhaily is saying (with our comments in brackets)
And the reason for transporting Hagar and her son Ismael from the Levant and dropping them of in Mecca (as if ?Mecca? even existed back then), was that a heated argument had taken place between Sarah, Abraham?s cousin (they made him marry his cousin in order to maintain Israelite ?purity? without being aware of it) and Hagar, and so Abraham was ordered (note how he leaves the source of this order unknown) to carry her on the back of the Pegasus (al-Buraq) to the location of the Bayt, then return from whence he came (i.e. to Palestine).
These people are completely insane. There is no other explanation how a story with that many holes in it can be adopted as the truth.
What we will say here is this
This Pegasus (the winged horse), which pops up every now and then in the Islamic books of tradition, is NOT a means of transportation, but a means of FORGERY and an insult to the intelligence of the average mind; and its goal is to patch up a glaring geographical puzzle, to seperate between Abraham and his family, and to cover up a scandalous traditional belief that no sane mind can accept.
But under the cloak of ?Allah Said So?, anything is possible.
The sane and logical conclusion tells us the following Abraham left his original homeland, the land of his fathers which was somewhere in Arabia (and I will show you exactly where before this thread ends), with his wife and nephew, and migrated to the ?blessed land? of Asir, where he was bestowed, by Allah, two sons at an advanced age Ismael and Isaac. He set up his tents no more than 20 kilometers from the Bayt. He was accompanied by Lot at first, but then they parted ways shortly after they reached their new home. It is possible that Abraham had two wives. But the second was also HIS WIFE, not his servant wench. And she was NOT Egyptian, as we will soon see.
Open your eyes please, and read, from the Quran, the truth that kills their belief. Ismael and Isaac were in the SAME LOCATION
{And Abraham said "My Rabb, make this a peaceful land, and keep me and my sons away from serving idols * "My Rabb, they have misguided many from among the people. So, whoever follows me, then he is of me, and whoever disobeys me, then You are Forgiving, Merciful." * Our Rabb, I have resided part of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Rabb, so that they may uphold the salat. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks * "Our Rabb, you know what we hide and what we declare. And nothing at all is hidden from Allah on the Earth or in the heavens * Praise be to Allah who has granted me at my old age Ishmael and Isaac; my Rabb is Hearer of the prayer}...
The criminal LIARS wanted to seperate Isaac the Pure (in Palestine), from Ismael the Bastard (in Arabia). And the misguided Muslims, who have made the Quran of no account, have been applauding and playing the drums for this forgery for centuries untold. All they know how to do is vehemently retaliate, like barbarians, when some Christian priest in the West threatens to burn a copy of the Quran. The truth is they are more proptective of the paper the Quran is printed on, than what it actually says.
They expect Muhamad's intercession on Judgement Day.. But the truth is Muhamad will do no such thing. On Judgement Day, he will complain to Allah and say {My Rabb, my people have deserted this Qur'an}
And he will disown them all.
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/Buraq.jpg
The Pegasus solves the geographical discrepency.
And since the Quran tells us clearly that Allah rescued both Abraham AND Lot to this blessed land, we should take this opportunity to remind you all, briefly for now ? but in more detail later on, when we study the volcanoes of Arabia ? of a glaring truth concerning the location of Lot?s town. The Quranic verses make it very clear that this town was not far at all from the location where Muhamad preached the Quran
{And Lot was one of the messengers * When We saved him and all his family * Except an old woman who remained * Then, We destroyed the rest * And you pass by their ruins in the morning * And in the night. Do you not comprehend?}...
This means that Muhamad and his people passed by it day and night as they went about their business. This means it could not have been more than a 24 hour trip from the Mother of Towns. And the last phrase in the above verses says {Do you not comprehend?} which shows that they were to reflect on what happened to its inhabitants.
Not only this, but Allah tells us that He left its ruins as a CLEAR SIGN for those who would reflect
{And when Our messengers came to Lot, they were mistreated, and he was embarrassed towards them. And they said "Do not fear, and do not be saddened. We will save you and your family, except for your wife; she is of those doomed * "We will send down upon the people of this town an affliction from the heaven for what wickedness they were in." * And We left remains of it as a clear sign for a people who comprehend}...Furthermore, the ruins of the town are located on an often-travelled trade route which Muhamad and his people knew very well
{And it is on an established path * In that is a sign for the faithful}...
And the reason they have not found Lot?s town until now is because of a rampant Jewish and Orientalist culture which has projected the events of the Old Testament from its original theater in Arabia, onto the Levant. And this is what we read in the Islamic books of ?tafseer?, where the commentators are nearly unanimous that the location of this town is near the Dead Sea. And when archeologists combed every inch of that area and didn?t find it, they said ?Oh it must be buried UNDER the sea bed?.
And it never occurred to the Muslims to ask how it can be buried under the sea bed, when their Quran says the town was left as a CLEAR SIGN?
- Geographic Projections and ?Coincidences?.
Coinsidence #1 Beersheba
Let?s now go back to this controversial name ?Beersheba?. In the Orientalist Arabic translations of the Torah, the name is rendered as ?Bi?ir Sab3? which can literally mean either ?Well of the Wild Beast?, or ?Well of the Seven?. As a result of the diabolical geographic projections, this area is believed to be in Palestine. The problem, however, which has left the archeologists of the East and West dumbfounded, is the total absence of a well or underground water source there, or any evidence that a man named ?Abraham? ever settled in the area. The name ?Beersheba? is mentioned over 30 times in the Torah, the first of which is encountered in Genesis 21, which we have previously seen. Here's a reminder
So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting on her shoulder, he gave and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away. Then she departed and wandered in the Wilderness of Beersheba.
As for the second instance this name appears in, it tells us the story of a dispute that took place over a water source (a spring) which was discovered by a strange, alien family, composed of an old man, his wife, and his infant son, who had just settled as migrants in the heart of some valley somewhere. The Torah relates to us what happened in a logical and acceptable account, through a conversation which took place between Abraham, and an Arab man by the name of ?Abimelech? (Abi Malek), right after the spring was discovered. Here is what it says, word for word
22 And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phichol, the commander of his army, spoke to Abraham, saying, "God with you in all that you do. 23 "Now therefore, swear to me by God that you will not deal falsely with me, with my offspring, or with my posterity; but that according to the kindness that I have done to you, you will do to me and to the land in which you have dwelt." 24 And Abraham said, "I will swear." 25 Then Abraham rebuked Abimelech because of a well of water which Abimelech's servants had seized. 26 And Abimelech said, "I do not know who has done this thing; you did not tell me, nor had I heard until today." 27 So Abraham took sheep and oxen and gave them to Abimelech, and the two of them made a covenant. 28 And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves. 29 Then Abimelech asked Abraham, "What these seven ewe lambs which you have set by themselves?" 30 And he said, "You will take seven ewe lambs from my hand, that they may be my witness that I have dug this well." 31 Therefore he called that place Beersheba, because the two of them swore an oath there. (Genesis 21 22-31)
Regardless of the reason given for the naming of the well, it is clear that Abraham had discovered the spring himself. This supports the Quran, which says that he ?provided habitation for his family?, not that he "expulsed" them, and that he migrated to the new land WITH THEM. The contradiction in the Torah becomes evident at this point (have you realized it by now?)
More importantly, is this 'Beersheba" really in Palestine, as they say?
First of all, we need to be aware that the modern Arab linguists and commentators who have studied the Aramaic language, have pointed out that the Arabic translation of the word, which renders it as ?Bi?r al- Saba?a? (literally Well of THE Seven) is not accurate, and this for two reasons
1- because in the original and silent Aramaic text, the letter which appears in the word is ?sh?, not ?s?.
2- That the pronoun "al" (meaning "the" is NOT found in the original so-called "Hebrew" text. The Torah calls the place Bir Sheb3 (it's actually TWO seperate words), not Bir - ha - Sheb3 (the Hebrew pronoun article "ha" is equivalent to "al" in Arabic).
This has been made evident by academic linguists of the caliber of Ziad Minah, Kamal Salibi, Fadhel al- Rubay'i, and others. They have pointed out that the more logical explanation is that the name "Beer Sheb3a" (obviosly a feminine name) actually means "Well of Fullness" not "Well of the Seven" (This explains the absence of the pronoun article "the" in the word). Moreover, the lack of any archeological evidence of a well or spring in the Palestinian location, shows that the "Beersheba" of the Torah was never there.
The "Hebrew" name is a mistranslation of the Arabic name "Bi'r Shab3a", and the further incorrect Orientalist translation into Arabic may in fact have been influenced by an ancient Greek rendering of the word. In his book ?The Torah Came from Arabia? , Kamal Salibi brings to our attention the following facts
In his account of the return of the Roman general Aelius Gallus from his military campaign in Arabia Felix, in the year 24 BC, the Greek geographer Strabo (16424) describes, with pinpoint accuracy, the locations that Gallus crossed on his return journey from ?Negrana? (the city of Najran, on the Saudi-Yemeni border), to Negra (which is al-Nujayra, near the port city of Umm Lujj in current day Saudi Arabia, on the Red Sea coast), where Gallus rode his ships which carried him back to Egypt (which was under Roman rule at the time). Strabo reports that 10 days after his departure from Negrana, Gallus reached a place called "The Well of Seven"?This is obviously a failed attempt by Strabo at translating the name "Bi'r sheb3a?". Then, the Greek geographer gives a detailed description of the town of Negra, and ancient port where ships would dock. And on his way from the "Well of Seven" to Negra, Strabo reports that Gallus passed by two fortified towns called "Kala" and "Malathos"(...) The truth is that road which Gallus took was actually a dry river basin that passed through the area known as "Rijal Almu3" , in the far south of Saudi Arabia, which led all the way to the Tahama coastline, and where two ancient towns still exist today, and are known locally as ?Al-Qal3a? - (Kala) and ?Al-Malatha? ? (Malathos). This road continued North along the coastal plain, until it reached the port town of Nujayra, which is today a southern suburb of Umm Lujj (or Umm Lajj), on the Red Sea coast.
Take a look at the map below
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/Gallus.jpg
A map showing the actual path taken by the Roman army, from Najran (in the orange circle) to al-Nujayra (in the blue circle). The green circle shows the geographical location of "Bi'r Sheb3a".
So I ask you now Is the existence of a location called ?Well of Seven? (as Strabo ? who tried to translate the word under the limitations of the Greek language, and its different vocal structure from Aramaic) in the far south of Saudi Arabia, a coincidence?
What if I told you now that Al-Hamadani (the great Arab geographer who was a native of the Hamadan region of northern Yemen) happens to mention the same area in his book ?Description of Arabia? ?
Take a look at the following (DoA, page 14
. (...) (...) .
Exposition Here, Al-Hamadani mentions two areas. The first is called ?Masna3a? (the name indicates water canals), and the second is ?Shab3a?. He also describes the entire surrounding region as located among ruins of ancient fortifications, and water wells. He also describes a stairway, carved from the natural rock, which comes down from one ancient military keep, to the Masna3a ? Shab3a wells, where one could have easy access to the water.
So what we have now is the following A description of an area called ?Well of Seven (Saba3)?, by an ancient Greek geographer, which ?happens? to coincide with a mesmerizing description by AL-Hamadani, over 1,000 years later, who called it ?Shab3a? (the correct pronunciation), and finally verified by an Arab historian who visited the place PERSONALLY in 1983 (Kamal Salibi), and verified its existence on the outskirts of the Suadi city of "Khamees Msheit" (which is shown on the map) as well as the existence of Himyaritic fortifications and the river canyon that the Roman general Gallus had crossed in the year 24 B.C, the several water springs there, and the fortified towns near it, exactly as the Greek geographer Strabo described them.
There, ladies and gentlemen is the "Bi'r Shab3a" (Beersheba) of the Torah.
And you can dismiss it as a coincidence if you like.
- Coincidence #2 Kinanah
It is hardly possible to read any passage about Abraham in the OT, without at least some passing mention of a people known as the "Canaanites". Ever since we embarked on our journey to search for the true location of Muhamad (P), we have been seeing proof after proof that the prophets mentioned in the Quran were all based in the south west of Arabia. So this means that the Canaanites must have been there as well, since we are stipulating that Abraham migrated to their land.
Then Abram took Sarai his wife and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people whom they had acquired in Haran, and they departed to go to the land of Canaan. So they came to the land of Canaan. (Genesis 12 5,6]
So who are these people? And what role did they play in the life and times of Abraham?
The origin of the word "Canaan" can be found in the silent, three-letter Aramaic word ?knn?. This is how the word was spelled in the original, vowel-less text, before the Masorite Priests of Turkey decided to accentuate the Aramaic letters, starting from the 6th Century A.D. In his book entitltled ?The Search for Jesus? (page 132), Kamal Salibi verifies this by saying
The name Canaanites pertains to a place called ?Cnn? or ?Knn? ? without vowels.
The rampant geography of the Torah has made people believe that there was once an ancient land in the Levant area called ?Canaan?. The shattering conclusion that the historians and archeologists have reached is that there is not ONE trace of such a name in the Levant itself!
Prepare yourselves for a big shock.
Arab historian and religious researcher Ahmad Dawood, in his famous book entitled ?Arabs, Semitics, Hebrews, Bani Israel, and the Jews?, throws some light on this centuries-old puzzle. Listen to what he says
How did the identity of the Syrian people, who have inhabited the region since before 5000 B.C, be simply ?erased? and replaced with the tribal population called ?Canaanites?, of whom there is not a single mention in any historical document other than the Torah, and when all who ever lived in the region, Arabs or non-Arabs alike, admit that this title was never known by any nation or group of people in the entire history of ancient Syria??
Another researcher, Dr. Ali Abou Assaf (who is Syrian, by the way), verifies Dawood?s claims in his book ?Ruins of the Ancient Kingdoms of Syria?, where he says
?None of these states ever called themselves by the name ?Canaanite? or ?Amorite? (...) And at the time when Herodotus (the famous Greek historian of the 6th Century B.C) travelled over extensive areas of the Levant region, he mentioned ?Syrians? and ?Phoenicians?. Not once did he mention ?Canaanites? anywhere.
This is of course the same Herodotus who verified that the Phoenicians originally came from along the Red Sea coast of Arabia. Here is a quote from Herodotus
According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began the quarrel. These people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea (the southern part of the Arabian peninsula-Yemen), having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria?
Not once did Herodotus label the region as "Canaan".
Likewise, Greek geographer, historian, and philosopher Strabo mentioned that the Phoenicians originally came from the Arabian peninsula, where they had similar gods, cemeteries and temples as they have in Palestine.
Not once does Strabo label them ?Canaanites?.
These scholars (Dawwod and Abou Assaf) are actually onto something. But there is one small issue which I feel must be clarified Dawood calims that besides the Torah, there is not a single historic document in the Levant that mentions ?Canaanites?. The fact is, there are some documents, but NOT originally from the Levant region. Some very old Mesopotamian inscriptions (from as early as 1800 BC) mention a people by the name ?Kinanhu? (this is EXACTLY how it is pronounced according to the vocal glossary of the Babylonian cuneiform), who were causing trouble by infiltrating into the regions of the Levant (they were described as bandits and thieves). Also, the name appears as ?ki-na-ah-na? in the Amarna tablets (14th Century B.C), which were written in Acadian cuneiform.
Please pay attention the Semitic name is KINANAH, not "Canaan".
And these people were NOT orginally from the Levant. So where the Hell did they come from?
Consider this
1- There is is absolutely ZERO archeological evidence that the peoples mentioned in the Amarna and Mesopotamian tablets were in Palestine.
2- There is ZERO physical evidence that the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians ever vied for control of Palestine, which every evidence has shown was a periferal land of very few resources, and very little strategic importance.
On the contrary, ALL the evidence indicates that they vied for the Red Sea coast of Arabia, and control of the trade routes. ANd I will soon show you the presence of ancient Egyotian ruins and fortifications deep inside Arabia (I will post a link to a video).
So we can say that the claims of Dawood and Abou Assaf are, in a sense, correct. And the Mesopotamian tablets indicate that the Ki-na-nah were NOT originally from the region, but were causing trouble by infiltrating it gradually, and pepetrating lots of looting in the process.
Kinanah?The name rings one very big bell?
Have you ever heard of Bani Kinanah? In case you haven?t, let me tell you who, and more importantly WHERE they were
The name Bani Kinanah pertains to a south Arabian mega-tribe whose domain was vast regions of the Tahama and mountainous regions of Asir and Yemen. These are the SAME "Cannanites" that are mentioned in the Torah, always with curses and damnations, because they had vast control of the coastal areas and trade routes, and, during the time of King David, their pagan clans (among them the ?Filist?) fought many bloody wars with the monotheistic Israelites. These are the SAME Kananites, the legendary Arabian tribe, to whose land Abraham had migrated, some 800 years before the time of David.
What do you think of that?
Below is an old map taken from a Saudi gazeteer, showing exactly where the coast of Kinanah was, and where this legendary mega-tribe lived. If you can read Arabic, try googling or , and see for yourselves.
http//i1203.photobucket.com/albums/bb386/Gorefiendel/Kinanah.jpg
The original land of "Canaan"
Al-Hamadani, who is a native of Northern Yemen, is no doubt very qualified to tell us where they lived. Here is what he says in DoA (page 231)
(...) (...) (...) (...) .
Exposition He is mentioning various areas along the coast of south-west Arabia, stretching from Jasan (Jazan) in the north (in Asir), all the way down and past the ?elbow? of Arabia, near the city of Aden, in Yemen?These places were the domains of several tribes, most prominent of which were Bani Majeed (the "Meggido" of the Torah), the Tribe of Haram, and the volcanic plains and slopes of BANI KINANAH.
Another passage from DoA (page 85) mentioning Kinanah
? ? (...) .
Exposition Here, Al-Hamadani is talking about the Surat of Yemen, The greatest and most renowned mountains in all of Arabia, and their expanse which reaches the red sea, and the domain of the tribes of Ash3ar, Akk, Hakam, and KINANAH.
These were tribes - among many - who at first began infiltrating north towards the Levant, causing a headache to the Mesopotamian colonies in Syria (NOT PALESTINE), then started to migrate in huge numbers after the Assyrian and Babylonian campaigns laid waste to their lands in Asir and Yemen, starting from 700 BC.
Finally, one last word must be said about Bani Kinanah, before we move on to the next ?coincidence?.
The orientalists, in their commentaries, are always quick to mention that the so-called ?Canaanites?, the masters of the Palestinian coast of the Mediterranean, were famous for their dark reddish purple garments. What very few people are aware of is that in the forgotten books of the Arab historians, most notably ?Al-Mas3oudi? and ?Yaqoot al-Hamwi?, there is mention of Bani Kinanah, the ancient Arabian tribe ? composed of several clans - who were masters of the Red Sea coast, and were famous for building red domes. In fact, there are many Arabian legends that have recorded these structures in Yemen, and Asir, and very few such structures remain after the "science-loving" Saudis bulldozed the entire region in the 1980?s.
So we have Canaanites of Palestine, masters of the Mediterranean coast, and makers of reddish-purple garments.
And we have Bani Kinanah, located on the Asir and Yemen coast, and builders of red domes.Is this a coincidence too? Or did someone hijack the entire history and geography of south Arabia, and project it onto the Levant?
To Be Continued
-
- The Jealous Wife
{Our Rabb, I have resided part of my progeny in an uncultivated valley near your Restricted Sanctuary. My Rabb, so that they may uphold the salat. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them and give provisions to them of the fruits that they may give thanks}...
Salaam alaikum brother Pazuzu
Thank you again for a very informative post. I never did not get around to reading the Bible, nor much of hadith, so I was surprised to learn how Jews see Hagar and Sarah feuding. But what I find really unbeleivable is that most Muslims followed the people of the book, rather than the Qur'an, which clearly gives the reason why Ibrahim(as) left his home to settle his progeny in an uncultivated valley near the Restricted Sanctuary. The next verse gives the reason;'so that they may uphold the salat. So let the hearts of the people incline towards them'This shows the love of Ibrahim for Allah and his desire to make his sons serve Allah from a very early age ... simply to dedicate himself and his family to serve Allah.On the subject of Ibrahim's wife I think, from the evidence in the Qur'an that he had only one wife, namely she who was given the news of the birth of Isaac and Jacob. Ismail(as) could be either from a first wife, who was no longer alive, or from a slave girl (concubine).
Jazzakh Allahu Khair - The Jealous Wife
-
@ Pazuzu
You mentioned that archeologists were dumfounded at finding no wells or water sources in Beersheba Palestine. Can you please provide link to the article that says this becasue this is plainly wrong in my view there are plenty of wells and their is underground water available.
Secondly If your going to use the lack of archeology findings in the Levant to substantiate your Yemen hypothesis, why not use archeology to substantiate it !!. Now based on your same reasoning to debunk the status qou it seems rather contradictory when you don't have a shred of archeological evidence to back it up.
below is an excerp I found for Beersheba in Palestine.
Archeological finds indicate that the site was inhabited from the Chalcolithic period, around 4000 BCE, through to the sixteenth century CE. This was probably due to the abundance of underground water, as evidenced by the numerous wells in the area. The settlement itself dates from the early Israelite period, around the tenth century BCE.
-
The case for Cannan
Pazuzu mentioned that there is not a trace outside the Torah for a people called the Cannanites. I thought I would correct this mistake for other readers
Mesopotamian references
Certain scholars of the Eblaite material (dated 2350 BC) from the archive of Tell Mardikh see the oldest reference to Canaanites in the ethnic name ga-na-na which provides a third millennium reference to the name Canaan.
Canaan is mentioned in a document from the 18th century BC found in the ruins of Mari, a former Sumerian outpost in Syria, located along the Middle Euphrates. Apparently Canaan at this time existed as a distinct political entity (probably a loose confederation of city-states). A letter from this time complains about certain "thieves and Canaanites (i.e. Kinahhu)" causing trouble in the town of Rahisum.
Tablets found in the Mesopotamian city of Nuzi use the term Kinahnu ("Canaan" as a synonym for red or purple dye, laboriously produced by the Kassites from murex shells as early as 1600 BC and on the Mediterranean coast by the Phoenicians from a byproduct of glassmaking. Purple cloth became a renowned Canaanite export commodity which is mentioned in Exodus. The dyes may have been named after their place of origin. The name 'Phoenicia' is connected with the Greek word for "purple", apparently referring to the same product, but it is difficult to state with certainty whether the Greek word came from the name, or vice versa. The purple cloth of Tyre in Phoenicia was well known far and wide and was associated by the Romans with nobility and royalty.
Anne Killebrew has shown that cities such as Jerusalem were large and important walled settlements in the Middle Bronze IIB and Iron Age IIC periods (ca. 1800?1550 and 720?586 BCE), but that during the intervening Late Bronze (LB) and Iron Age I and IIA/B Ages sites like Jerusalem were small and relatively insignificant and unfortified towns.
References to Canaanites are also found throughout the Amarna letters of Pharaoh Akenaton circa 1350 BC, and a reference to the "land of Canaan" is found on the statue of Idrimi of Alalakh in modern Syria. After a popular uprising against his rule, Idrimi was forced into exile with his mother's relatives to seek refuge in "the land of Canaan", where he prepared for an eventual attack to recover his city. Texts from Ugarit also refer to an individual Canaanite (*kn'ny), suggesting that the people of Ugarit, contrary to much modern opinion, considered themselves to be non-Canaanite.
Archaeological excavations of a number of sites, later identified as Canaanite, show that prosperity of the region reached its apogee during this Middle Bronze Age period, under leadership of the city of Hazor, at least nominally tributary to Egypt for much of the period. In the north, the cities of Yamkhad and Qatna were hegemons of important confederacies, and it would appear that Biblical Hazor was the chief city of another important coalition in the south. In the early Late Bronze Age, Canaanite confederacies were centered on Megiddo and Kadesh, before again being brought into the Egyptian Empire."
If the Bani Kinanah were famous for building red domes, how does this relate to the Cannanites who were famous for making reddish purple garments ???... Ones seems to be a building and the other is something you wear ?